Goldberg crosses line, and sets himself apart

A line has been crossed when Jonah Goldberg makes his political views the main subject of his column (Opinion, Feb. 16). Readers generally appreciate, if not actually enjoy, the crossfire between opposing points of view. Goldberg, however, has nothing to say, and he says nothing badly. Instead of doing his homework and coming up with some relevant facts and figures, he tries to impress with his windy and obscure style. What, for example, does he mean by “philosophical incontinence,” or “Republican rent-seekers”? We can understand his predicament. As someone looking for “fiscal restraint, limited government and cultural decency,” he’s supporting the wrong party.

WILLIAM H. DUBAY

Costa Mesa

*

One of the casualties of the current political climate is the art of real debate. The days of the Abraham Lincoln/Stephen Douglas debates are nothing more than a vague memory, yet they played such an integral role in the evolution of the greatest country in the world. Today, Republicans and Democrats are more like the Crips and Bloods, mindlessly protecting their respective turf above all else. That’s why it was refreshing to read Goldberg’s column. I am more liberal than conservative, but Goldberg proved to me his right to at least be heard. Different though our beliefs might be, his approach seems constructive rather than destructive. To me, he has effectively set himself apart from the Max Boots and Rush Limbaughs of the world.

MICHAEL VALENTE

San Clemente