Congratulations. You reached a new and previously untapped low in editorial reporting with the Cam Cardow editorial cartoon of Aug. 4.
Rarely, if ever, has the absolute hypocrisy and spiritual bankruptcy of the radical left been so clearly exposed as in the recent Chick-fil-A affair.
Because a Christian business owner dared to take an unapologetic stand for his values — without demeaning or belittling another human being — he was inundated with the most vulgar invective and vituperation imaginable.
His attackers accused him of hatefulness and intolerance in the most abusive terms.
The truth was exactly the opposite. It was the attackers who were the hatemongers. Those who demanded tolerance and acceptance of a perverse way of life refused to offer the same tolerance they sought. Those who had not been injured or demeaned in any fashion lashed out with the very things they claimed to despise.
Rahm Emmanuel responded that "Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago's values."
For once I agree with him and I thank God that Chick-fil-A has chosen the moral high road.
The bathroom issue in downtown Traverse City: Why don't the merchants, who want the business, pay most of the cost to construct a rest area downtown?
The Record Eagle: Why aren't reporters out doing more local news stories? Why is our paper getting smaller, less news and costing more? Not everyone enjoys reading the newspaper online.
TV stations: Again, why is most of our local news not local? Why are they reporting national news? Why do they repeat the news almost word for word at 5, 5:30 and 6 p.m? Why does the weather get all that airtime and sports about five minutes in 1½ hours?
Radio stations: Why are there no radio stations that play a variety of music instead of one genre? There is a lot of great music out there that never is heard.
Where is our imagination, originality and creativity in this country? Look at our movies and network TV. Have we become that lazy?
Finally, in this great country of ours, why could we not come up with better candidates than Mitt Romney and Obama?
Heaven help us all.
Word is 'integration'
So much unpleasant and pious acrimony about "same-sex marriages" could be eliminated simply by changing three words to one.
No one with any sensibility whatsoever could deny that eligible participants in "same-sex marriages" are entitled to the legal, financial, social and all other advantages of a legal union.
But "marriage" is a long-existing word meaning combination of a male and female for procreation of children.
Since two people of the same sex cannot do that, their legal union should have a different name.
There are many synonyms for "union." I think the winner should be "integration."
The dictionary defines it as "combination into an integral whole."
What legal union could be better than that?