Letters

LETTER OF THE WEEK

Never enough

Re "Gipper Gore: Responses to the Voice's Coverage of Ronald Reagan's Death" [June 16-22]: It was amusing to read the letters attacking Tom Carson's piece on Ronald Reagan's death for two reasons:

1. Who would have guessed that so many right-wing nuts read The Village Voice?

2. The 24-hour-a-day hagiography for America's second-worst president on every channel wasn't enough for them. They still had to attack one of the few negative articles that I've seen. It's typical of the right to go insane whenever anyone dissents from the official party line.

Dylan Skolnick
Huntington, New York


Pocket Change

In reading the responses to Carson's "Death of a Salesman," I noticed that most of the people who agreed with Carson gave reasons why they did not like Reagan's politics, yet those who were not in agreement with his opinion merely insulted him. Could this be because these conservatives actually have no reason to like Reagan other than the fact that he funneled even more money into their already heavy pockets while leaving millions of others out in the cold?

Amanda Kiel
Army Specialist
Baghdad, Iraq


Point-Counterpoint

I was glad you gave space to those upset by your criticism of President Reagan. None of the writers dealt with specifics. Let them answer these questions:

1. Were you pleased that Reagan ran up a $4 billion national debt?

2. Did you approve of his mining—against international law—Nicaragua's harbors?

3. When hundreds of marines were killed by the bombing in Beirut, and he withdrew, did you like that response? (These days, they call it "cut and run.")

4. Are you pleased with his support of the Afghan rebels, including Osama bin Laden?

5. Are you familiar with the arguments of those who think that Reagan prolonged the existence of the Soviet Union, rather than helping to end it?

Those who supported President Reagan need to think with care about these and other matters.

Michael Ehrlich
Washington Heights


Single and Voting it

Re Sharon Lerner's "Awkward Kerry, Hopeless Bush" [June 16-22]:

I wish there were more articles like Lerner's on single women and the course of the presidential election.

The problem is that married folk are still the focal point for both candidates. It seems as if their efforts to entice single women into the voting booth in November are too little, too late.

However, as a single woman, it's difficult to vote for someone like Bush, who is focusing so much on marriage bonuses and amendments.

Miriam Greenwald
Merion Station, Pennsylvania


Just a Thought

Re "Awkward Kerry, Hopeless Bush" [June 16-22] and Cathy Hong's "A New Voting Age for Women: 26" [June 15, villagevoice.com]:

I'm continually astounded by the willful ignorance, resigned apathy, and "What's in it for me?" attitude that pervades so much of today's nonvoting population. This attitude is not just held by young, single women but by many Americans, and these two articles should have expressed that. Men and women gripe about the guy in the White House while insisting they can't do anything about it, but then they admit they haven't really examined the alternatives. You would think that after the last presidential election it would be clear to these people that everyone's vote counts.

Why do we expect candidates to make a specific public pitch to our own demographic niches before we agree to support one of them? If we all love to complain about how "special interests" have taken over politics, then we should get out of the habit of acting like them ourselves. If you generally gravitate to one candidate's big-picture vision over the other's, then that's the candidate you go with. You may not get everything you want, but representatives are there to take care of individual needs. It's ridiculous for Lerner and Hong to make these women out to be the victims to sympathize with when it is their apathy that's the culprit.

Joseph Just
Lower Manhattan


Clamoring For Clout

Re "A New Voting Age for Women: 26":

Although Cathy Hong came up with several possibilities as to why young women do not vote, she did not say anything about the fact that women are still the small minority in positions of political power. Perhaps young women do not vote because they do not see the effects of the votes of older women. So why should they get involved in the political process in the first place?

I am proud to be a young, single woman who votes, but it took me a long time to realize that I have a say in the political process. However, I do not think women my age will be voting in large numbers until they see proof that more women can hold positions of power and affect public policy.

Michelle Kaufman
Vernon, Connecticut


Remembering Jonathan Kramer

Re Kyle Gann's "Felling the Wall" [June 16-22]:

Thanks for the moving portrait of Jonathan Kramer and his important contributions, both in compositions and in texts, to how we listen to and experience music of all kinds. He will be deeply missed by many.

Jann Pasler
Solana Beach, California


Playing the Piper

Re Ta-Nehisi Coates's "Doing It With R. Kelly" [June 15, villagevoice.com]:

1
 
2
 
All
 
Next Page »
 
My Voice Nation Help
0 comments
 
Loading...