|
Thank you for your kind (and unkind) letters from around the world. Mark reads all mail, but especially enjoys the vicious ones. Each day Monday to Friday we pick six of the best for our Daily Delivery. So drop a line to Mark's Mailbox, and on Friday if you're chosen to be the one and only Letter of the Week you'll join our roll of winners from four Continents and receive a copy of Mark Steyn From Head To Toe. Congratulations to this week's winner:
Letter of the Week
HIGH SIGNS AND MISDEMEANORS
Mark, there is another reason for the high expense of roadway signs (re: your monologue on Rush’s show the other day).
My father and uncle, German immigrants, came home from WWII (as American soldiers) and started a sign business. They bid on and won the original contracts for many of the highways and byways in New England. Cut to the late 70s and the introduction of the minority contractor laws that the federal government imposed. Basically, this meant that the large prime contractor had to have a portion of his contract sub-contracted to government-approved minorities— bye-bye family business.
The government eliminated competition. In our case, the feds chose to award these contracts to an upstart firm with no experience; the only criteria they met, it seemed, was that they had a Hispanic last name.
The government stole this from us. There was no parallel program to help the (family) businesses they destroyed. We had hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans for industry-specific equipment that was soon no good to us, but we still had to pay these loans and ultimately sell our equipment at pennies on the dollar.
Don’t get into business with the government!
Bill Hannmann
BIG SIGN STRIKES AGAIN
Enjoyed your comments on road signs yesterday on the EIB Network, Mark. My husband and I own property in Nebraska, and we thought you’d like to know that Nebraska has signs along every state or federal highway telling drivers, “Do Not Drive on the Shoulder.” These appear at least every ½ mile, if not every ¼ mile. Next, they’ll probably put up identical signs saying “Please Drive on the Highway”— another waste of taxpayer money.
Always enjoy your sitting in for Rush. Your wit is unparalleled.
Shannon Reed
Calabasas, California
SETTING THE PAPER OF RECORD STRAIGHT
I just read your "Friendly Persuasion" column, in which you quoted an article in the New York Times that quoted me. In “A Best Friend? You Must be Kidding”, by Hilary Stout, Ms Stout used two unrelated quotes from my 30-minute discussion with her in February 2010 to come across as if I advocated against the concept of best friends in middle school and high school. The topic of best friends was not the focus of the interview; it was addressed as part of a general discussion about the different aspects of a middle school counselor’s duties.
During my interview, I told Ms Stout there is nothing wrong with middle and high school students having best friends. To the contrary, strong bonds between best friends can last a lifetime. I do not discourage or intrude upon best friend relationships— I recommend to parents that they work with their children on how to avoid “toxic” or “overly possessive” best friendships, where, for example, a friend might say, “You’re my best friend so you cannot be friends with anyone else but me!”
Parents often contact me when they are concerned that their child lacks a best friend. I reassure them that it is perfectly normal for students to have groups of friends and that the absence of a best friend is not a cause for concern. I do not think my role is to find best friends for students, nor is my role to break up such bonds amongst students. As a school counselor, I encourage students to engage in all such friendships that have a positive impact on their middle school years.
This describes my brief discussion with Ms Stout relating to “best friends”. Please understand only a small portion of my comments were actually used in the article, and they were used by Ms Stout specifically to create the slant and argument Ms Stout desired.
Christine Laycob, MS, LPC
Missouri
HELL HATH NO FURY LIKE AN OBAMA SCORNED
In regards to "Containing Yourself," you state that Iran can be confident that there would be no significant Obama response to a nuclear attack by a group Iran has donated (so to speak) nuclear weapons to. I disagree.
Please note the occasions when President Obama has taken swift and decisive action. The most recent example is the McChrystal affair. President Obama takes decisive action when he has been made to look bad. (You discuss this in "The Rules of Unengagement”.) My guess is that President Obama would see a nuclear strike by Iran, or one even through her subsidiaries, as a personal insult. After all, hasn't he been saying that there is nothing to worry about? If he does view such as a personal insult, he will reply— possibly in an over-the-top manner. I can almost see a Tom Clancy "Sum of All Fears"-type scenario unfolding, where America lies on the brink of a nuclear strike due to the hubris and fear of a president; I doubt that Iran would push this president that far.
Frankly, my concern is for future leaders. There is no way to get this genie back in the bottle. A more rational leader having to deal with a nuclear-armed Iran will have to make concessions. So, while I agree with you that Iran having nukes is a horrible concern, I doubt that it will have significant short term consequences. The long term consequence, however, frighten me.
Jason
Dallas, Texas
HEY, THE DISCOVERY BOMBER HAS A POINT!
I am politically slightly to the right of the John Birch Society, but on the issue of human population, the nut bomber at the Discovery Channel building is spot on. You need only acknowledge the truth of one simple statement to prove his, and my, case. (And, oh yeah, by the way, it isn't necessary to kill anyone in order to reduce the planetary population— just limit couples to one child for the next thirty years or so.)
And now that you've put up with me to this point, here's the simple statement: Planet Earth is finite, and ergo all of its raw materials are finite, including its fresh water, its breathable air, its sea life (food supply), etc, etc, etc.
Chuck Cressman
Nevada
STEYN: NOT THE SCHLOCK HOMES GEEZER YOU THOUGHT HE WAS
Today I came home early and went to Rush's site to listen to today's show, and I saw your picture for the first time— I was stunned! I've heard your voice many times, and I had this thought you were some plus-65-years-old-Schlock-Homes-type guy with an English hat… thought you might find that humorous.
Jerome Maddox
Las Vegas, Nevada
|
