The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Palin on a Pedestal

9.11.08 @ 12:01AM

(Page 5 of 7)

CON ARTIST
Re: David Catron's response to Joseph Paduda's letter (under "Bad CON-notations") in Reader Mail's Signed, Nobody:

It was unfortunate that Mr. Catron resorted to ad hominem attacks rather than primary source analysis in his recent rejoinder to my letter.

My point was, and remains, that CON programs constrain costs. Clearly free market competition of the type advocated by Ms. Palin and apparently Mr. Catron does not reduce costs.

Contrary to Mr. Catron's assertion, I did cite specific sources for the Chrysler/Ford/GM data in my original post. Letters to the editor do not lend themselves to url hyperlinks, but Mr. Catron could have found the relevant links if he had googled my name or read my blog, which he has in the past.

Nowhere did I say that we should ignore an FTC paper referenced by Governor Palin because "the document was written during the present administration, one that has not been noted for an even-handed approach to science, analysis, and research." He further indicts the FTC of an "intent to encourage" so-called consumer driven health care (CDHC). The report stated that intent unequivocally.

The other point I made pertains to quality. Mr. Catron states "I'm not sure that seven-tenths of a percent would be considered 'significant' by many statisticians, but I am sure that this is one of the weakest pro-CON arguments I have encountered." Unfortunately, Mr. Catron is statistically confused. The risk of death is 16% higher in non-CON states for those undergoing bypass surgery. Somehow I don't think that is a "weak" argument against CON regulations.

There are many sources of data, should Mr. Catron seek to truly understand the issue.

I'd conclude by noting Mr. Catron is not someone I have ever met nor spoken with. Yet he claims throughout his retort that he knows what I think, what I advocate, and why (I'm a 'liberal').

I did not attack Mr. Catron in my letter, but for some reason he chose to personally attack me in his response. This condescending, patronizing, and insulting behavior does neither him, nor the Spectator, credit.
-- Joseph Paduda

David Catron replies:
LOL. The irony is that Paduda has leveled more than one cheap shot at me on his blog, where he has (as recently as Tuesday) made snide references to "that bastion of intellectual rigor, the American Spectator." Somehow these people always seem to be very thin-skinned.

ONCE IN A LIFETIME
Re: Michael Tobias's letter (under "Take it Back") in Reader Mail's Silly Sally:

Now all we need is for someone to remind Mr. Tobias that the party's choice has rarely been the people's choice. Occasionally we have a candidate who is pre-ordained to have it because it is "his turn" At least McCain didn't choose someone who would have totally screwed the election. I have in mind supply-sider Jack Kemp, whose pre-occupation with his Super Bowl ring is the nearest thing to public masturbation. Recall the time a heckler yelled at Kemp's wife and Secret Service moved in on the guy and Kemp said "Let the quarterback handle this?" (Groan) But he was Dole's choice -- and you see where that landed us. Think about it, if Bob Dole had had Sarah Palin and Sarah Palin had debated Al Gore...we might have been spared Bill Clinton. As for the age factor -- there is old Bob, still kickin' around.

Ninety percent of the electorate can't remember the names of VP's past Al Gore. If we win this time around, it will at least be memorable, as having the first woman.

But I do thank Mr. Tobias for the lesson in political science. My four years pursuing a degree in the subject followed by lifelong reading, was not nearly as enlightening. The only thing I did not glean from the whole riff was who Mr. Tobias thinks would have made an ideal candidate? And could he have won? For that matter, in the recent history of politics, how many People's Choice candidates have we had and how have they fared? Eisenhower, maybe -- riding the post-war wave. Not Nixon. Not our accidental president, Gerry Ford. He was just a born congressman and proved it in a debate, guaranteeing us four years of Carter.

Ronald Reagan was a political rara avis, setting an example that none have followed. I have never observed any similarity in those who call themselves Reagan Republicans. We can get used to this: We will never have another Ronald Reagan. We will never have another William F. Buckley. We should be glad we lived in a time when we did.
-- Diane Smith

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Taxes, Health Care, John McCain, Barack Obama, Sarah Palin, Bill Clinton, Television, Abortion, Environment, Hollywood, Constitution, Law, Military, Iraq, Russia, NATO, Immigration, Energy, Alaska, Oil