Letters to the Editor

Thomas criticism

June 15, 2008


To the editor:

Most mornings, I am pleased to find the Journal-World on my doorstep. Sometimes, however, the paper hits my front porch with the dull and pulpy thud of a stink bomb down the elevator shaft. Those are the days Cal Thomas' column appears.

I realize the J-W must strive for balance among its columnists. I also suspect it is good form for editors to carry someone bound to infuriate subscribers of the predominant persuasion for which the community is known - in this case, progressive readers - lest the paper be accused of preaching to the choir. Certainly George Will, with his cloying pedantry and baroque syntax, does that nicely enough, though he occasionally dishes up a baseball analogy worth considering.

Unsilent Cal is of another species entirely. Bigoted, xenophobic, self-righteous and always in the churchy context of the drunken Sunday school teacher who shows up on time, having beaten his wife half to death the night before, to condemn us all to hell if we don't stop smoking. "Obama fails Christianity test" (Journal-World, June 13). Indeed!

The response might be, "If you don't like it, just don't read it." Ah, choice: the shibboleth for ducking responsible judgment. I may have to shield the eyes of my grandchildren from scenes of graphic dismemberment or sexual dalliance that unexpectedly intrude on a DVD we are watching. I expect more from the people who are supposed to be running an intelligent editorial page at the hometown newspaper.

Bill Getz,


labmonkey 10 years ago

I love how Liberals claim to be open minded....except when a view doesn't agree with them. They are actually more close minded than most of the Religious Right. Wow, I hope Cal's wife heals soon from the metaphorical beating she took from metaphorical drunken Cal.

notajayhawk 10 years ago

"I also suspect it is good form for editors to carry someone bound to infuriate subscribers of the predominant persuasion for which the community is known"The editors are trying to infuriate morons?Funny how at least an equal number of people seem to complain when Leonard Pitts columns appear on the award-winning LJW's editorial page. Of course those "subscribers of the predominant persuasion for which the community is known" eat up every helping of horse-cr*p that Mr. Pitts can dish out, and request seconds.

notajayhawk 10 years ago

By the way, I feel compelled to congratulate Mr. Getz and his fellow "subscribers of the predominant persuasion for which the community is known - in this case, progressive readers" for their unflagging dedication to diversity and their openness to differing points of view. True enlightenment shines upon the city of Lawrence.

bisky1 10 years ago

typical liberal, opposing views must be censored

jlw53 10 years ago

And this LTE writer's words are NOT hateful???Such hypocrisy

cato_the_elder 10 years ago

If you don't like Thomas's columns, then don't read them. That's a considerably more mature way to deal with your hatred of his views than demanding censorship.

dandelion 10 years ago

I've been reading this forum for a couple of months, then decided to jump in here and make comments recently, because this goes out all over the world. You would think that Lawrence is filled with mean nasty racists, but in realty this town is filled with people who accept others, even Christians like Cal. People visiting this site from across the country might decide not to visit here if they are gay, disabled, from a different race or ethnic group, because of the hatefulness. Many progressive, liberal people who post end up going away, because they are bullied by the right wing jerks. People like Merril keep posting and Bozo gives them some of their own medicine. and bullies back. So I decided to sink to their level and bully back too. Cal is a moron who should be a forum poster, not a columnist. Bring on more George Will types, at least he's not a bully.

verity 10 years ago

Dandelion, you are so right on. Thank you for expressing it so well. The Lawrence I know and love is not what is often represented in these comments. Too many people, lacking a rational argument, attack in a personal and vicious way.I personally know and used to work with Mr. Getz and he is a fine and thoughtful person and upstanding citizen. He (or anyone else) does not deserve the gutter talk on this forum.I usually don't read Cal Thomas, but saw the headline on the column in question and decided to read it. I, too, was appalled that he would presume to judge that Mr. Obama is not a Christian. If someone from another religion wrote the kinds of things about their religion that Mr. Thomas does about Christianity, I shutter to think what the verbal abuse would be. But somehow it's alright when a so-called Christian does it.

SettingTheRecordStraight 10 years ago

Mr. Getz's call for censorship is typical of the far left. If Mr. Getz and his "progressive" buddies don't like Cal Thomas or other writers with whom they disagree, they will surely find plenty to read at the Solidarity library.

james bush 10 years ago

Obama's 20-year spiritual mentor/advisor: " Nah! Nah! Nah! Not God bless America, God damn America"..................now that's the brand of christian beliefs we want.

Rationalanimal 10 years ago

Thank you Mr. Getz for expressing, albeit unwittingly, how liberals only tolerate viewpoints conforming to their own. For marxists like yourself, "diversity" is a subterfuge used to deflect attention away from the political totalitarianism you insist to thrust upon America. There is nothing diverse or tolerant to be found among America's marxists.

