Filling a Much-Needed Gap Filling a Much-Needed Gap ...
Boss Tweed Jacket
Paper receipts from electronic voting terminals are a terrible idea, one that Tammany Hall would have loved ("Rotation," 11/12). With the advent of the secret ballot, political machines had to buy votes on trust. Imagine how pleased they would be to pay for a vote and get a receipt.
Electronic voting can be perfectly reliable and verifiable. Open source software that can be examined by anyone and especially expert officials of all parties will ensure clean counts.
But paper should be used to provide a reassuring redundancy: before the voter leaves the privacy of the booth, the machine would produce a printout behind glass for the voter to examine. If accepted, it would drop into a ballot box; if rejected it would be shredded so the voter could try again.
Steve Forbis, Manhattan
Two More: Magically Delicious
I thought the "wheel" article on Friedman ("Cage Match," 11/12) was right on. Smug, fatuous, supercilious are a few of the words that come to mind in describing Friedman's writing and opinions. He's an apologist for the white(wash) house.
Tom Carten, Milton, MA
It's a Friedman-hatin' Party!
Thank you for Matt Taibbi's brilliant "Cage Match," exposing Tom Friedman as a dangerous and befuddled thinker (11/12). A couple of years ago, I had the pleasure of watching him speak in Tacoma and nearly walked out. His smarmy, narrow and condescending view of other cultures (particularly Arab ones) was embodied in cute phrases like: "the sittin' around guys" (his creative euphemism for the monolith that is unemployed Arab men). You should've seen the way he said it, like describing the reproductive parts of flowers to six-year olds. This simplistic view no doubt fuels his support for thoughtless policies in Iraq, Afghanistan and here at home. So cheers to Taibbi for diving into the driver's seat and dismantling Friedman's web brick by brick.
Evan Derkacz, Oakland, CA
Anytime
See, imagine that you're driving a Humvee in a "roadless" desert where the only "rest stops" are oases inhabited by the likes of Tondelayo, or is it Britney Spears ("Cage Match," 11/12)? Imagine your Humvee runs out of gas or, better still, loses a tire?do you "ask" Britney to get Mr. Goodwrench? Hey, we see the beginning of a "Road to...the Matrix." Kudos to Taibbi. You made my day.
Armand De Laurell, Little Rock
Burn, Hollywood, Burn
Lighten up, Mugger. David Plotz's article on Shattered Glass was great: a wry, bemused little comment by an ordinary guy who finds his life intersecting, for a fraction of a second, with the silver screen (MUGGER, 11/19). I found it much better than Anthony Lane's pompous pan. So, presumably, a struggle at a famous magazine is just too tawdrily parochial for Hollywood?let's put this story aside for more serial killers, car chases, 60-year-old movie stars having bedroom scenes with 25-year-old babes, high-tech comic-book characters spouting subliterate dialogue and innocent convicts at the mercy of sadistic prison staff?in other words, all the garbage that makes contemporary movies so reliably trite and awful.
Michael Ladenson, Moorestown, NJ
Time Warner Radar
Armond White made a good point regarding the independence of critics ("Their Souls for a Freebie," 10/29). I observed in my 10-plus years in magazine production at Time Warner that despite a philosophy of separate "Church and State" (the editorial and business sides of the company), the media conglomerate could not help but influence content in the magazines?even unintentionally. Conversations with coworkers, meetings and in-house communications (not to mention the lifestyles of those working in a rarified corporate environment) affected what was on the radar and what mattered to the editors, if not their actual words on the page.
Rania Richardson, Manhattan
There is a Spoon After All
Matt Seitz wrote that it is now fashionable to bash The Matrix trilogy ("Film," 11/5), but that's not quite true. People aren't insulting it because it's not cool to admit to a guilty pleasure. We're insulting it (while praising aspects of it) because, let's face it?the second installment was a major piece of shit. And most of us think that Keanu Reeves is one of the dumbest, most uninteresting actors to soil the silver screen. It is impossible to take anything he appears in seriously (unless he's playing a moron?as he did in River's Edge and Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure). Accepting Keanu as a leading man is up there with believing Bush was elected president. I enjoyed the new Matrix very much, but the entire audience laughed whenever Keanu said something, and especially when he was "crying" over Trinity. Sorry Matt, but the assault on the childish but skilled Wachowski brothers is entirely deserved.
