This letter appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer editorial section this morning:I’m not going to answer what McIlhenny is saying in this letter, but instead I only wish to point out the following:Thank you for a job well done in coordinating the Trudy Rubin, Dick Polman and Kevin Ferris columns in the Sept. 24 "Currents" section. I appreciated the way each column addressed the notion that many in our country are blinded by partisan rage with little or no cognizance of where actual progress is being made, and where real failures are taking place.
While I often disagree with Rubin, I find her challenging me to establish a viewpoint beyond rhetoric. Her piece on the president's international critics was brilliant in its assessment of the dangers of embracing the likes of Chavez, Ahmadinejad and Hassan al-Bashir for their "witticisms" while ignoring their disregard for basic human rights. I would posit that these leaders are not simply emboldened by our struggles in Iraq, but that they are keen to the value of "Bush-bashing" in our entertainment-driven culture.
As usual, Polman has a sharp eye for the public pulse in the political spectrum. As an independent voter, I thought I was alone in being disappointed by what appears to be a president straying off message, with little or no intelligent response from the opposition. I have no problem with critics who wish to question where we're headed in Iraq; I'm kind of curious myself. But I need more than playground insults ("He's an idiot") to make me change my mind about whom I want making decisions.
Thank you, Kevin Ferris, for reminding us that, despite the rantings of a handful of pundits, there have been huge gains in antiterrorism and homeland security. It is important to remember that there have been no major, or even minor, terrorist acts on our home soil since 9/11. Isn't that what homeland security is defined by? There certainly are many more adjustments that will need to be made if we are to continue to survive and thrive in a changing world. But there is reason to be optimistic.
These columns serve as excellent reminders that our society works best when we trust our leaders, we trust each other, and we challenge each other with knowledge and truth. Petty jealousies and empty blather serve no one other than network executives.
Chuck McIlhenny
Johnstown, PA
The Inquirer’s stated policy on letters to the editor is that they should not exceed 200 words.
The word count of McIlhenny’s letter?
361.
Ah, but it praises Kevin Ferris, criticizes Trudy Rubin somewhat and gives kind of a wishy-washy opinion on Dick Polman.
And that, of course, dovetails nicely with the political opinion of Bruce Toll, Brian Tierney, and the rest of Philadelphia Media Holdings, L.L.C.
I see – it all makes sense now.
4 comments:
You should have seen it before they edited it!
On the one hand, I can't possibly see how an intelligent person such as yourself could take Kevin Ferris seriously. On the other hand, though, I should mention again that my criticism was with the Inquirer and not with you.
Thanks for checking in.
I certainly wasn't offended. I think intelligent people on both sides of any issue can find common ground, and perhaps I wasn't as eloquent as I had hoped, but that was actually my point. I never find myself completely in agreement with any particular party or writer, but I think there comes a point in time, say this one perhaps, where we need to start listening more than we talk, and there are those on both (or more) sides where it just ain't happening. Maybe I just appreciate the give-and-take more than others, but I think we need to spend more time looking for solutions than pointing fingers; again, something both sides are guilty of. I'm as sick of Michael Savage as I am of Al Franken.
My comment about seeing it before the edit actually was referring to the word count. Admittedly, I don't even recall seeing a word count guideline. One of their Letters editors called and discussed the edits with me.
Thanks for making me think.
Chuck,
I applaud your desire to stake out a middle ground. About 90-something percent of the time I agree with liberals/progressives of course, but every now and then one of my brethren does something to raise my hackles, such as some columnists (like R. J. Eskow I think among others, who is usually much smarter) who said that the shooting of Harry Whittington was "Cheney's Chappaquiddick," and I thought I was going to lose my mind.
I appreciate your good words - if you're inclined just a bit towards another point of view after visiting here, then I'm grateful. Not to sound too much like a civics lesson, but we will always have more common ground than not, and I echo Bill Clinton's wish in his Georgetown speech yesterday to see a time once more when we can all sit down and work things out without screaming at each other.
Post a Comment