Replacing or altering the Arch would be like tearing down the Sphinx or the Great Wall of China. It's a monument to our history, and no, little kids don't enjoy it too much, but that's because they are little, you idiots. They aren't old enough to understand yet, and if you think that the Arch is boring, either you have been too many times, or you aren't mature enough to grasp the history, detail and workmanship that went into making the dream of the Arch into reality.
Now, I know the Arch isn't the greatest thing in the world, there are things more exciting, taller, wider, but I've seen people come from all over the world to see the Arch as it is, to see our history, not to see some stupid Slinky made of garbage or already-slutty celebrities covered in condiments. Don't change the Arch; change your minds, you stupid, money-hungry bastards.
E. Mo, via the Internet
At least somebody gets it: Ummm...I don't think the guy [above] realized the story was meant to be funny. Goodness, some people are so literal.
L.K., via the Internet
FEATURE, JULY 15, 2010
MORE ON FATHER COOPER'S CABIN
Remember Elizabeth Smart: It does not matter if the priest is living or dead ["Sins of the Father," Nicholas Phillips]. The man in this story went after him as soon as his memory was jolted back into place! How dare someone write that they think it's a shame the RFT is attacking a dead priest! How about how dare that priest do horrible things to these young men!
And as for the comment that the young man in the story returned to the cabin after the first incident: Doesn't anyone remember the Elizabeth Smart situation when she denied being herself? Who knows what kind of hold these sick individuals have on victims to make them come back or stay with them? And it was proven that Elizabeth had been sexually abused. The priest's cabin was either purchased or maintained through money he had received because of his occupation! The church needs to recognize that there is a growing problem. The Catholic Church tries to pride itself on helping its followers and then turns right around and disregards them!
I know the victim in this story, and his integrity is stronger than anyone I know. This is not something he would make up to gain a buck! It is truly horrible that the church knew of this priest's actions, and continued to juggle him through parishes! The church is fully responsible! I hope John Doe prevails for all the victims out there!
Michelle M., via the Internet
GUT CHECK, JULY 7, 2010
LARRY CONNERS RESPONDS
Sage advice from a TV icon: Regarding Ian Froeb's article on my wife, Janet, and me at Jeff Ruby's Steakhouse ["Does Larry Conners Have to Tase a Bartender," Ian Froeb]. I'm not sure what the purpose was, but I'll take it for a laugh.
I can't complain when Ian says that I look "tan and fit." I certainly appreciate Ian's wife thinking that I look "handsome." Please thank her, but tell her that she might need glasses. The truth is: Janet makes me look better than I am.
Now, concerning my complaint about our drinks. First, I certainly would never demean a server; my daughters spent many years doing that very difficult job. While wanting the drinks corrected, I did have some fun, acting as if this was "most serious."
So what were the problems? Jeff Ruby's and our server, Matt, did a superb job that night, but I'm sure they got a little behind. So, when Janet's martini arrived it was not cold, not even cool. It was warm. I am not a martini drinker, but cold is better. As Janet says: "I like it very cold. Shake it like you stole something." Regarding my statement that my drink wasn't "brown enough": Jack on the rocks should not be Jack with water. Our server, Matt, understood and was more than happy to make the drinks right.
So, I never even considered "tasing" him. I did say that I live by the rule: When you serve Jack with water, you ruin two good drinks.
Larry Conners, St. Louis
Subscribe now to get the latest news delivered right to your inbox.