Another LTE attempt

[petardier]

In case you hadn't noticed, Jeff Jacoby's columns irk me. I sent in this letter to the editor. It hasn't been published yet, though I suppose there's still a chance.

Feel free to make comments about how I might improve it or future efforts.


Jeff Jacoby wrings his hands over what he claims are dishonest arguments by the political left while minions of the Bush administration are busy trying to brand anyone who disagrees with them as traitors. Since he's so sensitive to dishonest arguments, perhaps he'll take on that situation next? The use of dishonest arguments by the party in power should certainly be of concern to all who support democracy in America, but the blinkered Mr. Jacoby can only see the supposed misdeeds of those he opposes.

Since Jacoby has, as usual, missed the point of the argument, I want to point out that nobody is suggesting that war be left only to the generals, and nobody is suggesting that only those with a military background can have a valid opinion about war. What we are suggesting is that those who have served their country in time of war have insights that we would be wise to heed.

The opinion of an experienced mechanic is more valuable than that of a columnist if you're having engine problems. Readers less obtuse than Mr. Jacoby will no doubt see how this idea might apply to our current circumstances.

Comments

[ruthling.livejournal.com]

It's excellent. I know they like shorter letters when they decide to publish. Perhaps lose a few of the adjectives describing Jacoby's poor judgement and let his vs. your argumenst stand.

he irks me often, too. i usually don't even read his column because it's not value-added or trustworthy.

[leemoyer.livejournal.com]

Good work.

Glad I don't have to read his idiocy myself, but given that so many people do I'm glad you're calling him on his bullshit.

[petardier.livejournal.com]

Good point on the need for shorter letters. I should focus on making one main point instead of beating up his entire column (even though the whole column usually needs a good beating). Perhps the first paragraph could have stood on its own.

I actually did edit this one down, but I liked the last part too much to cut it more. I did ditch a great metaphor along the lines of, "Jacoby will likely take a mental wrong turn at Albuquerque and conclude that ...", but it was long and I figured I'd just lose too many people on it.

I couldn't resist the adjectives in my response. I realize that I'm committing the same logical fallacy as Jacoby does (ad-hominem, attacking the person, not the argument), but he started it. ;-)

That's my problem as well. I over-write LTE's.

[(Anonymous)]

Good to see you've kept this column going, hoisting one. I've tried the LTE route a few times as well. I have had one or two published in local fish wrappers, but that's as far as I've gotten. Getting published in what amounts to neighborhood weekly rags isn't exactly a high accomplishment. My problem is I tend to write essays where sound bytes are sought. Like you, I was taught to pick a solid position worth standing behind and make at least three solid cases for that position followed by a closing summary clearly stating what a moron a person who hadn't been convinced by me obvious eloquence would have to be. If I'm going to all the trouble to use a real word processor not "Joe's Own Editor" and check it for things like spelling, typos, and grammar, then by FSM it's going to be a missive suitable for framing. Unfortunately, that seems to preclude it being suitable for print.

Re: That's my problem as well. I over-write LTE's.

[petardier.livejournal.com]

The Globe suggests a limit of 200 words. Letters they print appear to exceed that with some frequency. That's good because it's hard to do a proper excoriation or phillippic in just 200 words.

Not to Brag, But...

[(Anonymous)]

I've written two LTEs to the Philadelphia Inquirer, my local newspaper, and gotten them both published--both concerning the Iraq then-war. Both were responses to front page stories, not columnists. My advice is to make your arguments a little more coherent and more understandable by someone who has not read his column--it took me a couple of reads to know what you were talking about, and even then I only knew vaguely what his and your arguments were. Give me a quick summary of what he said and its context, then tell me how stupid it is and why. Still, good work and good hunting. Mike in Philly

Re: Not to Brag, But...

[petardier.livejournal.com]

Congrats on the LTEs. I was reluctant to summarize his argument because that eats into my precious 200 words, but you're right, it would help those who didn't read the column.