Janice Amato, Manhattan
Stuck, Stuck in the Middle
Jim Knipfel suggests that practically everyone seems to have his or her own conspiracy theory ("Slackjaw," 11/12). Well, I have one too, and it just might implicate one or two New York Press columnists (and many, many other TV, radio and print pundits) and countless New York Press readers and letter writers.
I believe there is something like a conspiracy afoot in which the right and the left?in cahoots with each other and with the media?are attempting to hoodwink the American people into believing that our country is "split down the middle" ideologically. "We're in a culture war," the left and the right keep telling us. "Which side are you on?"
We're not in a culture war. They are. Dr. Gallup reports that the number of conservatives and liberals combined is smaller than the rest of us: the moderate, the centrist, the sane.
Most people enjoy believing that they're more important than they really are. The same goes for ideological groups. I, for one, would appreciate it if in the future the left and the right would try to keep their culture war to themselves.
Dale Thomajan, Manhattan
Years of Practice
It's hard to be simultaneously glib, dim and cowardly, but J.R. Taylor is a sparkling exception. Taylor's smarmy Elliott Smith jokes get castrated by Mark Ames ("The Mail," 11/5), and Taylor a) misses Ames' rather blunt point ("You're a chickenshit hipsteria-monger") and b) replies to Ames one week later ("The Mail," 11/12) in a footnoted retort to a different letter. Quite a show. Congratulations.
Justin Henderson, Newton, MA
Large Marge Sent Me
Tell Knipfel to go to Snopes.com, click search, and enter "body under bed." He'll see that this story ("Slackjaw, 11/12), unlikely as it sounds, is true! Snopes is a great site for urban legends. And it happened in New Jersey!
Lee Shafer, Kingston, PA
Morgan's Wrong
Actually, it was Jan Brunvand who was mistaken, according to Snopes.com ("Slackjaw," 11/12). Under this particular urban legend, the Snopes site provides six specific examples that fit the exact profile for this incident. The latest one happened (can be documented by police records) on July 10, 2003, so it is probably the one being referenced by Slackjaw. He was right and his friend Morgan was wrong.
Alan Collier, Cleveland, MS
Media apparatchik Donald Forst is no doubt merely doing his masters' bidding in this regard. After all, the Village Voice is first and foremost an investment. And these media speculator owners probably can't resist the feeling that their own politics would be more profitable.
Jason Zenith, Manhattan
We Count Six
Hey, I've got a question for Mugger: Would you care to explain to us all why Bush isn't invading China? They admit to having weapons of mass destruction and admit to violating the civil rights of their citizens. Aren't those good enough reasons to go liberate the people over there? Or is Bush only interested in attacking countries rich in oil that he knows he can easily take? And could you take a stab and explain how it was that many of us darn "liberals" predicted Bush would invade Iraq before he even entered office in January 2001? Are we simply clairvoyant or was Bush as predictably corrupt as we said? Hey, I hope you're right, because then Bush will invade Saudi Arabia to bring democracy to those people, yeah?
Nico Gerber, Brooklyn
Asian Amish
Why were there no photos in Alexander Zaitchik's article on Cambodia ("Back from the Dead: Cambodia 2003," 11/12)? Is there no photography allowed there? Otherwise, I found his Cambodia 2003 article and the K11 article by Keith Kirchner enjoyable.
Michael Thomas, Manhattan
Yeah, What is up With That?
I enjoyed Matt Taibbi's giving Tom Friedman's clumsy writerisms the punching-bag treatment for the second time ("Cage Match," 11/12). Richly deserved. This is a poor time, however, for Taibbi to add to the chronic misuse of the word "literally," the mishandling of which has rendered its perceived meaning nearly synonymous with "figuratively." Taibbi writes: "Friedman is perhaps the only writer in history whose meaning needs, literally, to be extracted by the Jaws of Life."
It begs the question: What exactly would the Jaws of Life offer to a writer's distressed meaning, literally?
Thomas Brown, Manhattan
The editors reply: While we always appreciate intelligent letters from intelligent readers, we would like to point out that in his good-natured chiding of Matt Taibbi, Thomas Brown committed the common mistake of misusing "beg the question." While popular definitions allow for "begging the question" to suggest evasion, it is never correct as "raising the question" or "inviting the question." The original meaning points back to the concept of petitio principii, by which flawed logic relies upon an unwarranted assumption of truth of the very point being discussed. In other words, to beg the question literally is to render the question unnecessary.
