Letters to the Editor
Xanthro
Published Letters: 522 Editor's Choice: 47
-
Mad Cartoonist
[Read the article: I know in my heart I'm going to leave my husband ... but when and how?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Mad Cartoonist are you really sure men don't do half the house work?
Pretty much all couples argue over house work, and usually it comes down to each has a different definition of house work.
Wife may include grocery shopping, but not include washing the skunk smell off the dog at 2:00 AM.
The man may exclude grocery shopping, and include washing the car.
Until both sides can agree what house work consists of, it's hard to gauge who is doing more.
If you just included opinions, the US would have the cleanest houses ever, because 150% of the cleaning would get done since each thinks he or she does 75% of the work.
-
$25 Entrees and responses
[Read the article: I grew up poor but my boyfriend has money]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There is nothing inherently wrong with a $25 entree. Some can and some cannot afford it.
If you find the price to be outrageous, nobody is making you spend the money, so it's none of your business what others spend to eat.
The fact that people like Kate, MighteyOakCudgel and the LW can get upset over what others spend of an entree is bizarre.
People are free to spend their money how they please, while you may not like their choice of food, it's not your choice.
Many times I've spent far more than $25 on an entree because my wife enjoys it. She enjoys eating out, I enjoy buying computer equipment. It's our money we will spend it as we please.
Too many people take pride in being poor. There is nothing to be proud about being poor anymore than there is something to be proud about simply being rich. Money itself or its lack does not make a person.
There is nothing wrong with making money. I've worked jobs that I doubt very many readers of Salon could physically handle, digging drain ditches with a shovel from 5am to 9 pm seven days a week is not fun. Swinging a sledge hammer for hours doesn't make you a better person than someone working in an office.
Stop trying to judge someone by how much or little money they make. There are as many poor jerks as rich ones.
-
Lieberman vs. Lamont
[Read the article: Why is Bill Clinton in Connecticut?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This is a very important primary but for reasons that seem to escape the media.
The fact is Lieberman is far too liberal to be accepted in a great part of the United States. States that any Democratic candidate must win in order to be President. States that a Democratic candidate must win in order to reclaim the Senate. States that Democrats need to win in order to reclaim the House.
Lieberman losing the primary sends the message that those candidates who can win in such States are unwelcome in the Democratic Party, and this hurts Democrats more than anyone else.
Contrast this to how Republican leadership and members tend to vote. The Senate Republican leadership cares only about one qualification, that the person will vote for Republican leadership, because the party that controls the Senate and House has all the power.
When asked about would they endorse a pro-choice and pro Bush impeachment Senate candidate, they didn't hesitate to say yes, they'd fully support such a candidate. The reason? It serves them in the long run.
Connecticut is mostly made up of Independent voters, and Lieberman would win any three way race easily. While the Democrats there are free to vote for whom they chose, but let’s be honest, if Lamont were running against Feingold, the same enthusiastic supporters would be screaming that Lamont is not only a political neophyte but that he’s trying to buy an election using personal wealth.
The difference is many Democrats hate Lieberman, and they’ll hate most any Democrat who can win in the Red States. This makes it much harder to find good Democratic candidates in those States and makes it much harder to win.
Often, Democrats are their own worse enemies. Trying to achieve purity, they squander the chance to achieve anything.
-
The Democratic Party should be inclusive
[Read the article: Why is Bill Clinton in Connecticut?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"A pox on all you crypto-republicans in the Democratic party. Go join the party you really want to be in. We don't want you."
-- chasa
----------------------------------------
Chasa, I have to ask why? Have you thought about your position at all?
The majority in the Senate and the House control all legislation that gets passed. Not one single item on the Democratic agenda can get passed without controlling one or the other.
You and others who don't want people in the party who might vote against everything you may personally stand for, but will vote for the leadership that makes it possible to acheive your goals, only ensure that your agenda will never come to completion.
Forget universal health care, because you do more to prevent than any Republican.
The fact is, you are a minority of opinion, even within the Democratic Party, and certainly within the general public. Parties of purity end up in the wastebasket of history. Perfect ideological agreement is useless without the power to acheive anything, by driving away Democrats you trade that power for purity, and it's a trade of failure.