Obama just switched sides during Army-Navy game Re: “President Obama cut out early from Army-Navy game,” From Readers, Dec. 21
Katie Holland complained that the headline saying that “President Obama attends Army-Navy game at FedEx Field” should have read “Obama cuts out early from Army-Navy game.” If the lady had listened or looked at the game a little longer, she would have seen that the commentators who said “Maybe he has to get home for dinner” made a big mistake.
I watched the game. In actuality, the president merely switched sides of the field. He did this twice, spending one-half of the game with Army fans and a large portion of the third quarter with the Navy (or vice versa). The point is, after leaving whatever side he was on, the president went back to the other side.
Ellis L. Collins
Washington
Nonbelievers can also be good people
Re: “Death of an atheist,” Dec. 20
Cal Thomas claims that in death, Christopher Hitchens must finally know better. Meeting the Almighty, Thomas argues, has shown Hitchens that he was wrong about his atheism and wrong about many other things besides.
Thomas uses Hitchens’ death to ask: “Why contribute to charity, or perform other good deeds?” if one does not believe in God. He then compares all atheists to Ebenezer Scrooge, implying that their primary and perhaps only concern is their own survival. Thus, they lack incentives to help others.
His argument parallels the same logic government has used to justify the welfare state: People will not contribute on their own without being compelled by a higher power.
Thomas holds atheists to an impossible and unfair standard. He cites Mark 10:18, where Jesus associated “good” only with God. Since atheists do not believe that, they cannot be or do good. Well, we Jews do not accept the New Testament either. Are we barred from doing good as well?
Amy Mandler
Arlington
Huntsman deserves second look from GOP loyalists
Re: “Newsmakers,” Dec. 19
Although I am not fully knowledgeable about Jon Huntsman and his candidacy, I have felt for some time that he is not being given enough serious consideration, particularly compared to candidates like Michele Bachmanm and Newt Gingrich. I actually hope that Mr. Huntsman does well in New Hampshire, if for no other reason than to help keep the Republican Party better grounded.
To date, Huntsman has appeared on TV as a serious, articulate and reasonable-sounding candidate — which has been so lacking in the GOP political horse race. More serious consideration of Huntsman from the party faithful would actually make the GOP seem more reasonable and relevant at this time in our economic and political history.
In short, if GOP loyalists are more interested in overly passionate, loud-sounding and bordering-on-outrageous candidates, they can continue not being further interested in a Huntsman-type candidate.
However, if that trend continues, the GOP itself might become irrelevant in the near future.
Kenneth Lemberg
Silver Spring
