The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The Largest Selection of Liberal-baiting Merchandise on the Net!
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Reader Mail
Print Email

Reader Mail

Blinded by Pork

(Page 3 of 5)

How did Obama come to be called an elitist? I thought people of his sort were merely "climbers." How do you go from "community organizer" to elitist? What kind of organizing does a community organizer do? Something like fomenting to riot? We don't know as much about this man as we should. Of course, for Democrats, the other choice is Hillary, who defended a Black Panther before ideals collided with ambition.
-- Diane Smith

In what was an interesting article you drop this right in the middle of the piece -- "...in 2005 the newly elected senator from Illinois bought a $1.65 million dollar house for $300,000 under the asking price." I have to ask of what relevance is it? Do the math, it's only an 18% price adjustment.

Being a former Realtor there is an old saying: "Sellers lie and Buyers cheat." Sellers usually lie to the south of fair market value of their property and buyers usually cheat on the contract for a price south of that figure. Only in extremely hot markets do sellers get their asking price. So other than what appears to be a Big Number there is nothing paranormal, based just on price, for such an adjustment.
-- John McGinnis
Arlington, Texas

The following paragraph in "Obama's Paranormalcy" very much reminded me of Mike Royko's writing style. I have read 6 or 7 of Mike Royko's books (reprints of his columns, as well as "Boss") so needless to say I am a big fan of what he writes about and his writing style.

How did that tape ever get out, and why would Obama's friends at that website not recognize its potential for ruin? Or consider a more recent and even more bizarre interlude. Senator Obama is having breakfast in Scranton, Pennsylvania. A reporter asks for his reaction to former president Jimmy Carter's meeting with the thugs of Hamas, and Obama waffles. Perhaps, that is not so surprising, for he has frequently waffled along the campaign trail. But now comes the paranormal part. He waffled while actually /eating/ a waffle reportedly a Belgian waffle, not even an American waffle. Weirder still, Obama acknowledged his waffle, exclaiming to the reporter: "Why can't I just eat my waffle?" and "Just let me eat my waffle."
-- Tom Scheffelin
P.S. I especially liked the use of the word "wretch."

Barack Obama bought a $1.65 million dollar house for $300,000 under the asking price in 2005? So he's the one who started this mess!
-- Dan Martin
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Will Obama win the Nobel Prize before the Oscar, or vice-versa?
-- David Govett
Davis, California

CHANNEL NO. 9
Re: Quin Hillyer's Hooray for Censorship:

As a father, I agree with the spirit of Mr. Hillyer's article "Hooray for Censorship," but I must object to his methods. Is it not better to allow the citizens of this free country to regulate their own affairs, particularly what happens 9 times out of 10 in their private homes? Is this not the more conservative approach?

Promote individual responsibility, not dependence.

If we label certain things "vulgar" or "smut," it does not seem a giant step from there to oppression of the very ideas I espouse here. Let the market vet this.
-- Johnny Meredith
Lexington, Kentucky
P.S. I also don't like the implication that the airwaves are somehow public property. I've heard that before.

I like a lot of pretty raw stuff...but I can also see why others might want to avoid it, or shield children from it.

But I don't think censorship will be needed. As cable's audience grows, the broadcast media will die the death-of-a-thousand-nibbles...and once it's gone, the programs one wants to watch will be on a big variety of channels. One can watch what one wants, and avoid what one doesn't want to watch. Waiting for sports shows will just involve watching something of similar tone and content.

And even right now, if one is displeased with anything on these channels, one can block them out. Problem solved.
-- Robert Nowall
Cape Coral, Florida

Absolutely correct. We know that advertising works, and here we have television continually advertising, in the most subtle way possible -- through drama and comedy -- that all sorts of degenerate actions are acceptable, even popular. And the actual advertising itself is almost as bad in some cases.

It's hardly surprising that our youths engage in sexual and criminal actions that years back would have been considered unbelievable in America.

Page:   1 23 4 5  

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Taxes, Transportation, Foreign Policy, Education, Trade, Barack Obama, Television, Entitlements, Earmarks, Social Security, Sports, Religion, Islam, Books, Movies, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court, Iran, NATO, North Korea, Conservatism, Immigration, Nuclear Weapons, Oil

Comments

Leave a Comment

Related Articles

ADVERTISEMENT

In Sum, IPCC Discredited

Paul Chesser

* * * *

That Dangerous Radical . . . Marvin Olasky?

Robert Stacy McCain

* * * *

Forget the Committees

Greg Scandlen

* * * *

Reid Disses David Broder

Philip Klein

* * * *

Moment of Truth

W. James Antle, III

* * * *

No Sales Days in the Afghan War

George H. Wittman

* * * *

Bureaucrats With Badges

Mark Hyman

* * * *

Obama in Wonderland

Ken Blackwell

* * * *

A Writer Speaks

William Tucker

* * * *

What Has Changed?

Robert P. Kirchhoefer

* * * *

High Stakes

Manon McKinnon

* * * *
ADVERTISEMENT