Back 'Atcha
Just a quick thank you ("Cage Match," 11/12) to Matt Taibbi. His article is very much appreciated, even without mentioning Tom Friedman's seminal work on how to drive globalization, The Lexus and the Olive Tree.
Marc Neumann, Manhattan
Cleaner Weiner
First, I'd like to give you people a belated but sincere "thank you" for cleaning up the mail considerably subsequent to my letter "From Natt Weinerdogg" ("The Mail," 10/22). I can now thumb through it without my fingers turning purple! I'm truly touched (and I don't mean crazy, although that's plausible). It's extremely refreshing to see a newspaper?alternative or mainstream?that (apparently) doesn't view its readership as being cockroaches who don't matter. More than one year ago, I was discussing an anti-police, anti-district attorney, dig-as-deep-as-is-convenient-to-our-agenda letter with an editor from another "alternative" weekly. The editor, in response to what I feel were logical and civil questions, hung the phone up in my ear!
However, I wouldn't be a New Yawker if I didn't have something to complain about. A couple of weeks ago, discussing the city's 311 ("Page Two," 10/29) line?"Holy Shit?it works." And in the "MTA PCAC" article ("Page Two," 11/19) "...passengers who were being assholes." Light stuff, maybe, but again, uncalled for. And while we're on the MTA article?
As a lifelong Bronx resident, I also must take minor umbrage to the remark about sending a loudmouth idiot to the Bronx. If you were simply referring to the Bronx as being out of the way, I apologize, but if you were implying that the Bronx is a wasteland, I must voice mild exception. It has its problems (crime, grime, traffic), but it is not the block upon block of burnt-out buildings Bronx of the 70s and 80s.
Nathan F. Weiner, Bronx
One Cartoon Clapping
I am responding to your great article by Paul Krassner ("Zen Bastard," 11/5). I was only interested in the item that mentioned Michael Ramirez. I got a chance to meet him this past summer at the LA Times. He's definitely a real nice guy. I don't agree with his politics, but he took the time from his busy schedule to see me, and we got to talking about politics and cartoons. I was fortunate enough that I was able to take pictures of him drawing his political cartoons. Did you know he is a killer caricaturist and a Pulitzer Prize winner for political cartooning? Why didn't New York Press use the cartoon that got Mike in a whole whale of controversy? That cartoon by Michael Weber sucked. Hell, I could have done better if the New York Press ever gave me a chance to do a cartoon.
Leo Garcia, Staten Island
King of the Cross-faders
Thank you so much for publishing the outstanding article by Celia Farber ("P.C. R.I.P.," 10/15). As an adult educator, professional trainer and Columbia doctoral candidate, I have been neck-deep in political correctness for many years. Along with Farber, I too have been "mauled by the beast." As a training practitioner, I've been passed over for promotion because my superiors were too afraid to "not promote" an incompetent person because he was a racial minority. As an adult educator, I've been turned down for a job for which I was the most qualified because I'm a man. A far less educated and experienced woman was hired. Though I have no illusions about the less-than-even professional opportunities that I have within higher education, I was greatly encouraged by Farber's piece. Maybe the pendulum is swinging back from its extreme left arch.
Richard C. Ortloff, McPherson, KS
Hot Wheels
Celia Farber's article was great ("P.C. R.I.P.," 10/15). I, too, am ready for the end of the "totalitarian rule of identity politics." When I got to college I was labeled a "self-propelling disabled person." Now I don't know about you, but self-propelling gives me quite an amusing image. I'm ready to call what I do to get around "walking" again and ready to call myself a "chick in a wheelchair" without getting stares like I have three heads for not being P.C.
Better yet, I want to "walk" scantily clad to the appreciative sounds of construction men whistling; I'm in New York after all. It's interesting in itself when the whole country "cares" who's governor of California, but it's pretty special when a movie as bad as Demolition Man can predict the future?claiming the muscle man would be governor and the idea of having to be American-born to be president would be reexamined following his election so he too could one day run for president.
Christina Trivigno, Manhattan
Hollywood Jungle Fever
Kudos to Armond White for his dead-on analysis of the farcical nature of Hollywood and its hype machine ("Their Souls for a Freebie," 10/29). I would like to add one more indication of this appalling phenomenon. Though it is one of the best films I have seen in years, Hollywood is paying little attention to Peter Hedges' independently produced gem, Pieces of April. The performance of Patricia Clarkson as the mother in the film is, without question, Oscar-worthy. My guess is that the principal reason this film is being ignored is because it stars an attractive young Caucasian female (Clarkson's screen daughter, played by Katie Holmes) who has an African-American boyfriend (played by Derek Luke), featuring a close-to-risque sex scene between them.