Haiku_Cuckoo 10 years ago

If Bill Getz was a German in the 1930's he would certainly be leading the charge to burn books that don't promote the approved line if thinking.(It's official. Godwin's Law just kicked in!)

dirkleisure 10 years ago

Notice how there are no comments on the "horsecr*p" Mr. Pitts shares in his column today:http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/jun/15/reading_shouldnt_be_guilty_pleasure/Funny how nobody ever wants to defend what Cal Thomas is saying, only his supposed "right" to say it.Rather than the knee-jerk "censorship!" reaction, how about taking some time to actually consider Mr. Getz's letter? How about actually attempting to defend the ridiculous positions Cal Thomas takes, apparently in an effort to "stir debate."If I go into a crowded movie theater and yell "FIRE!", I've certainly stirred debate over whether or not the place is ablaze, eh? The Journal-World would be better served turning off Mr. Thomas' spigot and going with a conservative columnist who, like Mr. Pitts on the left, actually makes reasonable points and presents defenses to his (or her) position.There is enough "because I said so" happening in grade schools throughout this city, it shouldn't also be happening on the paper's opinion page.

mom_of_three 10 years ago

I didn't like Cal Thomas' column either, but I usually don't read it, because it is one sided, critical, and totally opposite of what Cal Thomas says to follow. I don't care if the paper prints it, but I think Obama represents more of the country and all religions by not alienating any. It's so much more than Cal Thomas could say.

dandelion 10 years ago

And one of Bush's spiritual advisors, Robertson, said that 9/11 was God's punishment. He helped get Bush elected. But that's ok, because he's white, right? It's ok for white preachers to say it. What a joke!

Romans832 10 years ago

Getz writes: "The response might be, "If you don't like it, just don't read it." Ah, choice: the shibboleth for ducking responsible judgment." Change a few words... "If you don't like aborton, don't have one." "Ducking responsible judgment" is a good description! Responsible judgment? The law requires "informed consent," but I have to wonder just how much of the "truth" is presented there. Someone who was aborted testified that the tech would not allow her to see the sonogram prior to the abortion. If it's not a baby, why shouldn't the patient be able to see it? All in the name of "choice."

james bush 10 years ago

"Stink bombs in elevator shafts".............obviously someone whose experience with stink is well-founded and similarly worth nothing.

dirkleisure 10 years ago

STRS - it isn't about "other writers," it is about Cal Thomas.There are no other writers that even compare.Nice try.

1029 10 years ago

Bravo, Bill Getz. Cal Thomas is a pathetic scared little man. I think his columns are funny, but it is scary to think that there are idiots out there who are reading his columns and thinking they are well-written and insightful. I guess it could be worse, though. The journal-world could have Jonah Goldburg (sp?) or Michelle "I hate America" Malikin (sp?) instead.

craigers 10 years ago

If the answers in Cals article from Obama were factual, then his statement and column were correct. It is the implication that Cal is saying one way is right and the other is wrong that infuriates people.

bondmen 10 years ago

Christianity, like any term in which meaning is poured, must have a specific definition and whether one likes the explanation or not, its particulars must be so delineated. The majority would be well served to not rely on so called progressives to do the defining of such important terms, especially the word Christianity. Let them deconstruct other foundations of Western Civilization as they have been busy doing but keep your dirty, grimy mitts off Christianity! Your spiritual blinders ill equip your judgment; you make your bed willingly with the enemy, darkness and depravity; as a result you are a hostile witness. Don't be dismayed though, after all it is your choice.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 10 years ago

"If the answers in Cals article from Obama were factual, then his statement and column were correct. It is the implication that Cal is saying one way is right and the other is wrong that infuriates people."Anyone who claims that their version of some silly superstition is the "right one" is a true crackpot.

cato_the_elder 10 years ago

DL: "There are no other writers who even compare."Well, there was one: Molly Ivins was every bit as partisan, feisty, and exasperating to her detractors as Thomas is to his, but she's gone. I always thought that if the J-W had run her columns, especially those criticizing everything that was ever said, done, or thought by Bush I or II, it might have caused the Cal-haters to tone it down a bit - but that was probably wishful thinking, as he will always evoke their hatred. Many of us knew after he wrote his sincere and kindly column about Senator Kennedy that his next column, whatever it was, would be all that it would take to send the local neo-marxists into another tizzy, demanding censorship of his views. Observing the knee-jerk reactions of proven Cal-haters is as entertaining, and completely predictable, as listening to the sophomoric whining of KC sports talk show radio callers after Chiefs or Royals games.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.