Letters to the Editor
calgodot
Published Letters: 250 Editor's Choice: 6
-
Joan is a mirror
[Read the article: Thank you, Rush Limbaugh!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Joan Walsh is a mirror to the Hillary Clinton campaign. Her tirade matches the tone coming out of the Clinton camp these days.
The Clinton campaign has for many weeks maintained a desperate position of hyper-vigilance and hyper-defensiveness. No doubt the constant attacks on Joan's intelligence and honesty, along with accusations of racism and bias, have put her into a "firewall" mode, where she feels alone and persecuted, misunderstood and maligned. Like her favorite candidate, Joan Walsh strikes out at her critics not by arguing against their points, or attempting to persuade them to hers, but rather by paying her power and privilege card.
There's an old saying, Joan - I'm sure you (and many other Hillary supporters) will think I'm "sexist" for bringing it up (but if they think for just a moment - I mean really think, and not do that passive-aggressive mental twisting which passes for thinking among so many Democrats these days - then they'll note there's no gender-reference in my suggestion):
"If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen."
If you can't handle sexist boors typing their miscreant opinions in your comments section, Joan, then don't have a comments section. If you can't handle disagreement and contrary opinions, then resign as Salon's editor and become a campaign media adviser (a job which your personality and thinking indicate may be very apt).
You're either in favor of free, open expression or you're not (and frankly, many suspect you're not, and this screed doesn't beg off the idea). If you edit a web site and want to attract readers (face it: you really want $ub$criber$, not readers), then don't attempt to do so by stifling voices contrary to your own.
That is, unless you're trying to build a monolithic one-side opinion journal. If that's your plan, then keep following your instinct: you are headed in the right direction.
-
I'm with Kuhnigget on this
[Read the article: This Modern World]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There's a limit to this "experts told us" excuse. "Expert advice" in no way removes the responsibility of due diligence from the buyer. The basics of finance do not change because an "expert" assures you there are exceptions. The risks associated with low-interest housing loans and the volatile real estate market are well-known: along with all the hype the media presented about this "boom" were also dire predictions that it was in fact a "bubble" that would soon burst. Buyers chose to ignore the warnings and focus on the exceptions.
There are always exceptions, but exceptions are, you know, exceptional. Far too many people bought into this idea; each of them knew the perils, knew that "getting rich quick" is always fraught with peril, that owning can be risky. More importantly, they understood that, if the rates did rise, they would be unable to afford the deal. They all knew the risks, and all of them were thinking, "I'll be the exception."
Many of them no doubt recalled the recent "dot-com boom," which turned out to be a bubble that burst. They noted that while a lot of people lost money when the bubble popped, many others made millions by getting out at just the right time, or by somehow avoiding the pitfalls which confounded others. Imagining that they too would be exceptions if/when the housing bubble burst, they dove right in, hoping to get rich without hard work and effort (you know, like President Bush did).
Americans are plagued by "exceptionalist thinking." So many Americans, coddled by a lifetime of relative privilege and wealth, think they are exceptions to the rules which govern the rest of the world. This mentality reveals itself throughout the strata of American life: from our President ignoring laws and treaties, all the way down to the "little guy," thinking he will somehow beat the system and get rich quick. It is a plague and a poison, and I suspect the only way we'll ever be rid of it is to suffer through the very things to which we as a nation seem to think we are immune. (You know, like terrorism, widespread poverty, a second-rate economy, no production base, low GDP, tyrannical government, etc.)
-
Hmmm...
[Read the article: Quote of the day ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]A self-absorbed, white, privileged feminist writing about other self-absorbed, white, privileged feminists. Well, sometimes it has to start there I guess. At least she admits to her own privileged-induced myopia - she gets major points for that.
Too bad she wasted all her college time in feminist theory ("women's studies") classes. Courses in writing and composition would have served her well. If she's a journalist, I shudder to think of her actual work-writing - the poor editors must go mad revising such awful, pseudo-academic writing into readable journalism. I suspect she may have some good ideas, some good points to make, but such things are mostly lost in her impenetrably dense prose and this poorly constructed essay.
Overall: C-