We’re starting to run a little low on letters to the editor as we head toward the weekend. If you have a idea for a letter — or if you want to adapt something that you’ve posted here — I encourage you to submit it. Lengths are about 200 words, and we’ll need your real name and home address and phone number (verification purposes only). You can e-mail it to letters@wichitaeagle.com.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Skeptic on Jail consultants straining patience
- Chas on Health care reform would save state money
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
53 Comments
Phillip be careful what you ask for! I have one already typed out and will send it in the morning. After I do some proof reading.
Here’s a letter, if you want it.
A Balance of PowerNothing good comes from the appetite of Evil.Israel’s rusty old shield of anti-Semitism can no longer hide its inhumanity, yet Iran is now being sanctioned for not lowering its defenses against outright threats of aggression. All these impositions to Iran in the name of Israeli safety, or is it merely an excuse for the upcoming conquest of Iran.Whether it is a savage assault against a Palestinian family picnic on a Gaza beach, or the raining of 3000 lb. Cluster bombs on the peaceful people of Lebanon, the world’s response to Israeli aggression is a sickening sense of repulsion.George W. Bush has done the world and the American People a favor by removing all restrains from the Israelis and allowing them to act out their true unfettered nature.Though it cost the lives of defenseless Palestinian men women and children, as well as the ruthless devastation of Lebanon, the Israelis are being judged by an unforgiving world.60 years of Israeli propaganda along with the transparency of that rusty old shield of anti-Semitism no longer cloak the disgustingly barbarian mindset in the heartless Zionists of Israel.All this is making the genocide in Iraq, which has already claimed the lives of millions, and driven millions more from their homes, take on the same transparency of those willing to sacrifice the lives of the innocent. Moves to acquiesce to some twisted adulterated altar of greed for the sake of conquest.Now Iran is being asked to lower its defenses to console Israeli safety, when in fact Iran offers no threat.The only threat to Israel is Iran ability to defend itself. Does the Middle East somehow not need a balance of power.Nothing good comes from the appetite of Evil.
Mr. Brownlee,I hate to tell you this, but you’ve created a monster here.Writing a letter to The Editor used to be the only practical way to get your piece said. Unfortunately, it’s a bit risky in the sense that it may or may not get published, and what does get published is at the mercy of (shall I say that horrid word?)editors!This blog is a much better way to communicate with a much larger readership, without subjecting your views to the possible alteration of others. For that opportunity, you have my undying thanks! I’ve had a lot of fun blogging here, and at the same time had the chance to say a few things I felt really needed to be said, give support where it was needed, and blast a bit or two of idiocy. This monster of yours is a fantastic forum for a lot of people who would otherwise not have a voice. At the same time, it denies you of the letters we would have previously sent.My suggestion to you would be that if you need some column inches for the Op-Ed page, you have a marvelous selection of opinions right here on your screen. I doubt that any of us here would object to the use of their material, since it spreads our words that much farther. Go for it!
I wrote them a damn good letter and submitted it online, and I think they didn’t publish it because I had Hawaii as my location. It was a piece directed at the people who say things like “Well, if we had a White Miss America paegant, heads would roll!” and “I don’t see any WET channel on my cable, just BET!”
It was good, I’ll have to dig it up. But I think it would be best publish around Kwaanza or in February.
Oh, and I sent in a letter debunking a previous contributer’s “proofs against evolution”. Is it sad that I almost long for the days of Flying Spaghetti Monster? Having a moderate school board is nice, but it’s not nearly as fun as Connie Morris et all :)
They don’t care where the letter is from. I have wrote 2 from Atlanta and they published them both.
Oh, Tara, be careful what you wish for.
Let’s see if they’ll publish stuff from way up north in Saamiland. :)
The Flying Spaghetti Monster never really leaves, he is always watching and interecting with us. It was he who banished Connie Morris to never-never land.
RAMEN!!!!!!
Why would a letter to the Editor need a real name and address?
