Letters to the Editor
jebldmm
Published Letters: 933 Editor's Choice: 164
-
Did they trump us?
[Read the article: So this is why they needed six months?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Or is this a very stupid move? They are obviously hoping that the patriotic fervor on 9/11 will either distract people from seeing Petraeus and allow them to present his testimony with their own spin, or that people will hear his words through a 9/11 filter and put their own spin on it. The problem is that the public has largely let go of the idea that Iraq has anything to do with 9/11. They want the whole thing to go away. The Republican's use of 9/11 to manipulate the public has made even this great tragedy into a political event, and I don't think that people will be receptive to having their emotions twisted by the right wing yet again. I think that the White House is making a Hail Mary pass, trying to squeeze one more triumph out of the tragedy of 9/11. The real question is whether their previous manipulations of the event have caused people to be so cynical that they will rebel against this, or if the event is traumatic enough that it can be used indefinitely to manipulate people.
-
It's a control issue
[Read the article: Pit bulls are innocent]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Self-control on the part of the dogs. The difference between toy poodles and german shepherds is not just one of size. Toy poodles are small and have been bred to be cute pets. They tend to be more aggressive because they are so small that their lack of self-control has never been a major problem so it has not been "bred out" of the line. German shepherds are working dogs, and (like all working dogs) have been bred to be obedient and disiplined. This is why German Shepherds are often used by police. They certainly are not the largest or most vicious dogs, but they are easy to train and to control and rarely attack unprovoked.
Pit bulls have, in many cases, been bred to be aggressive. Not all pits are vicious, but many have been specifically bred to be fighters, and their genes have mixed with the general population. The fault isn't the dogs, it's the fault of the people who bred the dogs. But it's a reality that we have to deal with. If a flaw is found in a breed, it has to be bred out. The problem is that we can't see the fault in pit bulls. It's a subtle tendency to be easily provoked into violence. You can't test for this. A child might pull the tail of a pit bull and be mauled. This can happen with other breeds, but itisn't nearly as likely. And pits are built to kill. Their strong jaws and heavily muscled bodies make them efficient killing machines, should they lose control. If a toy poodle bites, then it probably won't hurt anybody permanently. A pit bull can easily kill.
I don't think there is an easy solution. I'm not in favor of forcing people to kill their pets (that's just crued), but I do favore requiring sterilization of pits and banning their breeding. As for dog fighting, I think that anybody caught participating should be treated as a murderer, since they are indirectly responsible for the death of every person who has been mauled by a pit bull. By breeding aggression into dogs, they have made an entire breed a threat to human beings, and the punishment should be severe.
-
I'm not even buying movies on DVD
[Read the article: The next-gen disc format war gets uglier, more ridiculous]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Well, unless they're really cheap. Records morphed into 8-track, then cassetes tapes and CD's to digital. Movies went from film to video (remember Beta?) to DVD to pay per view... and now to ???, without any visible improvment in quality in the last 5 years. I'm beginning to feel that this is all a scam to get us to spend more money. Okay, that feeling has been in my mind quite a while. Maybe "less is more". I'm not spending more money until the technology settles down a bit.
-
I have a few problems with this
[Read the article: Dude, that's my treadmill]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]First, mice aren't human beings, and no matter how many treadmill tests you do there is no way to extraolate from a mouse study of voluntary exercise patterns to how an organized exercise program will effect the heart of an adult man or woman. Second, if you read the study, you will find that female mice exercised more than the male mice. The study conclusions might as well have been "exercising more benefits the heart", or "female mice voluntarily exercise more", but that wasn't the point of the study. I assume that they controlled for exercise levels when analyzing the study, but this is not made clear in the report, which does not describe the analytical methods at all. I presume that this report is simply a summary, since no responsible researcher would neglect this important information.
Rodent research can be a useful tool, but it is irresponsible to make announcements that might lead to men exercising less based on this limited kind of research.
Second, it is not reasonable to suggest that the experiences of a transsexual can be used to identify differences between male and female physiology. I'm sure that the individuals performance did change after the sex change. There is a reason that some athletes take testosterone to improve their performance - it builds muscles and strength and increases aggression. I would be very surprised if somebody taking medications to stop their body from making testosterone did not have decreased sports performance, whether or not that person was transsexual. There is no reason to suspect that the sex change has altered her cardiovascular response to exercise, except as far as the drugs she is taking alter said response.