Sunday, April 1, 2007

Don't Rethink Your Opinions; Just Make Them Brief

The Morning Herald "You Said It" section remains bustling with words on local, national and global goings-on. But overbustling?

"To our has become necessary for the Morning Herald to shorten the time allotted for should try to limit your calls to 30 seconds.

Quality control on the part of the paper might be a good idea; only one missive of Monday, March 26, was deemed worthy of my blogspace:

"To all of you that say you're an anti-war protester but not an anti-soldier protester, I would like to tell you how wrong you are."

That from Washington County. I had a nice spiel all ready, but then I found another, similar message later in the week, and saved it for that.


"Why in the world...would they retry a man who was tried 30 years ago and sentenced to a life term plus years? That doesn't make sense to me."--WILLIAMSPORT

Ah, a reference to a recent story wherein a Hagerstown cop killer may be brought back to trial. I even blogged about it here.

Well, "Weemsport", lemme explain it to you so that it hopefully can make sense. "Judge Beachley found that Melvin Unger's trial judge improperly advised jurors that they were to determine the law as well as the facts of the case. Such instructions were routinely given in Maryland courts until 1980, when the state Court of Appeals ruled that jurors are the finders of facts but not of the law." So not only this case, but a handful of others in the state, are facing possible retrials due to this legal loophole. Is it annoying that it has to happen? Surely. Is it unnecessary? Given the lack of controversy over the original Unger trial, likely. Should it be done at all? Yes. There is no point in having the law if you don't follow it. Words are weapons of mass destruction when it comes to the world of criminal justice; lawyers and judges are simultaneously radars and dischargers.



All the controversy about the proposed new hospital for Hagerstown...I just want this city to have a hospital where the ER wait isn't an average of one hour. That's all.

In 1998, I was driven to the Washington County Hospital at 3:30 AM when the pain in my chest became too much to just "ride out". I took a seat and waited to be called. Hell, I anticipated that my current state would precipitate near-immediate care: consistent chest pains, sweating, shortness of breath, inability to speak at an audible level. Surely one does not need more than one half-day of medical school to discern the profundity!

It took 30 minutes for me to be taken in for treatment. In that time, I had added "inability to swallow" to my basket of goodies. Once the nurse got a gander at this young woman in distress, I was led to a stretcher and in no time had a doctor and handful of aides surrounding my prone body, hooking me up to machines and examining my vitals. I had the thought that it was like out of the "ER", but no, "St. Elsewhere", if for no reason other than, the latter was just a better show.

(It was discovered I had costochondritis, which you can read more about at this link. Almost ten years later it still affects my everyday life and can make trying to fall asleep more distressing than anything I face during the day.)

And that's just one of several thousand horror stories. People have been known to wait upwards of four hours for emergency care. Frankly, if the new hospital means quicker care, then it's what is owed the city. People should want what is owed them.


"In response to the church organist who feels underappreciated, the only thing I have to say to you is serve your God, then serve yourself"--SMITHSBURG.

First off, you didn't say that; some fucker else did. Second off, church organists do happen to be severly overlooked. Did you ever see the "Bart Sells His Soul" episode of The Simpsons? Did that poor elderly woman get any love after her exhausting version of "In-A-Gadda-Vida"? Precisely.

Funnily enough, in the same section:

"Beaver Creek Christian Church has a one and only organist....every one of us appreciates her and has her on a pedestal, and she knows it. We love her."

Well, super. How is she going to want to serve God fully now that you've given her simple earthly praise? This country is going insane!

"I'm calling to congratulate all those people who support the troops but they don't support what the troops are sent there for. That's like saying I support the cops, but I don't support the cops arresting people."

I support good cops making solid arrests. I do not support dirty cops treating the badge and the people they are sworn to serve like dog shit. Similarly, I have admiration and respect for good-hearted, sincere, decent members of our military and unfathomable sympathy over their current condition. I really am overcome with a sincere sadness when I think of the physical/psychological injury and death borne of the circuitous conflict. War is may sometimes be a necessary evil. In this case, I feel it is not. That is why so many are speaking out in support of brave people trapped in a coward's global game of "mine's bigger'n yers".

See, some of us can make a distinction, thanks to our friend "the brain." It's a super thing to have in one's head; among many awesome advantages, it keeps us from laughing when we tickle ourselves. It also stores memories of auditory and visual experiences so that we may remember them later and either learn from them or relive certain emotions through them. When one uses "the brain", they may then understand how one can have seemingly contradictory feelings on a certain topic. For "the brain", when used well, shows us the frequent fallacy of syllogisms, ie:



No comments:

Post a Comment