Letters to the Editor
Bryce Anderson
Published Letters: 31 Editor's Choice: 5
-
Bad Glenn! Bad!
[Read the article: Mitt Romney: Perfect tough guy for right-wing war cheerleaders]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Mormon culture being what it is, it's hard to argue that any Mormon (even one who could be described as "halfhearted," as NYT describes mission-aged Romney) served a mission solely to avoid the draft. Serving a mission is a rite of passage for any young Mormon who wishes to stay in the good graces of their friends, family, and (most especially) the beautiful but frustratingly chaste Latter-day ladies.
Nor should you underestimate the emotional turmoil that comes from the sort of rejection Romney got on his mission. You spend your whole life being told that "the field is white and ready to harvest," that the whole world thirsts for the truths you're setting out to bring them. Then the people you're trying to help blow you off, ignore you, and berate you. Really, there are three possible reactions to this: blame yourself, blame the people, or blame the message.
Few young missionaries have the self confidence needed to fully accept the idea that hey, maybe there isn't anything special about the Mormon faith. A lot of Mormons who come back from European missions (which are generally wildly unsuccessful) talk about how closed-minded and unspiritual most Europeans are. Others blame their own inability to follow the rules of the mission field for their lack of success.
Should he have been whining about how hard it was in France, while his peers were slogging through the mud of Vietnam? Possibly not. But I see such narcissism as perfectly normal, both for a nineteen year old and for human beings in general.
“While we had gone from being adolescents to grown-ups with a lot of responsibility, our peers — from our perspective — were just tearing down the country, becoming dangerously childish.”
Most missionaries come off their missions with the feeling that they've matured into spiritual giants. Frankly, it's obnoxious as hell. But I can see how it might have affected him. He came from a very obedience-oriented society, so seeing his peers experimenting with drugs and free love, and rising up against all the old, respected institutions (all while he was out "doing the Lord's work") had to add an extra dose of self-righteousness.
My father got the same sort of deferment as Romney, so that he could serve a mission in Japan. I hope you're not insinuating that he was a draft dodger as well.
Having said all that, I hope there is a special level of hell reserved specifically for Mitt Romney. Double Guantanamo? I was for a woman's right to choose before I was against it? Castigating his Democratic opposition for wanting to introduce "socialized medicine," when their plans bear an eerie resemblance to the health care program he signed as governor? His only real qualification is that, of the three major Republican candidates, he's the only one still married to his first wife. Good luck with that.
-
Speaking of half-hearted mea culpas for misleading reporting...
[Read the article: Time magazine's FISA fiasco shows how Beltway reporters mislead the country]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Mark Halperin of ABC News gave a rather lame, point-missing apology for the horserace-ish state of campaign coverage these days.
Not surprising -- given his status as a self-proclaimed notliberal -- Halperin spends as much time apologizing for letting the country elect Bill Clinton as for George "Worst" Bush. He sums up:
At least sometimes. In the face of polls and horse-race maneuvering, we can try to keep from getting sucked in by it all. We should examine a candidate’s public record and full life as opposed to his or her campaign performance. But what might appear simple to a voter can, I know, seem hard for a journalist.
If past is prologue, the winners of the major-party nominations will be those who demonstrate they have what it takes to win. But in the short time remaining voters and journalists alike should be focused on a deeper question: Do the candidates have what it takes to fill the most difficult job in the world?
Here's a crazy thought: maybe once in a while, skip the presidential psychoanalysis and spend a bit of time discussing the candidate's policies, and how they would affect the country. As stated, Halperin seems to be asking reporters to trade the "would I like to have a beer with him" criteria in for a "would I like Vladmir Putin to have a beer with him" criteria.
-
Oops. Linkies!
[Read the article: Time magazine's FISA fiasco shows how Beltway reporters mislead the country]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/10/more-on-mark-halperins-sad-little.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/25/opinion/25halperin.html
-
@John Seiffer
[Read the article: Green investing 101]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think green investing is more effective than you're letting on.
A good green fund doesn't just buy the stocks; the fund uses its stocks as leverage to promote environmentally wise decisions and good governance. They push for greater transparency and better environmental information (from both current and prospective investments). They help elect board members who will keep the company on the right path.
I guess if you look at stocks merely as entitlements to a share of corporate profits, and strip away other aspects of ownership, then your analysis makes sense. But stock owners benefit when demand is high. If there are enough green investment dollars out there to be courted (read: if enough people invest in "green" funds), stockholders of all stripes will insist that their companies start courting them.
Lastly, I'm inclined to believe the green fund argument that environmentally responsible companies are better managed in a variety of other ways as well.
Of course, I could simply be rationalizing my decision to cut Winslow's Green Growth Fund a check last month.