Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 149 Editor's Choice: 9
-
I too have mixed feelings
[Read the article: Lee Bollinger's big moment]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]On the one hand, I can't imagine Bush having the stones to talk to Ahmadinejad like that; he'd rather just be dismissive of him while he secretly plans to bomb the crap out of him.
But Bollinger did go over the top. He assaulted Ahmadinejad so intensely that it didn't matter what the guy said in response; on the contrary, it gave Ahmadinejad more ammunition for the argument that he never gets a fair shake. (Not that anybody who would host a Holocaust denial convention DESERVES any kind of a fair shake, but still.)
Maybe Bollinger kowtowed to the right wing with his speech, or maybe it's what he was planning all along. But regardless, he had a chance to hold Ahmadinejad's feet to the fire in a non-political setting, to ask him point blank the questions he can never satisfactorily answer, and to let the world judge Ahmadinejad based on those responses.
Still, I think Bollinger was on the right track. The truest expression of American free speech is giving someone like Ahmadinejad the opportunity to make his case, and then giving everyone else an equal opportunity to repudiate him, protest him, and prove him wrong. That kind of thing happens less and less in our country these days.
-
Yeah, I don't really get it.
[Read the article: Men on eHarmony seem obsessed with women who are "clean"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I do not have shallow friends, mind you, but none of the women I know would take anyone to task for excluding "not clean" people from their dating pool. Multiple girls have told me that if a guy doesn't take care of his hygiene, he's off the list. I think it's absolutely fair for guys to utilize the same criterion. Besides, bad hygiene is often a warning sign for all kinds of other issues, ranging from laziness to personality disorders.
That said, you have every right to judge potential suitors based on whatever criteria you choose. I just hope you see the irony in making snap judgments on people whom you feel are making snap judgments.
But I think the real problem is that they make you do that "I can't stand" list in the first place. Maybe I'm biased against eHarmony because of its religious trappings and refusal to match gay people, but that doesn't sound like a great idea to me. I think there are better ways to match couples than lists of their pet peeves.
-
Competition is good.
[Read the article: Amazon's MP3 store: Better than iTunes]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]No question about it: a viable alternative to iTunes with the Amazon name behind it (a brand that's trusted by just about everyone in the world) can't be anything but a plus. Amazon has undercut Apple's prices as a way of making its presence known; Apple will likely be forced to add features to stay on top; and so forth.
Still, there's stuff I don't get. How are the very same labels that bitched and moaned about Apple's refusal to price anything above 99 cents with DRM restrictions going to be willing to let Amazon sell their stuff for ten cents cheaper and without restrictions? I guess it's already happened with the first two that signed on, but I'm suspicious that some agreement is in place whereby Amazon agrees to jack up the price after a certain amount of time. I guess we'll see.
-
@Forty-Something
[Read the article: Men on eHarmony seem obsessed with women who are "clean"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If you're referring to my post, I said that eHarmony had religious trappings, not that it only matches religious people. And what I said is true: it was started by an Evangelical and gained success through heavy promotion in megachurches and on James Dobson's Focus on the Family radio show.
It's also true that they refuse to match same-sex couples and, as far as I know, have absolutely no plans to do so in the future.
-
@The LW
[Read the article: Men on eHarmony seem obsessed with women who are "clean"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Since you keep coming back to the "not clean" vs. "racist" scenario, I'll say this:
A person who doesn't care much about their hygiene or cleanliness MIGHT be willing to admit that it's not their top priority, and that they think the world doesn't stop if they go without showering or making the bed for a few days.
But no racist on this earth will EVER admit that they are racist or classify themself as such.
So, one of the checkboxes has SOME point, while the other has NO point.
-
She has a really good point.
[Read the article: Jenna Bush is just not the Winnebago-driving type]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Her father should make an executive order RIGHT NOW stating that any troops who don't want to risk their lives anymore are allowed to quit the military and work for UNICEF instead.
That would be an excellent idea. Go Jenna.
-
Another one I heard...
[Read the article: Fred Thompson: Refreshingly honest or just uninformed?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Asked whether he was aware that his fly was open and he had toilet paper stuck to his shoe, Thompson answered simply, "I'm not sure where I stand on that particular issue but I have people working on it." Several aides then stepped up to the podium to adjust his zipper for him.
-
Look on the bright side...
[Read the article: Quote of the Day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's probably not too late for him to get back his old job as head of air traffic control at Dulles.
-
Come on...
[Read the article: Defendant owes $222,000 for illegal downloading]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]A few thousand dollars would have been more than enough of a deterrent to this particular woman, and if that's all the RIAA tried to get, they'd be able to sting a lot more people. One $220,000 judgment in a blue moon is not going to do much -- except make people smarter about covering their tracks just in case.
And honestly, what good does it do for the RIAA to establish such an adversarial relationship to their customer base? It's not going to make people feel good about paying for music. It IS, however, going to make people like me think twice about sending any more money to the association that bankrupted a single mother.
(Side note: When did this woman download this music, anyway? Kazaa hasn't been safe to use for a long time. These days (uh, from what I hear) you can get anything you want with a simple Google search, much harder to trace.)