Letters to the Editor
Panther58
Published Letters: 4 Editor's Choice: 1
-
Great piece
[Read the article: How did the T get in LGBT?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]THAT is one of the most thoughtful articles I've ever seen in Salon, especially the part about how conservatives have managed to win so many cultural battles.
As a middle-aged, straight white male, who admittedly knows nothing about transexual issues (but strongly favors full rights for gays, lesbians and bisexuals), I can tell you that there's always been something a bit unsettling to me about including the transgendered with those other orientations. It never really crystallized for me until I read this.
It seems, from my limited knowledge of transsexuals, that they really don't fit in with the other groups without some serious shoehorning.
And even if a conservative can suspend disbelief long enough to believe that gays and lesbians are actually people deserving of protection, I think there's something about transsexuals that just doesn't fit for them. I mean, you might be able to convince a married, straight conservative that a gay man can feel the same thing for another man that a straight feels for his wife. It's a much harder sell, though, to convince a straight person that some guys will only feel whole after their penis has been lopped off. That's inelegantly put, but that's the way a lot of conservative straights will think of it.
-
A new definition needed
[Read the article: Journalism and its discontents]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]After 25 years in the news business, I've often thought that what's needed -- and Blumenthal touched on this -- is a new definition of "objectivity."
The problem is that there are people, mostly on the right, who have learned to use the lazy definition of "objectivity" to subvert journalism. When one side knows that the longer and louder a lie is told, the more it becomes accepted truth, it just doesn't work to simply give both sides.
In other words, reporters and editors need to find a way to scream "bullshit" when they see it, rather than just uncritically reporting it. Right now, the only person who does this with some courage is Keith Olberman on "Countdown." When he takes apart the latest dissembling on Fox News, it's the closest thing to real journalism you'll see anywhere.
Incidentally, we also need to remember that "objectivity" itself started as a business decision, after political parties stopped supporting newspapers. That meant that the papers had to avoid alienating potential advertisers and the best way to do that was not to advocate one side. For all the gassing about how "objective" reporters are, I wonder how much our consumers really even notice or care about our faux objectivity. Given the results, my guess is, not much.
-
Meanwhile, back in the real world ...
[Read the article: McCain's gassy tax relief]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Why is it economists and transportation experts always talk as though people just run out and buy a new car like they'd run out and buy a gallon of milk?
Gas prices being what they are, one has to take out a bank loan just to buy half a tank. Most people can't afford that, much less a new car, no matter how fuel-efficient.
-
Whew!
[Read the article: Scott McClellan comes clean]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thanks, P.N. I hadn't had my daily communication from an alternate universe today.
And now, back to this planet ...
I'm not quite sure how I feel about McClellan coming clean at so late a date. I guess, in the end, what's important is that truth comes out somehow, even if it's too late to really make any difference. But then, I'm a great believer in futile gestures.