Letters to the Editor
J T
Published Letters: 295 Editor's Choice: 26
-
Yes and No
[Read the article: WayLay]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Okay, I'll bite. I know I shouldn't, but I can't resist.
I did indeed notice that the holes changed position, which seemed to give the cactus facial expressions, serving to anthropormorphize the plant. (Also, having the cactus hauled into court and serve time achieved the same thing). As for the humor, I found it funny that the cactus killed the one who shot it in an ignoble way, and it ended up with a porn producer, who was also likely to shoot it in an ignoble way.
I'm not sure if this is what the artist intended, but it works for me.
-
We got replay, lets take it a step further
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Hey, everyone wanted replay, right? That's why we've got it now. Perhaps we need to take this a step further. I remember back in the Little League I played in, when a coach disagreed with rulings on the fields by officials, he could note that the game was being played under protest. The game was played out, then sent to those above for review. To keep from having too many protests, a team lodging the protest had to put down a financial stake in the protest.
If the protest was upheld (the call reversed, or whatever), the team got their money back, the part of the game after the protest was erased, the rest of the game rescheduled, the teams met again, and played the rest of the game from that point on. If the protest failed, the rest of the game stood as played.
Think of the excitement this could generate. We could have a special event to see Oklahoma/Oregon play out the last 1 minute 9 seconds again with Oklahoma getting the onside kick and running out the clock. Will they be able to run out the clock, or will a freak fumble derail their plans. LSU and Auburn could possibly meet again, if so ruled. On the NFL side, we could see Pittsburgh and Miami from week 1 replay from the missed Miami instant replay flag thrown but missed by the officials. Think of the TV promos: "This time we'll really get it right (unless there is another screw-up, then we'll have to do this all over again)"
-
making decisions
[Read the article: Two weddings, one day, miles apart: What to do?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I agree with the picking one or the other, and going to it. Try to make both, and you'll likely find yourself tired and miserable.
And if you have trouble making the decision of which one to go to, use the coin flip method, but with a bit of an adjustment. Get your coin out, and decide "heads for wedding 1, tails for wedding 2." Flip the coin in the air, and while it's in mid-flight, listen to your thoughts. If you find yourself thinking something like "I hope it comes up tails" then ignore the results of the coin flip, and go with whatever event was for tails (or heads, as the case may be). If you don't find yourself hoping for one outcome or the other, then follow the coin.
-
LoDuca
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Heck, J.D. Drew nearly managed to score because Paul LoDuca was busy showing the umpire he still had the ball instead of immediately checking on the trailing runner. Every little leaguer is told to ignore the umpires until the play is dead. It would've been a great play for Drew if he'd scored, now it's a great play for LoDuca. Either way, I expect it to be in highlights for some years.
Hunter's play is a bit different. If he makes the catch, it's a great play, but only one of many he's made, and probably not remembered past this year's playoffs (Kotsay might think back on that time he was robbed of a hit in the playoffs by Hunter, but that's about it). As it is, it'll be remembered for a while because you just don't see that many in the park HR in the playoffs, caused by an error or otherwise.
And add Mark Grace to the list of ballplayers who've been caught in the fake to third, throw to first pickoff. He fell victim to it in a Cubs/White Sox game I attended.
-
Confused
[Read the article: It's the coverup, stupid]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Okay, I still haven't figured this whole thing out (as I'm sure most people haven't). As far as I can tell, he sent explicit messages to pages, who are probably 16 years old. What I don't know is:
- What the age of consent is, either in Washington, DC, Florida, or any of the states the pages are from.
- As there are no reports yet about any physical contact, it's still unclear about any illegal contact with a minor.
- No one seems to be talking about workplace sexual harrassment, which would seem to apply, as a member of Congress would be a superior to a page.
I realize that this goes the standards of morality in the country, and there is something to be found out about who knew about this prior to the recent news reports, and what they did or did not do about it, but it still hasn't been made clear what laws may have been broken. It seems that some law or another may have been violated, but which one?