seize Enter Stage Right
Got a bone to pick with us? Did we get something really wrong? Did we get something right? Need to vent?
Then write a letter to ESR for publication! Names withheld by request and all letters are subject to editing for length, clarity or language. Letters from anywhere on the political spectrum are welcome and will be printed. Please state whether you wish your name to appear with the email.
Send your hate-filled vitriol or love-filled praise to firstname.lastname@example.org
web posted May 28, 2007
Re: Fred Thompson: The great right hope by Alisa Craddock (May 21, 2007)
In her article titled "Fred Thompson: The great right hope", Alisa Craddock says "Whenever the Jews dropped the ball and forgot their God and went their own way, He always sent the Assyrians or the Babylonians or some other barbarian race to conquer and enslave them until they turned back to their God in repentance."
Re: Where is candidate Rudy Paul or Ron Guiliani? by J.J. Jackson (May 21, 2007)
J.J. Jackson writes, "I do get tired of pointing out that using al-Qaida's propaganda about how we are the reason they attacked us because we are defending allies in the Middle East (imperfect as they are) is about as sane as citing rants by Hitler and the Nazis against the Jews as proof positive that they were the reason Germany had problems and justification for the Holocaust." They may not be proof positive for the reason Germany had problems and they certainly do not justify the Holocaust, but they do explain the Nazi's motivation, which is what is at issue concerning Muslims. I agree with Alan Caruba that America should immediately withdraw from Iraq. While that is not the only thing that attracts me to Ron Paul's candidacy, it is one of the major things. I agree with Ron Paul concerning Rudy Giuliani. When asked whether he would support Giuliani if he won the Republican nomination, Ron Paul indicated that he could not do so unless and until Giuliani changed his views on foreign policy. Ron Paul is an excellent candidate just as he is; we don't need to change him.
J.J. Jackson responds:
Perhaps you, like many Ron Paul supporters who have responded, did not understand the point. This seems to be a major problem; Ron Paul supporters suggesting that the article says something it doesn't say. But that is ok. I'm used to people who disagree with me "not getting it" whether it is on purpose to purposefully advance an argument or just because they simply don't actually get it.
The point isn't, nor was it ever made, that we needed to "change" Ron Paul. The point, and in my opinion it was very clear, is that if there was a candidate that had Ron Paul's diligence on Constitutional spending and the role of government combined with the nuts of Rudy on the war he would be much more greatly supported than Ron Paul is.
And that ultimately seems to be what is sticking in the craw of the Paul supporters.
web posted April 16, 2007
Re: Real hate crimes by Nathan Tabor (April 9, 2007)
I find the beating-up of the homeless to be an atrocity just as much as you do. Perhaps more so; I have no idea. Where I find myself at odds with in your article is your belief that religious beliefs will prevent this happening. You say "A young person who can't even check in with God at the place that he spends the majority of his day isn't likely to ooze compassion to other people—especially the poor. A heart which lacks prayer is a heart which lacks love".
Perhaps in your world that is true. I know that in the world my mother and uncle grew up in, those kids who had religion all day every school day were the ones most likely to chase them, and beat the you know what out of them because they were "Christ killers". I am sure that, because of the beliefs instilled in these children, they could walk in the door of their church, light a candle, put cash in the box, talk to the guy in that booth with the fancy filigree, and be forgiven of their sins.
Fortunately, my uncle was a feisty, wiry kid who could hold his own and managed to give back better than he got at the hands of these little angels.
In the world I grew up in, I had plenty of experience with having my loyalty questioned, my job performance assessments falling through the floor if I revealed what I was by taking off on the "wrong" holidays, or handed "[excrement] duty" in the Navy after having a shift chief go into my personnel record to check my religious preference. I will give you three guesses as to what their religions were.
What IS the solution is this: the parents shut off the TV set, limit the internet, and ration the iPod, LOOK at the records they are buying or downloading. How many parents are spending time with their children these days? Yes, yes, I know: both have to work today to keep up with the taxes. But my mother, divorced and working long before it was fashionable, still found time to talk with me, go to the occasional movie with me, or sit and watch television together. I never beat up any homeless, I robbed no banks, I raped no women (or men if it comes to that), I stole no cars. My grades were horrid and I had plenty of emotional baggage to haul that is not germane to this note to you, but I came through okay.
On a related topic, I have a question for you that I have of all advocates of mandated "voluntary" school prayer. It is not a rhetorical question, nor is it intended to mock. I am very serious when I ask you this: How will you, as a Christian, and especially one who studied at Regent University, feel when you get your wish and mandated "voluntary" school prayer is mandated, and little Sammy Mermelstein is asked to lead the kids in prayer? Or for that matter little Hassan Muhammad, or Mary Suzuki? Will you stand for it, or will you be saying "but but...! This is not what we meant!"? And if so, what DO you mean?
David J. "Bear" Mann
© 1996-2010, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.
You've seen the banner,
now order the gear!
Visit ESR's anti-gun control gear web site for T-shirts, mugs and mousepads!