Letters to the Editor

This was interesting -- Sunday's Washington Post included a column dealing with letters to the editor.  According to the article just one letter out of twenty-five is published (4%). 

Last May on this blog, I looked back at the letters I've had published in the Post and saw that 77% of my submissions made the paper.  I think it helps that I wait until I really feel I have something important to say and that I mostly write to point out errors rather than just rant about my own opinions.

Sarah!

The weekend sure brought Sarah Palin to the forefront of the news again. She gave a barnburner of a speech at the Tea party convention and then she knocked it out of he park with an interview with Fox News Sunday.

I've heard something about notes on her hand that people are making fun of. I missed that story. Maybe I don't watch enough cable news and read the Washington Post too much. But, someone please tell me what is the big deal? Has anybody seen our current president's reliance on TelePrompters? The late night hosts who mocked her last night, were themselves reading from CUE CARDS and they were no doubt reading words written by other people. (As is Obama, of course).

Super Bowl Tim Tebow Ad

Okay, I just watched the Super Bowl (Saints 31 - Colts 17), and where was the Tim Tebow ad that drew so much controversy ahead of time? I watched the whole game, save for a few minutes when I was checking on the pizza and wings in the oven.

I have now learned that the ad did air, and viewed it on YouTube, but look how easy it was to miss the thing. And what a blunder for anti-life groups to protest it before it even aired. All they did was multiply and magnify what was, in the end, an incredibly mild commercial that was totally lost in all the clutter of the other dozens of ads.

As for the content of the ad itself, I felt it was way too timid and did not even address the real issue. It just seemed like Tim Tebow was a sickly child or something. But, because of the NOW types, the publicity has given this ad a context which it never would have had before. Was it effective? Maybe. How many hearts and minds can you really impact in 30 seconds. Would I have authorized the expenditure? No, not unless the ad was a lot more open about the Life issue.

The most offensive ad of the day, of course, was the 20 minute informercial that CBS gave Barack Obama at 4:30!

Obama on Super Bowl Pre-Game

Katie Couric has been interviewing President Obama on the Super Bowl Pre-Game show since 4:30 PM EST. Why is he being given this free airtime to promote his agenda and tear down his opponents?

What an absurdity to think back on the complaints about the Tim Tebow 30 second Tim Tebow Pro-Life ad that will be aired later tonight. The Obama-Couric chat has been going on for 20 minutes now and only now does it look like they are wrapping it up.

Were we about to go to war or something? No.

Didn't he just have a 75 minute-plus State of the Union speech eleven days ago?

I agree with those who want to keep politics and sports separate. But allowing someone to buy an ad and doing an interview with a politician are totally different things.

Republicans: Demand equal time!

Obituary of Roy Grenaway, Aide to Senator Cranston

A few months ago, I wrote "Why I am No Longer A Democrat." Well, looking back at the post, I didn't make it clear that I left the Democrats for good a long time ago, back in 1990. I voted for George Bush in 1988. But before then, I had supported and tried to work with a lot of liberal Democrats. In 1980, I thought Ted Kennedy was great. In 1984, I recruited fellow Berkeley college students to get on a bus from California and drive to Iowa to help Senator Alan Cranston (D-CA) win the Iowa Democratic Caucuses and eventually the Democratic nomination for President. As I matured, my politics changed and I no longer felt comfortable in the Democratic party.

This obituary of Roy Greenaway, the former Chief of Stafff to Senator Cranston, brought back a lot of forgotten memories for me. In 1989, seven months after moving to the D.C. area, I interviewed for a job in Cranston's Senate office. As it happened, it was Grenaway who conducted the interview on a hot July afternoon. Well, I thought I had bombed because Greenaway fell asleep during the interview! How boring I must have been! Imagine my surprise when they called and offered me the job. I considered the offer and realized that although this was an entry level job, I no longer felt comfortable with the Senator's politics so I turned it down and focused instead on finishing up my Master's Degree.

The Post obituary on Greenaway included this: "Mr. Greenaway was known for the unpredictable questions he asked job seekers during interviews." I don't recall any off the wall questions during my interview, but perhaps he was trying to see how I would react when he fell asleep on me! I remember being pretty mad afterwards and wanting to write a nasty letter complaining of his unprofessionalism at falling asleep. But I held back and never wrote that letter and lo and behold, I could have had the job. I guess I passed his test by not being flustered by his somnolence.

Washington Post Gets It Right

It was nice to read in Tuesday's Washington Post (2/2/10) some common sense from liberals for a change. Lots of my conservative friends despise the Post for its liberal leanings and they are correct in their appraisal. The Post used a meaningless "macaca" comment by Sen. George Allen to skewer him day after day in the 2006 campaign. But, they do provide a good overall picture of the news of the day. With the downsizing of the Washington Times, it is sadly now the only real choice for us here in the D.C. suburbs. And every now and then they seem to get it right. They just don't wage campaigns against Democrats like they do against Republicans when they find the opportunity.

The Post editorialized in favored of the Iraq war, for example. In 2008, few were surprised when they endorsed inexperienced Democrat Barack Obama for president against John McCain. To me it made little logical sense because Obama's main campaign theme against Hillary Clinton was his opposition to the Iraq War. The Post supported the war. But, despite that, in the end they will side with the Democrat.

The 9/11 attack caused a number of Democrats to rethink their positions on the dangers of terrorism and how we should respond to it. Jewish American Democrats seemed to be particularly attuned to the dangers of terrorism. Leading Democrats like late actor Ron Silver and Senator Joe Lieberman actually supported the Republican Presidential candidate in 2004 and 2008 respectively. Tuesday, it was liberal Richard Cohen who opined "There is almost nothing the Obama administration does regarding terrorism that makes me feel safer." He continues, "more is at stake here than America's image abroad -- namely the security and peace of mind of Americans in America. "

Also, the Sally Jenkins column in Tuesday's Washington Post:"Tebow's 30-second ad hasn't even run yet, but it already has provoked "The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us" to reveal something important about themselves: They aren't actually "pro-choice" so much as they are pro-abortion." And Jenkins herself is Pro-Choice.

I have no hope that Cohen or Jenkins will endorse many conservative ideas but it is clear to me that both the Pro-Life view and an aggressive war on terror are mainstream positions, and the approaches favored by liberals are as far left as a lot of us have been saying for years.

2200 Degrees: Conservative Commentary: Liberals' deadbeat arguments for abortion

I liked the arguments made at the "2200 Degrees" blog:

"It never ceases to amaze me how easily a pro-choice liberal will toss out some deadbeat argument as an excuse for allowing abortion, and will stubbornly cling to their ignorant view of abortion. What are some of the liberal statements that are commonly made to defend abortion?

• Abortion has been around throughout all of documented history.
• We can't go back to the clothes hanger days of abortion.
• It is a woman's body and her right to choose what she does with it.
• The child may suffer from a birth defect or illness all his or her life.
• It is okay in the case of rape or incest or if the mother's life is in danger.

Why are these arguments ignorant and irrelevant?"

See the whole blog post at: 2200 Degrees: Conservative Commentary: Liberals' deadbeat arguments for abortion