Letters to the Editor
Mike J Y Wood
Published Letters: 95 Editor's Choice: 12
-
Why not let Iraq vote on it?
[Read the article: Should we stay or should we go?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Here's my simple solution ...
The Iraqi people should have a vote on whether the US military leaves within 100 days or stays another year. A straight up popular vote done by the people, not their represenatives.
While I sympathize with the human toll this war has taken on our country, we must remember -- we started this and the "Pottery Barn" rule is in effect. If the Iraqi people want us to stay then we have the obligation to stay and try to fix what they want fixed. Leaving simply because it's best for us, with no regards to the Iraqi people, is as misguided as starting this war with no regards to the Iraqi people.
However, if they vote for the US military to leave then it's best that would leave anyway. Winning this war without popular support will never happen. Furthermore, if they vote to have us leave, and we do leave, it at least shows to the world that we truly do believe in the most basic principle of democracy. It's the choice of the Iraqi people -- not ours.
My only real worry about this plan is if the Iraqi people voted us to stay with a close margin -- 51% to 49%. Then we would have to stay, but would have half the country wanting us to leave.
-
It's part of sports but its still wrong
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In the world of political thought (I assume you read the other parts of Salon) people talk about ideas like institutionalized racism and sexism. Simply put it means that people often have biases that aren't directly noticeable, perhaps even by themselves, but we can recognize it by activity over a period of time. Hey look, there's no minority coach hirings!
While you make the point that incorrect officiating is essentially just part of the game (and the we need to except that), you are totally ignoring when the officiating trends one way or another. While I do not think the refs were "on the take" I can easily see them having a hidden personal preference for one team or the other. Perhaps something subtle. Perhaps they too were charmed by all the Jerome Bettis returning to Detroit stories. Perhaps they didn't want to piss off a crowd that's 90% Steeler fans. And while I can not read their minds I count how many bad calls went one way and the other. In fact, we can all do that math.
You may continue to argue that bad calls are just chance and where they land is a matter of luck, but we all know that famous people get the breaks. If you're a star basketball player you'll get the call over the unknown journey man. None of this is new. It's just accepted as part of the fame, and that's wrong.
In the world of fencing there's an old story where a famous veteran beats a newcomer in the final bout, and with some questionable calls. The newcomer approaches the veteran and says, "You won because of your reputation." The veteran replies, "Get yourself a reputation."
-
Santino's demise
[Read the article: Project Bummer]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]We all heard the judges talking about how Santino restrained himself and that they, gasp, had crushed his spririt. I don't think that's true, I don't think Santino ever let us see the real him.
After the first few competitions he was no longer making dresses because he liked them, but because he wanted to evoke a reaction from the judges. Then on finally show he does the same thing again but in the other direction, still not following his own inner voice, but over playing what he thought the judges would want. Playing it safe with a bunch of tame dresses all looking similar.
I find Santino to be very disingenous. He's not a true artist who creates from an inner vision. His creative process starts with wanting a reaction then trying to create the dress to get that reacion, be it acceptance or horror.
You want a true artist then you look at Jay.
-
Judging art in a competition is always flawed
[Read the article: Project Bummer]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Lets imagine a reality show called Project Canvas. it starts with 16 painters and each week they have to make a new painting. Week 1: Virgin Mary made out of feces. Week 2: Hiroshima in watercolors. Week 3: Metaphor of lonliness. (You get the idea.) How exactly, at the end, would you judge the finally? Who wins in the end? The Van Gogh knock off? The Picasso knock off? Or the guy who does sculptures?
Whenever you have a competition and art is the factor the winner is decided by the tastes of the judges. This competition didn't tell us if Chloe is better than Santino or Daniel, it told us what the judges likes -- and you're shocked that they don't match yours. Hey, you know what, Crash wouldn't have won the best picture oscar either if so many academy voters didn't live in LA.
BTW, you should really read King Kaufman, he writes sports for Salon. He made some great points during the Olympics about how judging events (hello Ice Dancing) based on artistic merit will always be flawed. You could learn a lot about the problems of competitions by reading the sports pages.