I mean the MSM uses “ghost writers” all the time to write stories and never once asks for an identity check.
Ghosts are scary
Phil -
I’d write, but I’m tired of running contrary to the Eagle’s official Approved Opinions.
Bashing one’s head against that wall is pointless; especially when one writes against positions the Eagle holds.
Tara – you should enclosed your picture!
;^)
GMC and I are in rare agreement.
I sent in half a dozen letters about Bush piratization of Social Security and the ensuing vote in Congress on a non-binding resolution.
The last letter I sent was this one:
The Bush cartel now has Social Security in its gun sights. The president’s privatization plan clearly increases risk to beneficiaries. A Yale economist believes that over 70 percent who participate would receive less under the privatized program.[1] And privatization hurts rather than helps general social security funding. The president himself admitted in a recent press conference[2], “personal accounts do not solve the issue [of funding].” A majority of Americans reject privatization of any part of the program, but once again, the president’s men run rough-shod over what Americans want.
Last week, Kansas Senators Roberts and Brownback voted against a “sense of the senate” resolution stating “Congress should reject any Social Security plan that requires deep benefit cuts or a massive increase in debt.”[3] Think about it—our Senators have gone on record as saying that they do not oppose deep benefit cuts in Social Security, benefits that help orphaned children and disabled workers as well as retirees. Does that represent your view? Does it represent the will of the people of Kansas?
President Roosevelt was once asked why he funded the program with dedicated payroll taxes. “We put those payroll contributions there” he said, “so as to give the contributors a legal, moral and political right to collect their pensions and their unemployment benefits. With those taxes in there, no damn politician can ever scrap my Social Security program.”
Despite Roosevelt’s foresight, it’s not stopping the “damn politicians” now from trying to destroy the most popular and successful government program ever created.
When our elected officials in Washington come home to Kansas for their break in April, let’s ask them to do what they were elected to do—represent the majority. Stop ramming a privatization plan down our throats that we don’t want.
Ask them to do the will of the people this time.
——————————–
[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48341-2005Mar18.html
[2] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/03/20050316-3.html
[3] http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00049
Which The Eagle also DIDN’T print.
I should write about people piling grass clippings in the street or another meaningless theological argument supporting creationism.
The Eagle can’t seem to get enough of those . . .
I’d like to hear from the WE what THEY think is the reason for the shortage of ltes. Is this typical and seasonal? Have the numbers of letters submitted dropped off? Why?
I know they may not have the answers, but I’d like to know their opinion.
Of course, it could always be, that since their editiorial page is essentially a right wing glory hole given their love of values boy, cal thomas, and ALL their other wingnut columnists.
Maybe liberals dont even read it anymore, and the wingnuts dont write because they dont need to. The WE has it covered with their columnists.
How about publishing “Highlights from the Weblog”, in the Editorial section? Would probably stimulate letters to the editor submissions.
I always thought editorial pages should be thought provoking and BALANCED!
What I meant in my post above is that when the page is consistantly and relentlessly skewed to one side, the other side will eventually just ignore it as propaganda.
And that would also be true if it was all left all the time. The right would just stop reading it.
A suggestion? How about some BALANCE in the columnists? Like a SANE PERSON to comment counterpoint to values boy.
It’ll never happen in kansas…
Phillip Brownlee: I wish the EAGLE would add a section, “Outstate news.” I understand your paper decided several years ago not to send reporters out to places like Pratt, Salina, El Dorado and Emporia. But these towns do have newspapers of their own which publish important news relating to Wichita.
Case in point. I noticed on TV last night that the ethanol company that is building a 55,000,000 gallon ethanol plant outside of Pratt is merging with another company and moving their headquarters out of Pratt to Texas, I believe.
To me this is a very serious matter. First of all, the company probably promoted itself as hiring local people in corporate positions at relatively good salaries in order to get politicians’ support to drain millions of gallons of pure drinking water from the Ogallala aquifer below Pratt. Now with their ducks in a row to build the ethanol plant, they are moving their good jobs out of state.
