Swans Commentary: Letters to the Editor - letter254



Letters to the Editor

(December 3, 2012)


[Please include your first and last names, and your city and state of residence. Thank you.]

If you find our work useful and appreciate its quality, then consider
making a donation.

Sloppy Work? David Jordan's Some Thoughts On The US Election

To the Editor:

I find it unfortunate that you do not list, so far as I could tell, a means of replying directly to authors of opinion pieces on your pages. In terms of David Jordan on the election, as one who writes opinion and commentary daily myself, I find that he is being too general and not precise in his comments. I would expect more from a professor. The Web is full of commentaries that use opinion to build opinionated statements, rather than drawing on fact and direct experience.

His charge that Obama violates the Constitution is particularly egregious, especially when he indicates that other presidents have not done likewise. We have had multiple wars since WWII without formal declarations and they have been prosecuted by every president since then save one, Jimmy Carter. Otherwise, there is not a single American president who has not engaged in some sort of military adventure and even Carter could be accused of that in the attempted rescue of American hostages in Iran. What exactly is a "drone murder"? Is all war murder? Does he refer specifically to the killing of an American citizen rather than terrorists in general? What the hell is he writing about? No specificity.

This commentary is just generally sloppy and all over the map. Calling journalists who cover presidential campaigns "whores" without any facts or reasoning to back it up is fairly typical of a vast supply of commentary on the Web and is unworthy of a serious person or commentary site. We all think we know the shape and meaning of the world, but sharing unsupported views baked into commentary about other matters can easily slip into propaganda or just simple abuse.

Doug Terry
Olney, Maryland, USA - November 19, 2012


Cynical and Self serving? David Jordan's Some Thoughts On The US Election

To the Editor:

I found Mr. Jordan's comments cynical and self serving. President Obama assumed office in 2008 with an agenda of working cooperatively across party lines. This was not the Republican agenda, specifically that of a group of men with a sense of "white entitlement" who have yet to recognize the diversity of our country. Their attempt to suppress the vote and deport millions of aliens came back to bite them in the butt. I view the election as a demand for change and should the Republican's persist in their pattern of racism, divisiveness, and favoritism towards the wealthy, the people will rise up in protest to demand equal representation for all and not the chosen few. I was a part of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. When the oppressed have had enough, they are willing to face extreme odds, even death, to ensure their voices are heard. The Wall Street protestors signaled what may happen in this country without positive and constructive change.

President Obama accomplished much in his first term despite racially motivated opposition. I applaud his calm demeanor in the face of daily adversity and unrestrained disrespect. Had he openly expressed his inner thoughts about challenges never faced by any president in our history, Mr. Jordan and his journalistic peers would still be dissecting, discussing and consulting experts about this "Angry Black Man."

Instead of predicting gloom and doom, what is Mr. Jordan willing to do to move our country forward? There is nothing more powerful than the media in this age of technology. Mr. Jordan needs to use this medium to champion the cause of compromise, unity and advocating agendas to promote the welfare of all Americans.

Hattie Hedgepeth
Charlotte, North Carolina, USA - November 19, 2012


Of Atlantis And Aliens: Michael Barker's New Age Flying Objects

To the Editor:

I have found that reading this article was interesting. I find it important for people to question other people's facts and histories. And I think that all the ancient astronauts theorists do is that; question. We know that history is written by the winner, in wars and in culture. For a new idea to work some liberties must be taken along the way. As it was with the catholic religion who incorporated more pagan ideas to include more people in their views.

In fact, if you look at the writer's comment you could transpose them to any and all religious, political and historical views that exists.

One thing for sure, is that the writer feels persecuted from all sides. It also reads as "I'm right" and all others have wrong views.

At least for people reading the views of the ancient astronauts we question, we keep an open mind. I think that these theories say more about stopping old convictions and looking at things differently than anything else.

That's my non-professional, non-educated views and biased to open-minded views. It is good to question the established views once in a while, otherwise where is the advancement, the progress. Not everyone knows everything like this writer.

Thanks for reading.

Pierre Corriveau
Montreal, Quebec, Canada - November 24, 2012


We appreciate and welcome your comments. Please, enter in the subject line of your e-mail "letter to the editor," and specify the article or the subject you are commenting on at the beginning of your e-mail. Also, ***PLEASE,*** sign your e-mail with your name ***AND*** add your city, state, country, address, and phone number. If we publish your opinion we will only include your name, city, state, and country. Send your comments to the Editor. (Letters may be shortened and edited.)
Previous || Letters to the Editor || Next

Published December 3, 2012
[Copyright]-[Archives]-[Resources]-[Main Page]
Swans -- ISSN: 1554-4915