Share on Facebook
December 27, 2010
Jamie Stiehm’s “Sarah Palin Is No Friend of Women in Politics” isn’t the first time feminist history has been rewritten to fit the abortion-centered model, but it is one of the more egregious instances of ignoring current events. Her recent opinion cites the 2010 election results as evidence of the alleged disservice Sarah Palin and pro-life groups like the Susan B. Anthony List (SBA List) have done women by decreasing the overall number of women taking office in 2011.
Share on Facebook
December 21, 2010
Who would have thought that our first black president could be brought down by Democrats? Unless there is a real attitude adjustment in the Democratic Party before 2012—a greater respect for the president’s ability to reach compromises with very hostile adversaries—Obama’s own party will probably prevent him from getting a second term. If President Obama wanted to accomplish anything, he had to compromise. It seems that many Democrats would rather have a political civil war that paralyzes the nation than compromise with [Rep. John] Boehner and [Sen. Mitch] McConnell. Obama is right to say no to those rigid ideologues [who refuse to] compromise and achieve some small success. Maybe the difference between victory and survival should be explained to the purists.
MICHAEL GORMAN Whitestone, N.Y.
Share on Facebook
December 6, 2010
Stephanie Taylor argued that President Obama and the Democrats must be more boldly progressive; Rep. Jim Matheson argued that the path back to victory lies in the political center. Here's a sample of reader reaction:
I tend to agree with the observations of Rep. Jim Matheson. I see his presentation as realistic and as one which would probably stand up fairly well to a fact audit. I tend to see Stephanie Taylor as out of touch with reality—as are Nancy Pelosi and President Obama. Loss of moderate politicians in this last election is a disaster.
DONALD GROTH Yakima, Wash.
Democrats lost because they went too far with the big-government, statist, progressive agenda; not the other way around. The American people gave the [Democrats] a chance in 2006 to make things better. They did not. So they got voted out of office. Now the Republicans have a chance. If they fail also, they'll also get voted out. Reading anything more into it is just spin.
STEVEN TAYLOR Denison, Texas
Being more boldly progressive will not change a thing as long as there are so many in the electorate who think everything from the left is a new incursion on liberties, more big government, more tax-and-spend, more regulation of business, and more liberalization of moral standards. The right has, through massively successful manipulation of public opinion, turned "liberalism" into a dirty word. The battle won't be won by the left without far better marketing and public relations preceding every attempt at change. Howard Dean and Barack Obama knew this, but ever since Obama's victory in 2008, all tactics to win the hearts and minds of the electorate have been abandoned in favor of abrupt policy change and the creation of programs the right has had no problem shooting down. The irony is that people want healthcare reform, want Social Security and Medicare preserved, want compassionate government, and want an end to wars and the immense expense involved in them. Fooling enough of the people enough of the time, though, has worked to make them think otherwise, and we're all losers as a result.
RON SMITH Providence, Utah
Blue Dog Democrats have been the undoing of the Democratic Party. Why did so many of them lose in November? People didn't bother to go out and vote for them because they felt that they are DINOs [Democrats In Name Only]. Stop trying to appease the party of no.
ROGER CRAWFORD Stony Run, Pa.
I've heard enough about how this election proves that the Democrats need to move more to the right. If we could just get our president and the Democratic Party (including the Blue Dogs who write such miserable op-eds) to hear us, the members of the Democratic Party, they may realize that they've been taken out behind the woodshed for a whipping by their own members. Our party has a much better history than this toothless aberration that is in place in the White House and the Blue Dog Congress. We're trying to change that. Party pols need to get their collective heads out of the sand.
LINDA WOODWARD Puyallup, Wash.
The so-called center—Blue Dogs included—is now so far to the right that the truly reactionary pre-Teddy Roosevelt politics of the far-right radicals seem reasonable (and that's freakin' scary). This isn't amnesia on the part of the "informed" right. They want to go back to when big money ruled—indeed we're already there—and the little folks kept their mouths shut and did as they were told.
Richard Lehman Johnstown, Pa.
Matheson makes no sense at all. If moderates helped Obama win, where were they in 2010 when Blue Dogs got swept out to sea? If most progressives kept their seats, why did Blue Dogs lose? Can the message be any clearer? It's beyond me how any straight-faced Democrat can possibly still push for a Blue Dog approach.
TOBI DRAGERT Los Angeles
Share on Facebook
December 2, 2010
"So what would you cut?" [Editor's Note, November 12] Given that we really don't want our country to go bankrupt, the best way to do this is the same as how you move to a smaller house. You don't agonize over letting go of each item, but instead tag the stuff you must take with you, and leave the rest behind. Do we really not realize how serious our financial situation is?
SUSAN STEPHENS Midland, Mich.