Compare this to Hollywood's reaction to the independent film, Monster's Ball, featuring the far more graphic sex scene between the African-American Halle Berry and Caucasian Billy Bob Thornton. As most people know, Berry was rewarded with the first best actress Oscar to ever go to an African-American woman. I'll bet my bottom dollar that when Oscar time comes, Clarkson's compelling performance in Pieces of April, which is certainly worthy of an Oscar for best supporting actress, will be completely overlooked.
Hugh Pearson, Brooklyn
Our Patience, Tested
Hey, Janice Amato ("The Mail," 11/5), defender of sleazy topless bars everywhere! Thanks for giving me an excuse to go on about the glories of God's Church! Being called a creep by you is a small price to pay! (Now if only New York Press has the patience to print this rant!)
Here's a news flash, Janice: The world by itself is an imperfect place full of imperfect people. Christ founded a Church in it anyway, even knowing there was a Judas in the midst from day one, because His power through that Church would outweigh the sins of false "Christians."
Now, would you care to list some of the "endless crimes" of the Church, Janice? If you're talking about the usual "unholy three" examples of "the Inquisition," "the Crusades" and "the colonizing of Native Americans," maybe a study of history (one not written by a lib or a lefty, that is) will show you that those were not the black-and-white cases that you would like to believe.
The Inquisition saved many innocent people from mob vigilantism, for example, and non-Christian historians like the respected Norman Cantor have concluded that the number of people killed by some individual corrupt Inquisitors was nowhere near the impossible numbers bandied about by hysterics (and by con artists like Dan Brown).
The Crusades (there were many of them, not all involving atrocities) were stoked by Muslim aggression against Christian Europe as much as by any venality of a corrupt churchman. There again, Cantor and many others show that the killings by some Crusaders were extremely low in number compared to what is usually claimed (and please note that we have left out the issue of how many invasions and atrocities Muslims committed, in full obedience to the murderous jihad calls in their Koran).
As for Native Americans, the Church demanded as early as the 1500s that the Indians must not be enslaved or abused, and this is a simple matter of recorded history. Blame the merchant and business classes for the Indians' plight (heck, blame them for a whole bunch of peoples' plights now, too), but don't blame the Church.
It's also fascinating that you would compare the Church to Mussolini and Hitler, since both of those atheist monsters (along with the atheist monsters of communism, who killed tens of millions of people in a single century's time) wanted to destroy the Church.
Would you also care to show us where a single evil person acting badly in the name of the Church was ever obeying Christ or following the true Church Catechism? I can certainly show you where many a titty-bar owner, acting in full and natural accordance with his satanic philosophy of self, has helped ruin many a young woman's life, including some who later turned to the Church for protection and spiritual solace.
Would you also care to prove your contention that "half" the Church hierarchy deserves to be fired for the media-inflated sex abuse scandal? No one has even finished compiling the accurate figures for how many pedophile priests there may have been or how many bishops may have done a deliberate cover-up (and no one denies that when they are compiled, the number is likely to be quite small). But somehow you've already reached the conclusion that 50 percent of the Church deserves the boot.
In the meantime, you might note that the Pope, a simple servant of the Lord Christ, has ordered extensive investigations, reforms and compensation to victims and has apologized for any act committed by a deviant and Christ-disobeying priest. And he has apologized for any and all acts committed by corrupt churchmen in the Church's entire history. And he bucks all modern trends and opposes the Iraq war.
Would you care to show me a titty-bar owner who searches his soul and apologizes for the women he exploits and the slime that he splashes onto an already corrupt society? I know I could show you (based on knowledge from my own drunken and sinful past!) at least a half dozen of them who hang American flags over the half-drugged dancing girls in their bars while helping to pump up the "boys'" support of the bombing and killing of innocent children in Iraq.
Finally, and again, would you care to show me a human institution of any kind that has helped the suffering, poor and needy to the extent and with the consistency that the Church has, throughout the 2000-year history of the modern Western civilization that you live in and reap the benefits of (and which, by the way, wouldn't even exist if it weren't for the Church)? I hereby turn the other cheek to your "creep" remark. May God bless!
Jack Seney, Queens