Comments
360
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Thursday's Letters to the Editor
Dear whatever: Perhaps you should heed your own advise. If you didn't understand the references by Jerry (not me), Bob, and Not Yet, then you should have gotten a clue from JMD. The point being made is that the subscribers referenced claimed to want balance but their idea of balance is a Liberal agenda. Anyone who does not see the balance in this newspaper apparently has not noticed the attacks on the paper by those who claim it is too Liberal as well as by those who claim it is too Conservative. The fact of the matter is, this paper can't seem to please anybody except maybe the Moderates. (Friday Dec 4 | post #20)
It's time to bail us out of the deficit
Clear Thinker - I completely agree with your points, except for the first and last paragraphs. And my only disagreement with those is that I believe the whole point of the editorial is that the past performance is indicative of what the present and future performance is looking to be. And that it is wrong. (Tuesday Dec 1 | post #2)
Letter of the Day: Climate data is misleading
Senor Peligro, the entire point of the story is the last paragraph, and you seem to have missed it. Anytime data is cherry picked - and then discovered to have been cherry picked - the entire credibility of all the data becomes suspect. Using all the data to support your argument while leaving out any data that conflicts with that argument eventually weakens the entire argument. And it is not "scientific method." (Tuesday Dec 1 | post #4)
Should US sign emissions treaty? Yes
This seems like a pretty week argument for signing the agreement as it appears it will be formed. The argument seems to be to look at another agreement that will be less stringent than what is expected to be formed in the next international conference. (Monday Nov 30 | post #7)
Letter of the Day: Climate data is misleading
Very well said. (Monday Nov 30 | post #1)
Parents of girls tagging crew will pay for Carson cleanup
A start in the right direction. (Tuesday Nov 24 | post #1)
Friday's Letters to the Editor
What are you talking about? And what is the relevance to anything said by either M Richards or me? (Monday Nov 23 | post #5)
Wednesday's Letters to the Editor
Mr. Roberts, do not judge people who do not fly the flag as being selfish and self-centered. Your statement that they do not honor you as a veteran makes you selfish and self-centered. Your entire letter makes you out to be self-righteous and narcissistic. I know a number of people who do not fly the flag and honor our vets every day. In a number of cases they are not available to properly display the flag because they are too busy at the WLA VA Center to be sure that the flag is not still flying after the sun sets or they leave their house before the sun rises. Some devote a great deal of time to helping and supporting vets which they feel is a higher priority than being sure that the flag is flown at their home. Driving around to see who is or is not flying the flag is disgraceful on your part as a veteran and indicative of your powerful desire for people to honor YOU, not necessarily all veterans. Take that time you spent investigating the patriotism of your neighbors and devote it to veterans issues. I am a veteran, a disabled veteran. I devote most of my free time to veterans' causes. I do not fly the flag. (Thursday Nov 19 | post #7)
Martha Madison - You do not honor veterans by bringing them home before the mission is completed. If you do that prior to them having some form of mission closure then they will - as in the case of so many Vietnam vets - end up having so very many problems for the rest of their lives. This is something I've learned as a Vietnam vet and from working with many vets. Just an FYI. Thank you for your concern for vets and your admirable desire to do them honor. (Monday Nov 16 | post #10)
Thursday's Letters to the Editor
The matter of Slug's union membership is not relevant to what I said in my earlier post in response to "Not a Revisionist" and I reiterate: "I'm probably as anti-union as you ((Not a Revisionist)). However, in this case - Slug is correct, you ((Not a Revisionist)) are not. As for union membership, I have been a union member (SAG and AFTRA) for 25 years. It was a matter of necessity. I would still consider myself anti-union. (Monday Nov 16 | post #23)
As challengers line up, it looks like Boxer could `luck out' again
As much as I would not like it to happen, I think she will be reelected, and for some of the very reasons stated above. She's so liberal the special interest groups will make sure she has the money to win. And her party will work just as hard for her. While I don't believe her only concern is to get reelected, it certainly ranks really high. And that's the drive she'll have to do just about anything she needs to do to make sure she is reelected. And so far the Republicans aren't coming up with a real winner to go against her. (Monday Nov 16 | post #3)
Thursday's Letters to the Editor
I'm probably as anti-union as you. However, in this case - Slug is correct, you are not. (Friday Nov 13 | post #16)
Hawthorne police in D.A.'s sights
No, I don't give them "reacharounds " - I'll leave that for you. And yeah, I know what a kapo is; learned it over 50 years ago, not like you did - just the other day. But it is a good thing that you try to use new words you've just learned in sentences. As for being a useful idiot - that's another one I'll leave for you. The useful idiots are the ones like you who hide behind a wall of anonymity because they fear standing up for their beliefs. You should know all about that; something you should have learned about when you learned such a useful term as kapo. Or maybe you just need to go back to the textbook and finish your homework. Have a wonderful day and, more significant to all of this, have a safe day. (Friday Nov 13 | post #38)
Hometown:
Hawthorne, CA
Neighborhood:
Hollyglen
I Belong To:
VFW, VVA, DAV, SAG
I'm Listening To:
Il Divo
Read This Book:
Once An Eagle