Sounds like the old shell game I used to lose at, at the Hutchinson State Fair.
How does this affect Wichita?
Draining this much water out of the below ground Ogallala aquifer near Pratt has the potential to slow if not stop the flow of almost pure cool mountain-type drinking water in the north and south branches of the Ninnescah River.
Both branches of the Ninnescah start in Pratt County. The beautiful south branch parallels highway 54 between Wichita and Pratt particularly among the tall windbreaks and groves of Cottonwoods, Elms and Maple trees west of Kingman.
The north branch of the Ninnescah River runs a few miles further north and furnishes water to Cheney Lake. Cheney Lake, in turn, is the source for some 50% of Wichita’s drinking water. The remaining 50% comes from the Equiss Bed aquifer near Halstead, itself an easterly extension of the Ogallala aquifer.
If you say, “Relax, our Governor is handling this for the benefit of the people,” forget it. You can bet she’s not handling it in a way to protect Wichita’s future drinking water supply.
As I have said before … Kansas people have a drinking problem. They want to drink fresh clean water and take a bath occasionally.
“If you say, “Relax, our Governor is handling this for the benefit of the people,” forget it. You can bet she’s not handling it in a way to protect Wichita’s future drinking water supply.”
You got that right Wink!
The only water she protects are irrigation for steve irsik, ethanol for janis lee, russell and hays, and recreation for EASTERN kansas, not Cedar Bluff in Western kasnas.
In other words, follow the money. She doesnt give a buggered RAT about our water supply unless the monopoly of ethanol and irrigation are threatened.
Or sunflower wants to build a water sucking plant in holcomb, irsik wants an ethanol plant, hays wants to piss on every town around them…
And the hits just keep coming on the all votes, all campaing contributions, all sebelius radio!
JWink! They did have news from Pratt yesterday. Pratt’s largest company, an Ethanol company is leaving Pratt to set up their headquarters in Texas.
KGrrl–
YOU ARE RIGHT!
I followed The Eagles’ op-ed page for two weeks and found that right-wingers were run about two to one to moderates.
Cal Thomas, Kathleen Parker, that Weekly Standard dude, the San Antonio idiot etc.
Meanwhile “the left” was represented by the likes of milquetoast Tom Teepin and the never-exciting Leonard Pitts.
Or confirmed centrists like Trudy Rubin and David Broder.
There were no true voices from the left: David Corn, Molly Ivins, Adriana Huffington, Joe Conason, Greg Palast, Ted Rall, Jim Hightower, Gene Lyons.
That’s when I had to cancel my subscription.
A good source of real alternative news is this little publication–The Progressive Populist–a twice monthly “Reader’s Digest” for progressive issues.
http://www.populist.com/index.html#selections
Subscriptions are only like 20 bucks a year.
I see a couple of problems with letters to the editor.
First, the blog provides a convenient outlet for expressing yourself when you get revved up about something.
Second, when you do submit a letter to the editor and you see it in print, some intern has edited out a key phrase and changed the meaning. That is why I don’t bother.
Submit a letter to the editor? I’ve tried that without much luck.
So now that NOBODY wants to submit, you’re ready to lower your standards? Even if my name isn’t B. Foster or R. Khan? Gee, thanks, Phillip. But if it’s all the same to you, I’ll just keep posting here in real time where I know my opinion will be read.
Excerpts from this thread might prove provocative for print.
The responses to this thread would make an interesting subject for a letter. Those from the left thinking the Eagle’s editorial bias is to the right and those on the right vice versa, and the kahn wanting to be a ghost writer.
What Jed seems to see as strengths of this blog format, I wonder if they are not weaknesses. It is very easy to send something here and that can be done with little thought or inspiration. I have often thought that posting anonymously encourages foaming at the mouth rants, rather than reasonable discourse.
