Letters to the Editor
wires
Published Letters: 50 Editor's Choice: 3
-
Penny Barrett Hornsby
[Read the article: Eight Belles' last run]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I like to "see animals being treated humanely, being trained at an appropriate age by qualified individuals, and bred responsibly".
I also like thoroughbred horse racing and, having been around it for most of my life, I think it generally fulfills most of the above requirements. As soon as the article appeared I knew that those with minimal or no knowledge of the sport would start adding their emotional two cents worth.
It is unfortunate that letters receiving an Editor's Choice Star contain such emotional self centered drivel as:
"I know first hand, race people treat horses like shit".
"witnessing horses push themselves beyond their capabilities because someone is on their back whipping the crap out of them"
"We've about reached the limit of what "natural" horses can do"
In all of these cases the writers don't know what they are talking about and/or assume god like abilities to predict the future. IMHO the only worthwhile Editor's Choice is Catling's informed letter about broken legs. There is one worth reading.
Since my last post these choice bits if idiocy have appeared:
"In cases where a horse is to be euthanized after a race, the owner, trainer and jockey must be euthanized along with the horse." Wow - when a car wrecks lets kill everyone in the car. Emotional DRIVEL!
"I have lived with horses for twenty-five years and they run for two reasons -- they are afraid and running for safety or they are forced to run." This person must have been around OLD horses. Young animals (including humans) run for fun. Surely you remember that?
I am not splitting hairs when I call out an idiot letter that chastises "corporate owners" and other nonsense. The NASCAR reference is about the nature of the spectators not the participants. Pointing out the very interesting concept of "repeatedly dying" was an attempt at humor. Sorry you didn't get it.
-
Hopefully this is winding down...
[Read the article: Eight Belles' last run]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Mary Ann Joseph:
I am certainly not Lynx. I have never used a sock puppet in my online life. Your limited grasp of this issue may lead you to believe that only one person could enjoy thoroughbred horse racing but that is not true. Your insults mean nothing to me.
I don't gamble or work for the gambling industry and will never defend them. Gambling is a tax on the mathematically challenged.
If you "stand behind a horse" you WILL get kicked enough times to convince you it is a BAD place to stand. It does not matter if you have a whip or not.
kittyweese:
Prove your point? At first you said horses only run "for two reasons -- they are afraid and running for safety or they are forced". Now you come back and admit that they run naturally. Your education will be more complete if you spend some time around race horses. They LIKE to run. They enjoy it just as any human athlete does. I have my doubts about your experience in this field.
Allie_:
Your 11:49 AM letter is much more in line with my experience than your first. "Race horses do love not just running, but racing" I couldn't have said it better!
I would like to know exactly what drugs you are referring to when you say "shoot 'em full of pain meds".
"Three day eventers take excellent care of the horses - there's a vet looking in every step of the way." Same with race horses at major tracks like Churchill. I don't know what tracks you have been around but my experience with "way racing people treat horses" is about the same as you describe in your world, x-rays and all.
Breathany: Thank YOU!
-
WORTHLESS video!
[Read the article: Controversy brewing over King statue]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]15 straight cut edits of a talking head. How edgy and modern...
Show us the statue. Save the bandwidth and MY time.
-
The WSJ incorrectly notes many things
[Read the article: Is Obama moving to the center?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Though the Journal article correctly notes that Obama's professed willingness to negotiate with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad..."
Obama has NEVER said he would negotiate with Ahmadinejad. This is a right wing talking point. The more this falsehood is repeated the more it moves into the collective "reality" and the easier it is for the right wingers to build fear.
Another one to look out for is the is Rev. Wright's "outrageous" belief that US policy had something to do with 911. When lumped in with his AIDS theories and God Damn America this moves the collective "reality" to forget that Usama bin Laden said the same thing. It makes the US a victim of a crazy world where we are attacked for no reason.
Bending the truth to incorporate these memes is how the right wing have taken over the county. It is VERY important to point out these LIES whenever they crop up. I would have thought Mr. Koppelman to be up to the task...
-
How many more times?
[Read the article: No peace for Obama on Israel]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I tire of seeing this meme go unchallenged here at Salon:
"Looking at it objectively, I'd say he sends mixed signals. One day he talks about meeting with Ahmadinejad. Then he recites the AIPAC talking points."
McCain himself said in a press conference, "I can't react to every comment that Senator Obama makes, because it probably will change as it did on sitting down and talking unconditionally with Ahmadinejad and other dictators."
Obama has NEVER said he would meet with Ahmadinejad. This is a right wing talking point and should NEVER go unchallenged.
How many more times are we going to see this crap in Salon?