LAWS MADE TO BE BROKEN
Re: Eric Peters’s Magical Thinking in California:
Agriculture + Semiconductors + Software + Movies + Television + Aerospace + Biotech + Nanotech + Universities + Tourism + Democrats = Bankruptcy.
— David Govett
“Magical Thinking In California” is a bulls-eye. In its July issue, Car & Driver ran a three-way comparison test: ’09 Honda Insight vs. ’10 Toyota Prius vs. ’99 Chevrolet Metro. The 10 year-old Metro managed better average fuel mileage (42 mpg) than the new Insight and tied the Prius. Plus, the rear suspension of the Metro was rated as being “more sophisticated” than either of its hybrid competitors. The Metro’s price when new was about $9900, vs. nearly $24,000 for the Insight and nearly $32,000 for the Prius. To leftist elites this may represent progress, but in the real world going back to the future would be a good idea.
— Mark Nahmias
San Tan Valley, Arizona
As Ayn Rand noted long ago, laws such as these aren’t meant to be obeyed. They are composed precisely so that NOT breaking them is impossible .
The proponents then cash in. It’s a protection racket. To survive, the ordinary person or business has to buy
indulgences from the new orthodoxy- a waiver here, a regulation change there, “and by the way, I’m having a fundraiser next week…”
Still waiting for the “Sopranos” movie? It’s already playing at a legislature near you.
— Martin Owens
AWARDED, NOT WON
Re: George H. Wittman’s An Enlisted Man’s Point of View:
Corrections on Bob Kerrey if you do not mind? He did not “win” the Medal of Honor, but was awarded it, and he is a recipient of it. As an ex-PFC, am sure you know that no combat medal is ever “won.” Second item is the name of the award as the word congressional has never been a part of its official name. It is the Medal of Honor presented in the name of congress (I refuse to capitalize it any more!).
— David Menard
Re: R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.’s Al Franken’s Blue Ball:
I hope Franken enjoys his single term as U.S. Senator…
— Robert Nowall
Cape Coral, Florida
Yes, increasingly, the Democratic Party is the party of personalities and Al Frankton is not a consistent thinker. I suspect you would conclude that emotion unconstrained by reason is a formula for ill-advised decisions, whereas emotion effectively controlled by reason is a formula for successful achievement.
Fabricated addresses and pop singers’ names are indeed indelicate, but the most effective defense against such tactics would be landslide victories. Democrats often have an advantage in winning voters’ sympathy, so Republicans will ordinarily lose if they don’t dominate the battle of ideas — and win if they do.
That imperative, I suspect, accounts for last November’s outcome. It also, I believe, accounts for your victory in your little skirmish with Frankton.
— William Best
Tell it to your Ben Stein. Along with him, how many of your contributors gave the max to Frankenfraud’s campaign.
— Alfred Stanbury
Stanbury Law Firm P.A.
FRIGHTENED BY A HOCKEY MOM
Re: Philip Klein’s What Happened to Sarah Barracuda?
Philip Klein’s blog post reflects very poorly on The American Spectator.
Another little man with an inferiority complex heard from. Good grief…who knew The American Spectator, Fox News, Washington Times, etc. were populated by a bunch of spiteful little boys who felt threatened by Sarah?
Is this the new Republican Party speaking…the one that is moving as quickly as it can to kill the conservative base once and for all ?
The only people who hate her more than the DNC is the Brie and Chablis Avant Guard Republicans.
Remind me to remember that The American Spectator works for Rahm Emanuel.
— Ron B.
PUT YOUR HEALTH CARE WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS
Re: Jay Molyneaux’s letter (under “The Will Care When They Get the Care”) in Reader Mail’s Cap-and-Taxed to Death:
I would like to go on record as being 100% in favor of the messiah’s health care fiasco, if and only if:
(1) the congress is forced to give up their current health plan and use messiah care and be banned from exempting themselves from their own laws as is the usual procedure,
(2) federal government workers (whoops, employees — government workers is an oxymoron) are forced to do the same,
(3) union bosses at all levels are also forced into the program like the rest of us, and
(4) the aforementioned groups are forced to use messiah care in their retirement packages instead of their current gravy train.
It seems to me that it is only fair that we share the messiah’s benevolence with the Washington elites, their employees, and their cronies. Of course, the messiah and Bubba Biden should also be forced to partake of the fruits of such benevolence.
Finally, the current congressional healthcare program should be transferred unchanged to the military and military retirees. They (unlike the congress) have contributed enough blood, sweat and tears to merit such lavish care.
Just an idea — don’t hold your breath.
— C.D. Lueders
Re: Rev. Canon Richard T. Nolan’s letter (under “Splitsville — Not Yet”) in Reader Mail’s Cap-and-Taxed to Death:
It is quite amusing to read Rev. Nolan’s sanguine notions concerning the “split that is not a split” within the Episcopal Church. It is especially entertaining when he is dismissive of the ACNA as just another breakaway group in a long list of breakaway groups from a number of larger religious bodies.
What, pray tell, is the Episcopal (Anglican) Church but a breakaway assemblage? What is the worst excuse in the world for separating from the Roman Catholic Church than switching allegiance from the Pope to the King so that King can divorce and/or murder his wife in order to marry another?
At least some new religious bodies come about because of honest disagreements over doctrine and the meaning of the Word of God.
The good Reverend is certainly right in his comments that the Christian Churches are constantly “engaged in doctrinal/moral self-examination.” But he is a little too glib in looking down his nose at those who are less than game for participating in the perpetual seminar for every “wind of doctrine” that comes down the pike. He seems to have little empathy or imagination by describing their motives as nothing more than “prefer[ing] final certainties in all matters.”
Rev. Nolan admits he himself is “dissatisfied with a number of matters of belief and practice in the contemporary Episcopal Church.” But he also counters: “However, it is within the life of the Church that effective remedies can emerge — after much discussion, debate, and discernment.” What Rev. Nolan leaves out is that these Christian-Socratic symposiums can get it wrong. In fact these exercises in “discerning the movement of the Holy Ghost” have got it catastrophically wrong hundreds of times in the past two thousand years.
Among Christians, there can be genuine disagreements yet the fellowship holds them together. But there are decisions in doctrine which are deal breakers. Some of our divines have construed the plain sense of Scripture into enthusiastic blessings for what it actually condemns. Clearly what is at the bottom is a deeper disagreement over how Scripture is read and used. What is troubling to “conservatives” is that if our theologians, seminaries and leadership can see their way to permit practicing homosexuals into the ministry and bless “same sex” unions, what will they see their way to do in the future? Worse, our theologians, seminaries and leadership may find the next “development” distasteful, but they will find they have no principle against it.
— Mike Dooley
Re: The July 2 edition of Reader Mail:
Good for you! At last, a 8-page reader mail. As a subscriber and donating reader, we were about to move on to other sites. I understand the costs involved but what are the costs of almost eliminating this well loved feature? Also missing is the interplay between various contributors in the mail. Hopefully today is the start of the “return of mail.”
— Dick Grogan
Yorba Linda, California
The Editor replies: We appreciate Mr. Grogan’s loyalty to Reader Mail. Most readers, alas, prefer to respond in the Comments section of individual pieces, which wasn’t available back in Reader Mail’s heyday. We do what we can, but Reader Mail depends on you, the reader — and letter writer.