Letters to the editor for Thursday, Dec. 18

So far the Star Tribune has run two letters repeating the right-wing talking point that Muntadhar al-Zeidi's shoe thrown at President Bush demonstrates "free speech" and somehow vindicates our illegal and pointless invasion of Iraq.

But the Star Tribune hasn't yet run any letters pointing out that Al-Zeidi was subsequently tortured and kicked nearly to death in an Iraqi prison, just as he would have been under Saddam Hussein. Some improvement.

ROBERT ALBERTI, MINNEAPOLIS

•••

It appears that the biggest news story of the moment is the Iraqi journalist throwing his shoes at President Bush. This is apparently more important than the plummeting violence rates in Iraq, the budget surplus in Iraq or the imminent withdraw of coalition troops in Iraq because conditions there are so good.

A logical examination of the incident reveals a message that is not what the liberal media want. They want it to be a humorous incident, worthy of the late-night comics and the "news" persons who are no better than comics. They want it to be an incident revealing that the Iraq war is a failure, that the Iraqi people hate our president and that we should, too. The facts are contrary.

As attested to in the first paragraph, the Iraq war has been anything but a failure. This shoe-throwing journalist now has the ability to commit such a crime without being punished the way Iraq's previous president would have, namely a lovely bit of torture followed by a pleasant beheading and a nice mustard-gassing of his entire village. Why is Saddam gone? Why are people now free enough to express themselves this way? President Bush, that's why.

If a journalist, perhaps a Fox News Republican, were to throw his shoes at Barack Obama, would it be an incident worthy of the same snickers that the liberals on MSNBC gave to this incident? And, while we are on the topic, since when is any assault, especially one on the president of the United States, entertaining?

TAYLOR SWANSON, ROLLA, MO.

There will be many individuals voicing anger over a Dec. 14 story reported on by Maura Lerner in which the American worker takes on higher health costs for choosing to follow unhealthy habits.

But the 400-pound gorilla in the room has evolved into a 400-pound coworker, and those are hard to ignore. Rather than being an invasion of civil liberties, these programs try to make the unduly burdensome costs of health care more fair for both the public and the companies that employ them.

Car insurance raises your rates if you have tickets, have been in accidents, or choose to drink and drive. Life insurance charges you more if you smoke, have high cholesterol or participate in potentially dangerous hobbies. Why should health insurance be any different?

For those who denounce this trend as an invasion of your rights, you are mistaken. You are still free to participate in as many unhealthy habits as you want. Just know that your wallet will be going on a diet in order to pay for them.

SAM BOESER, MINNEAPOLIS

The federal government's Wall Street bailout included provisions to restrict compensation provided to executives. However, when the United Auto Workers union is requested to make similar sacrifices by Congress to pass the Big Three bailout, congressional Democrats balk.

It's comforting to see that no matter how much "change" is made, the same old class warfare is still being waged.

IAN TURNER, ST. PAUL

At $4 a gallon, millions of consumers were driving less in more fuel-efficient vehicles, using mass transit, paying attention to their speed and squeezing the most from every gallon they pumped.

Yes, there is a simple lesson: We need not rush to drill in environmentally sensitive areas like the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska. The quickest way to lower price is conservation.

J. TODD EMBURY, RAMSEY

Regarding " 'Outrageous' designation irks fans of Greenway bike center" (Dec. 13): Does anybody find it odd that a senator from an oil state would object to the bicycle center in Minneapolis? I ride a bike to work frequently, saving several gallons of gas each time. I am certain that all of my fellow bike commuters were primary factors in the collapse in the price of oil. Isn't that what the senator's objection is really about?

PATRICK J. GUERNSEY, ST. PAUL