The cuts need to be made across the board including—especially—the entitlement programs. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are killing us. Americans need to be weaned off of government programs by providing people incentives to save for their own welfare.
CHRISTOPHER ZIMMERMAN Whetstone, Ariz.
The Future of U.S. News
I look forward to the arrival of my U.S. News Weekly [Editor's Note, November 19]. In fact, my diminishing print version was getting less and less of my attention. I enjoy the opinions in the two attached podcasts. I usually seek balance in weekly current events watching and reading. Hopefully U.S. News Weekly will report both sides of issues. I prefer to make up my own mind rather than listen to a continuing barrage of opinionated pundits, disguised as newscasters, on radio and TV.
LAURENCE WITTIG Phoenix
I have been a U.S. News subscriber for decades, but I won't continue after the print edition ceases. I spend a good deal of time in front of my computers and it is not relaxing. When I want to read a magazine, I prefer to do it in my leather chair or bed. This is the first time I have read the online edition, ever. I am not enjoying it.
ALAN WINTERS Bellaire, Texas
As a U.S. News subscriber for decades, I enjoy the weekly. Mixing sections of unbiased news with writer opinions makes for an enjoyable read. However, keep it short—about its present size—as one doesn't want to sit for hours in front of a computer.
JERRY PASEK Rancho Murieta, Calif.
As someone who has subscribed to U.S. News & World Report for almost 40 years, I was very disappointed by the demise of the weekly print edition, and I'm going to miss the monthly print edition, too. And I'm not a Luddite. I am a distinguished member of the technical staff at a major telecom company, and I've been a direct participant in the development of the standards that have supported the evolution of cable and telco Internet delivery. I've been an early adopter of technologies like smartphones. That said, I still like holding a newsmagazine and, for that matter, my daily newspaper.
BOB STEIN Coopersburg, Pa.
Things I like: interactive graphs, video and audio supplements. This is a multimedia format; give us more of it. I don't peruse your journal for the written content alone. Things I miss: articles on science and health news, something other than politics. I miss the color. Pictures are intriguing and help add emotion and art and zip to the mundane. Things I would change: less emphasis on all things political. I can only absorb so much of Washington's missteps before I lose interest.
DONNA ALDER Rochester, N.Y.
I strongly preferred the print version and very much looked forward to having something I could hold in my hand and take anywhere to read without worrying about Internet access. It used to be I could share the magazine with my wife and kids, but now that is not possible (or at least not very convenient). We are getting much less value out of it.
JOHN KEREKES Pittsford, N.Y.
Drop the weekly presidential report card. No president deserves to be treated that way: like some schoolchild bringing home weekly grade reports. We have also been polled and given poll results until we are numb (or dumb).
JOHN GRUMBLES West Chester, Ohio
As a longtime subscriber to U.S. News, I was upset with the change from a weekly magazine to a monthly publication combined with the weekly digital version. But, bravo! I thought I would miss the ability to sit back and enjoy my print version; that has not been the case. U.S. News Weekly is something I look forward to each Friday as it arrives on my laptop. As a 61-year-old high school teacher, your new format has helped me see the merits of the digital age and delights my students when we discuss issues in my economics classes pulled from the weekly digital.
STUART SIMS San Clemente, Calif.
Yes, I carry a BlackBerry, another cellphone, and work almost exclusively on a laptop away from the office . . . but there is something special (for me) in disconnecting from all of that, sitting in a comfortable chair, and reading something on paper. If you could consolidate all of your weekly reporting into one place (like the Weekly), which contains a variety of topics and in-depth information, that would add immeasurable value to my subscription. Your current Weekly seems to concentrate too much on politics and not enough on other issues.
STEVEN DRAGESET Mount Shasta, Calif.
I like the digital Weekly and its format. But I wish the articles would cover more world news and less on Washington, as the print edition did. After all, "world report" is still part of your name, and it's beginning to seem like a bit of a misnomer. Your magazine was a great way to keep up with international affairs. I have yet to find a good print magazine to fill that void.
THOMAS LERCZAK Havana, Ill.
I want a weekly newsmagazine, and I'll pay for it. Yes, I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore.
MIKE THORNTON Memphis
I'm a subscriber to the digital Weekly. I love it. I love being able to get current news quickly. I won't be disappointed to see the print version go away. Personally, I don't read it. Print has really gone the way of the dinosaur with respect to news.
DIANA DILL Pittsburgh
I miss the old weekly newsmags—I am a reader without a laptop. I enjoy cramming things into my bag to read whenever I have a moment. That being said, I have enjoyed the weekly U.S. News via E-mail—less content, but nice. However, if I am busy, I often don't have time to read everything, because I am not able to sit at my computer and don't want to print out every edition—isn't that why you're digital?
MARSHA WEINER Savannah, Ga.