I think in the interest of preserving the letter to the editor section, the Eagle should abolish this blog.
Any other opinions?
One last thing, according to our resident expert on phylogeny, my political leanings are unmistakable and despite that I can’t recall a letter of mine being rejected by the Eagle. And I don’t think I share reality with many on the Eagle editorial board.
XXX–
Exactly right.
They haven’t printed one of my letters for five years and now they can’t figure out why the regulars aren’t submitting anymore.
I’ve got an idea: how about running an actual left-wing columnist like Hal Crowther’s essay that LTP posted on the open thread that starts, “The Bush administration is a cadaver decomposing on America’s doorstep.”
Maybe if The Eagle didn’t post only right-wing pablum, they would get more letters.
Steven–
How many letters did you send?
Send in another letter Capn, I believe Phillip Brownlee is asking for them now.
Or, you can continue to whine about the past.
I am going to say 6 or 7 in the last year. My favorite one was asking the voters to remember that George Tiller, MD was not on the ballot for KS AG. My inspiration was the Morrison/Kline Wichita debate and the attendant street theater. One should not be able to have so much, so cheaply.
Capn,I have written the Editorial board regarding their declining to accept one of your submissions and asked them what the deal was. Got no answer.
It is not like the WE doesn’t print letters with pretty clear ideological bias. Many of the WE LTEs look like they could have been penned by KSgerm herself.
should have been “so much _fun_, so cheaply.”
Unfortunately, too many of the WE readers are right-wingers. Printing letters to the editor with too much of a Liberal slant would piss off a lot of readers.
I am going to write a letter as an anti-WE Blog. Will do it on my word processing program, but will post it here, too. Anyone care to do a Pro-WE Blog letter. You know how those MSM types like those opposing viewpoint treatments.
In reality, I think you could submit a letter to the editor under a phoney name. I did get a call confimaiton one time – I can’t recall the subject, but it was more foaming at the mouth than I usually am. So, I know they sometimes check.
Wow! You’re doing better than I am (was), Steven.
I get the feeling that they like letters about local issues more than national.
And I’m more into the national. That could be part of the problem. Or it could just be that I happened to send in my letters when a lot of other people did too–
you know the ones about creationism and grass in the street, heigh ho . . .
Send a letter to the EditorPosted by Phillip Brownlee
Do you really think they are going to respond to your letters?Ok-here is a test, the answer is “NO”, how positive am I to say this?Is the simple fact that they themselves do not read any of the postings on the topics that they post up.
Yesterday morning, I sent in the same long letter I posted on the 6/20 open thread, asking if they’d like to adapt it for the letters section. I got an answer yesterday afternoon that it’ll probably be published.
I think that request may have precipitated this blog entry by Brownlee.
Elaborating on Brian’s points, I have had people call me at home in regard to a letter to the editor I wrote in support of a city council candidate. They were not hostile calls, but I found it interesting that I was so easy to reach. My wife took both calls and neither person wanted to leave their name with their message for me.
I think you’re right, Cap’n, if one writes on a local issue the chances go up considerably that the Eds will be interested in such a letter.
06-21-07
Letter to the Editor – Wichita Eagle
You can call me a Luddite if you want, but it seems to me that the Wichita Editorial page blog (aka the WE Blog) does as much for civil debate as a microwave oven does for gourmet cooking. There are several problems with the WE Blog that ultimately lead to failure in realizing its goals.
It is relatively easy to type off of a quick post for the WE Blog. This ease of use makes it easy to not put much thought into one’s writing. The relative freedom of this type of communication makes it especially easy to post points of dubious accuracy with little in the way research support.
There is precious little editorial control at the WE Blog which encourages a food fight mentality in many of the posters. Ad hominem insults are the soup du jour at the WE Blog. Threats of violence and threats to meet one another in public have occurred and presumably these calls for meetings were not motivated by a desire to share compliments. The ability to post remarks under a pseudonym serves to enhance the hostile atmosphere of the Blog.
