It all calls to mind Stephen
King’s Pet Sematary: One cannot and should not drag things back
from the dead… Things will get ugly… But then again, how often have the
boomers demonstrated a lick of common sense when it comes to parenting?
I see a lot of attempts
at some mutant form of “parenting as a peer,” rather like the teacher
who tries in vain to show his students he’s cool, or “not one of them.”
As if the kids don’t shudder and mumble “asshole” under their
collective breath. As ye sow, so shall ye reap.
I look forward to our own
dotage years with a great measure of concern and apprehension: those kids from
Woodstock ’99 are our future caretakers at work.
Port Washington, NY
know that New Yorkers believe the main problem with L.A. is that it exists.
But for those of us who toil at our computer screens trying to make sense of
the place, the problem is that this is a city without a hint of irony or wit.
The intolerable Los Angeles Times has never actually published anything
with a hint of irony or wit in it, not in its entire century-long history (though
the late, lamented Jack Smith was a master of wry). The only person who writes
about the absurdities of L.A. with a sense of humor is our own Catherine Seipp,
a woman blessed with a Swiftian keyboard and a properly jaundiced eye. And might
I add one word of advice: After Buzz magazine foolishly discontinued
her column on the malefactions of the L.A. Times, Buzz went out
of business. In fact, the more you pay her, the more you will prosper.
But Not to Syphilis
Your 7/28 column was a wonderful piece. Thanks. However, I noted in it that
you thought someone might wonder about the fact that George magazine
accepted NRA ads. But was not John’s father an NRA life member? Maybe,
like any clear-thinking person, John F. Kennedy Jr. was immune to media-driven
connections between disparate thoughts, actions, objects and beliefs.
Hang the DJ
Worst singles? (8/4) Others would be “I Can See Clearly Now,” “Me
and You and a Dog Named Boo” and “Sunshine of Your Love.”
David Corn’s logic is so flawed in the “We Are the Taxman” portion
of his 8/4 “Loyal Opposition” column that I shouldn’t even refer
to it as logic, and you should warn readers that his column, though inane, is
presented to show the brilliance of liberal thought. He speculates that those
who say “we trust people to handle their own money” should, by extrapolation,
be trusted to send in money for national defense, etc., etc., so that no taxes
would be necessary. Nonsense. What we’re saying is that all the things
he listed are projected to be paid for, and there will be a surplus.
If there is a surplus, it should be returned to the people who paid it, just
like so many states have done recently.
Also, I haven’t heard
it said before, but how is it appropriate to use income tax revenues to shore
up social security? Don’t we already have a payroll tax for just that purpose?