Letters to the Editor
jebldmm
Published Letters: 933 Editor's Choice: 164
-
Dear Jeffrey
[Read the article: Dear college applicant, So sorry to hear you're a girl ...]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"I guess that zeros out all the home care attendents, flight attendents, secys, receptionists, sales clerks, hotel workers, agricultural workers, factory workers, health care workers, beauty salon workers (whatever they're called), teacher's aids, dental hygenists and probably some I never thought off! What nerve, you bitch, my grandmother was a clerk at Sears for like 30 years!"
You are obviously ignorant of the fact above described jobs are among the lowest paying in their respective fields, or perhaps you misogynistically belive that the lowest jos are all that women are qualified for.
There is nothing wrong with being a store clerk. I'm betting that your grandmother might have wanted more options, though, especially in an age where store clerks rarely have job security or benefits.
By the way, I'm sure your grandmother would have told you that it's very rude to refer to a woman as a "bitch" in polite conversation. I assure you, I don't have any canine genes. I really don't understand what I said that could have earned such hostility. May I suggest an anger management program? You can get away with things like that when you are protected by the anonymity of a computer, but such behaviour in person can have negative consequences.
-
I wonder if and Red Staters grasp the irony
[Read the article: Domenech apologizes for plagiarism -- and for "obfuscation" in defense]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Here is a group that has perfected the art of the smear, usually over truly trivial issues, criticizing another group for smearing one of their own. In the defense of liberals, at least when we smear someone, we use facts instead of lies.
-
They have the power
[Read the article: Sinners in the hands of an angry GOP]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The right fought for states rights until they came to power, then they decided that the federal government should make the rules.
The right fought for lower government spending until they came to power, then they decided that spending for their causes was a good thing.
The right fought for small government until they came to power, now they are making the government bigger than Reagan ever dreamed and enriching their contributors in the process.
So why should it be suprising that the right, who fought to keep the government our of religion until they came to power, now wants THEIR church to dictate the laws of the land?
-
"He Fought Democrats"
[Read the article: How will you remember Tom DeLay?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This is his legacy? The sad thing is that the extremists who have taken over the republican party think that this is a fitting legacy, something to be proud of. They believe that fighting American Democrats is the ultimate goal of any republican politician. I remember when Republicans had other goals, including ensuring the security of this nation, maintaining a balanced budget, and improving opportunities for non-wealthy Americans. I wonder how long a nation can survive when the principle goal of it's dominant political party is to destroy it's internal opposition and the welfare of the nation falls a distant second.
-
Remember Whitewater?
[Read the article: No, really, why did DeLay quit?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]While I feel sympathy for DeLay's frieds who are being "squeezed to say terrible things" about him, I think it would be good to remember that the republicans spent tens of millions of dollars investigating a decade old failed land deal in the hopes of getting some kind of dirt on the president of the United States. While I realize that hypocrisy is not a sin in the republican mindset, I would expect them to at least acknowldege that investigating ongoing corruption involving millions of dollars at the highest levels of government is at least as important as investigating old land deals that lost money. They are supposed to be the "law and order" party, after all.
-
They are politicizing grief
[Read the article: Stillbirth certificates?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]When I was 4 years old, my mother gave birth to an anenencephalic baby. As far as I know, there was no birth certificate - they knew in advance that the baby was not going to live. She only carried it to term so that his organs could be harvested to try to save another baby. He is listed in the family bible, under the name "Baby Boy". When I was a child, every year my mother got a bid sad around the time of his birthday, although she has gotten past that. I still think of him as the brother who never was and sometimes wonder what he would have been like.
A piece of paper is not going to comfort a parent who has a stillbirth. A "Certificate of Live Birth" is a legal document, not a prize for a successful birth. The baby is the prize. Having a certificate is not going to help the grieving parents who have to explain to friends and family that their beloved, wanted baby never drew a breath. It isn't going to stop that sadness that parents will experience on the anniversary of their child's non-birth. This is entirely political. This is nothing more than an opportunity to expand the defintion of "live birth".
We need to research why these things happen, of course. It's very hard to talk about things like stillbirths and miscarriages without feeling like you are terrifying currently pregnant women. But policizing the issue by redefining "live birth" isn't going to solve the problem. Perhaps, instead of granting new status to stillbirths, we could initiate mandatory reporting systems that track stillbirths and late term miscarriages, treating them as a real problem, perhaps under the authority of the CDC. That might actually provide data that would help solve the problem, instead of simply scoring political points for people who want to control women's reprodutive choices.
-
Thanks for the warning
[Read the article: And your little dog, too]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm one of those people who get's extremely upset reading about animal abuse. I appreciate the warning, and will content myself with the summary. Thanks.