September 23, 2008 at 5:16 pm (Chicago Tribune, Oakland, Olympics, baby)
Tags: advice, advice columns, ask amy, gum chewing, mean people, Olympics, Tribune
To: askamy@tribune.com
Dear Amy,
Not a question; just a response:
I just read your column printed in the September 16 issue of my Oakland Tribune, and I was appalled to read your answer to the 14-year-old who took disagreement with your stating that chewing gum during the Olympics is rude. I agree with you on the chewing gum matter, but answering a young teen with a snippy “Of course I’m in a position to judge. We all are.” has hereby reduced my respect for your advice to nil.
Imagine the courage it takes a youngster to write in to a big newspaper – probably the first time in her life – and then imagine the self-doubt and embarrassment she might feel getting such a coarse response from someone she clearly admires enough to read regularly.
She explained herself very well, citing the fact that she often chews gum during sports to relieve the stresses of competition, and suggested that the Olympians might share her form of anxiety relief. In fact, she explained herself humanly (if not adorably) in admitting this and thereby proposing the radical notion that Olympic athletes aren’t all that different than the rest of us – that they may get the jitters during the most important moments of their lives. And you couldn’t bother to affirm her ideas – or at least her right to have them – before shooting it down.
Now, what did you disagree with most?
1. Her belief that gum-chewing isn’t rude.
2. Her assumption that she has the right to see herself on the same level as celebrity athletes.
3. Her daring to challenge the wisdom of a celebrity advice columnist.
Be honest.
Why would you choose to run your response to this particular question if not to prove to the world how arrogant (or perhaps insecure) you are, that you choose to pick on teenagers publicly? Was the letter bag getting empty? (If so, why you would try to alienate a loyal reader is beyond me.) You had already run your response to the original letter, so running it again, just to get in a dig at a child’s expense, is pitiful. Gum-chewing at Olympic medals ceremonies is not a national emergency that requires two separate columns to be addressed. I am equally saddened that the Tribune syndicate offered no editorial guidance for you to tone it down.
If you are still feeling sorry for yourself, feel free to run my letter, with some new snide jabs against me for daring to speak up for a 14-year-old. Maybe it makes you feel better to pick on people who lack the authority of national readership that you have. Just know that we lowly readers still have the power to draw silly mustaches on your picture in our newspapers.
BP’s NOTE: This was submitted to Ms. Amy at the Tribune via email today. After writing the letter, however, my temper has been further piqued, and I added the middle section, from “She explained herself very well” to “Be honest.”
Leave a Comment
August 5, 2007 at 12:52 am (Bush, Chicago Tribune, Dad, Democrats, Republicans, peace, violence)
August 4, 2007
Open Letter to Democrats:
(by my dad)
Starting with Nancy Pelosi’s infamous “Impeachment is off the table” declaration, the Democratic majority in Congress, with the exception of a scant few courageous heroes like Dennis Kucinich, have refused to begin impeachment hearings against the most corrupt, anti-democratic, secretive, and destructive Administration in US history. Presumably, this decision to avoid doing their sworn duty to defend the Construction against attack is a strategic decision, based on some hypothetical political advantage proposed by a Party strategist. Likely this is the same Democratic Party strategist who told war hero John Kerry to refuse to flaunt his purple hearts in debates with AWOL coward GW Bush, thus negating Kerry’s enormous advantage.
The failure of Congressional Democrats to react to repeated insults and abuses by the present Administration is a colossal error that is certain to backfire. Americans will conclude, justifiably, that Democrats do not have the moral courage to defend the US Constitution from vicious, unrelenting, conscious, and premeditated attacks. This Administration has, by Presidential decree, declared its intention to violate the law and conduct illegal surveillance on US citizens who are accused of no crime. This Supreme Court-appointed “President” rarely signs a bill into law without attaching a “signing statement” which is an explicit assertion that the President refuses to recognize the Constitutionally mandated authority of Congress to enact legislation. This Administration has declared itself exempt from International Law and the Geneva Convention, and has authorized the use of torture. This Administration has decreed that the President is above the Law, a supreme dictator, and that everything he does is therefore legal. This Administration has refused to provide documents requested by Congressional subpoenas, and instead has destroyed evidence of their crimes. The Attorney General has openly lied to Congress about his firing of US Prosecutors who refused to obey Administration demands to selectively indict Democrats and exempt Republicans from prosecution. By a recent Presidential decree, Bush declared that at his own discretion, he can seize the property of any US citizen whom he considers to oppose his policies in Iraq. A large majority of Americans have stated that they support the impeachment of Bush if it is proven that he lied about the reasons for starting the Iraq War, which we know now that he and Cheney did repeatedly. Why does Congress refuse to do their job? If all of these outrageous high crimes and misdemeanors do not constitute grounds for impeachment, then what would? If Congress refuses to protect the American citizens from these egregious attacks, then who can we turn to?
If a police officer witnesses a brutal murder, he/she does not have the option of deciding to ignore it because it is inconvenient to arrest the murderer, possibly because the work shift is nearly over and paperwork might be involved. No, the police officer must arrest the murderer – there is no option but to do the job. A Democratic Congress was elected because the American Public is fed up with the unrelenting abuse of power by this Administration. Even a prominent Republican (Paul Craig Roberts, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration) declared that the systematic attempts by the Bush Administration to assume supreme dictatorial power are precisely the kind of abuses the Founding Fathers had in mind when they created the option of impeachment. In the face of the extraordinary attempts by this Administration to destroy our democratic system of government, why does Congress refuse to do their job? The very fabric of our Nation is being systematically destroyed by a pack of ruthless, brutal despots. Congress alone has the power and authority to restore democracy, but they evidently are too timid to confront the sociopathic criminals who have stolen our Democracy. Martin Luther King stood up to police dogs, but our present Congress is afraid to stand up to Karl Rove and the rest of the neocon media attack dogs.
2 Comments
April 20, 2007 at 12:31 am (Chicago Tribune, Virginia Tech, Worldliness, massacre, peace, war)
Voice of the People
Chicago Tribune
Re: Virginia Tech Tragedy
Dear Voice of the People,
We all mourn for the students senselessly massacred at Virginia Tech.
But where is the mourning for the American soldiers of similar age, a
similar number of whom are killed every week in Iraq? The Bush regime
even refuses to allow photographs of the caskets of American soldiers
who sacrificed their lives. The Virginia tragedy was a freakish event
that could not have been predicted. In contrast, we know with
certainty that dozens of Americans and hundreds of Iraqis will die
every month as long as Bush’s War continues. The American people have
spoken clearly and demand an end to the Iraq Disaster. Let us fly our
flags at half-mast until Congress does its job and shuts down the Iraq
War. If this means impeaching Bush (for lying to Congress to get the
war approved, for advocating torture, and for refusing to act on a
Congressional mandate to stop the war), so much the better.
Leave a Comment