There are clear ideological camps at the WE Blog and members of these camp members agree on little except for a persistent contention that the WE editorial board and the mainstream media at large hold ideological biases that are the opposite of their personal ideology. They are either the victims of a liberal or conservative media establishment. As Jackson and Jamieson (2007) point out in their book (Unspun: finding facts in a world of disinformation): “There’s evidence that our commitment to a cause not only colors our thinking but also affects what we see – and don’t see – as we observe the world around us” (p. 33). If one is interested in real life examples of the preceding, such can be found at the WE Blog.
The motivation for this letter was a call on the WE Blog by Phillip Brownlee for letters to the editor for this weekend. I have wondered if the appeal of the Blog has led to a reduction of people making the effort to write letters to the editor. If this reduction in letters is a result of the Blog, that too, would be another unfortunate outcome of that platform.
A committed Luddite,Steven Davis
You know, that bot checker busts me every time, whether I include a link or not. I may have to rethink that “ease of use” contention.
The main attraction of the WEblog, is that it is in real time, and issues of the day can be discussed. Posting annomonously is also a plus, in that those of us who might not write about our thoughts on political/moral/religious/local issues can freely share them.My wife works for a large aircraft firm, a new employee who openly disagreed with the pro-bush/republican mantras was ostracized from the group, who thereafter would not train him properly. He ended up losing his job because of the mob conservative bias, as he had not learned the job.I put the same degree pf thought into virtually everything I submit whether in a Letter to the Editor, or on the blog. Granted spelling and punctuation do take a backseat in the real time publications.
I’m beginning to think that there are no protections at all for workers against their employers. The ones who make it to the top have to step on everyone else to get there. The decent people get left in the dust. It’s a dog eat dog world out there and the pit bulls are winning.
P_momYour accurate portrayal of life at work today was recognized by GHW Bush and thus his “Kinder, gentler nation” mantra during his second election. He knew that his form of governance was bad for the American people and he thought that if he could come up with some dumb slogan, it would help soften the blow. That prediction proved to be wrong.
Contrast GHW Bush’s recognition to GW Bush’s complete obliviousness:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/20/AR2007062002096.html?hpid=opinionsbox2
I post here too often, that hinders my writing letters to editors.
One of my gambling rants to the Eagle was archived in Topeka.
Back when the County wasn’t allowing us to make our own decision. Ruffin was talking about slots in the dog track and that’s all the gambling we would get?
I think editors argued over a Ronald Reagan rant, it was a couple of weeks after being written, the letter got published.
Reagan had died and I wanted an accounting aired, my views of his Presidency.
Maybe they took a long time editing it.
I do pretty good, not much got changed in my letters.
I wrote to the editors when people were protesting in Topeka about gay marriage. I said, gay marriage wouldn’t hurt my straight marriage, when I’m married.
How can a church groups protesting talk down to gay members among them.
I’m not gay but respect their push for partnership rights.
Some guy gave a speech here about legalizing drugs. I had a counter opinion in a letter to the Editors
That caused me to write the legalize drug movement nationally, him directly and other supporters.
We had it out in emails, their views on legalizing drugs and my ranting counter.
We decided it was best to disagree.
Did I write during Katrina, that aftermath, was it published?
I don’t read letters to Editors that often anymore.
This blog catches my attention.
The few times I read letters on editors online, I see who is commenting on the articles written. That’s different.
I didn’t have response to my earlier letters to editors.
The Phantom,
pseudonyms are okay with me, but I am reminded of what my grandfather (a politician in Oklahoma in the 1930’s and 40’s) had to say about the KKK. He said, “somehow I can’t respect a man who has to put a sheet over his head, to find the courage to say what he thinks.”
Steven, P-Mom,Yeah, it’s back to Hitler’s approach to an already discredited Social Darwinism, resurrected by the Neo-Cons to justify their dirty political and business dealings, and somehow sold to the Religious Right as the true face of American conservatism. Hopefully, we won’t have to live with it that much longer!
Good point, Steven (about the sheet over one’s head).
But we’re not talking here. We’re posting.
We have no idea who’s reading and what they’ll do with the information they get.
Here’s an idea for an editorial: Why did it take Senator Roberts being replaced to get some serious oversight function performed by the Senate Intelligence Committee, and how does this connect with Bush coming to town to raise money for him?Ashcroft: Officials fought over snooping By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer57 minutes ago
WASHINGTON – The administration was sharply divided over the legality of President Bush’s most controversial eavesdropping policies, a congressman quoted former Attorney General John Ashcroft as telling a House panel Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT”It is very apparent to us that there was robust and enormous debate within the administration about the legal basis for the president’s surveillance program,” Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, told reporters after a closed-door meeting with Ashcroft.
The point is critical to two matters being considered in the Democratic-controlled Congress: One is the House and Senate Intelligence committees’ ongoing review of 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which includes an extensive examination of the president’s warrantless eavesdropping program.
The other is the House and Senate Judiciary Committees’ parallel examinations of current Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ service to the administration. Under that probe, former Deputy Attorney General James Comey revealed that Gonzales, then White House counsel, tried to pressure him and a critically ill Ashcroft to certify the legality of the wiretapping program.
Comey and Ashcroft, who was in intensive care during Gonzales’ 2004 hospital visit, refused to comply.
Also Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee authorized — but did not issue — subpoenas to Gonzales and to the custodian of records at the Executive Office of the President for all administration documents on the legality of the program. The panel approved giving Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., authority to issue the subpoenas, 13-3, with Republican Sens. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Orrin Hatch of Utah and Chuck Grassley of Iowa voting with the Democrats.
The White House made no move to comply.
“It’s important for Congress to understand that the information the committee is requesting is highly classified and not information we can make available,” said Bush spokesman Tony Fratto. “Also important is for Congress to respect our need to ensure that internal executive branch deliberations are confidential.
Democrats have insisted that the hospital story appears to contradict Gonzales’ congressional testimony that there had been no significant disagreement within the administration over the program. Gonzales has stood by his testimony.
In his first public comments on the subject, Ashcroft told reporters he was pleased to cooperate and “to signal that I want to do everything I can to make sure that the framework we have for defeating terror, defending the liberty and security of the United States in the context of our Constitution, that that capacity remains intact and is functioning properly.” He refused to take questions.
Looking like these fishing expeditins are going to produce some trophy size fish. Ashcroft seems only too ready to cooperate, must have resented the Admin.’s strong arm tactics while he was incacipated in the hospital. The traitor Ashcroft, putting that GD piece of paper over loyalty to the Emperor. How unlike Senator Roberts.
Steven, I’m reminded of another old addage: “He who raises his head over the crowd, gets the tomato.”Kansas is dominated by too many right wing wacko’s, best to remain anonomous.Also, if one were to be a govt. worker opposed to their representatives and they chose to attack said representatives, they would be surely leaving themselves open to recrimination. For that matter if their employer was one on the right wingnuts, they might find their financial security threatened.
“But we’re not talking here. We’re posting.”
True Cap’n. But, come on, this sounds too much like Repuliblank parsing of the language, if you ask me.
I know you can do better than that.
Phantom,
If I have to be afraid of people in Kansas, that is a very basic problem to me. I don’t think I have to be afraid.
Okay, SD–
I admire your guts, but I’ve gotten repercussions in RL from a letter that I wrote to The Eagle they printed.
So far, it’s just annoying.
But, hell, they shot King and Bobbie Kennedy, remember?
Do I think there’re dickheads out there who will hurt people they disagree with if they can?
I know of it happening in many situations.
Cap’n,
I admire your guts too. I don’t wish to discredit what you and our friends do. That is not my point at all.
I think we can maintain our views with the truth. It is not that difficult.
Thanks,Steven Davis