Readers React to NOW, Ankle Biters

This week, readers sounded off on two controversial columns, both of which incited a mix of praise and disdain for their authors.

Wendy McElroy received mostly positive responses to her article, "Put Up or Shut Up," which focused on nefarious activities of the National Organization for Women.

Kenneth Adelman’s column "The Ankle Biters," which lambasted European and Arab nations' criticism of the United States, received a mix of responses, with many e-mails coming from Europe.

Here’s a sample of what readers had to say:

Mrs. Styles wrote:

This article was brave, truthful and shows a lack of hesitation in digging up the facts. I have watched article after article come from that showed much less cowardice than most other news sources. Keep up the good work. America, or at least those who aren’t afraid to see the reality of the situation, appreciates this factual reporting. Mr. Adelman, a resounding 'well done' is in order. 

Garth Jordahl wrote:

As an American who has lived in Europe and has many European friends, I don't totally agree with your assessment. The European military, or lack thereof, is at best a joke (exempting the U.K.). They spend about 2 percent of their annual GDP on their militaries. We spend more than 20 percent of our GDP. The reason they can spend so little is because we spend so much. Is it fair that the American people pay taxes to defend and stabilize countries that are more than able to do it themselves, but are simply unwilling to? We receive benefits from doing this such as army bases and expanded markets.

As to carping, well lets define who does the majority of it. I have never understood France's justification for their belief that they are a superior society. At least any American arrogance can be justified. We are the biggest thing on the block. We know it. They know it. How can Europeans possibly justify the expectation that they should dictate American actions and investment choices?

Although the Kyoto treaty is a flawed attempt, it is a framework for a beginning. The likelihood that any of the countries that have signed on could meet all of its requirements it laughable. But there are times in life, when you have to put your money where your mouth is. I think it would be a show of good faith to sign it. The details of implementation could then be hashed out when it is appropriate to do so.

While the constitution does not allow for a higher court than that of the Supreme Court, limited participation in the International Criminal Court would also be another show of good faith, as long as we have the right to overrule such a court. I don't see the validity in the argument that it would put us in a position where we would be the prime target for illegitimate litigation. There would have to be proof before such litigation would go forward. 

Mark A. Skoda wrote:

The Europeans do not like our unilateralism, but they are paralyzed within their bureaucracies and are unable to take a clear position on these issues. The EU-body homogenizes all perspectives in order to ensure "consensus". Unfortunately, this approach usually results in creating a camel rather than a race horse! The fact that the United States can speak with one voice is branded unilateralism. Our president stands by his convictions of a greater good. The result is that the European collective view is weak and pales against our own certainty.

Greg Richardson wrote:

Whether it’s because of jealousy, religion, or simple lack of international understanding, there is still a perceived idea that America is prepared to do whatever America wants to do, without the consultation of our allies. That is troubling. Consultation with our allies, military operations with our allies, and political and economic initiatives with our allies may be cumbersome, yet it is a necessity to maintain a global order, which we need and desire to maintain our standard of living. Much like the basketball star that forgets that his teammates, coaches, and fans help establish him as the best in the world, a nation, failing to acknowledge the contributions of its major allies, will see the team disintegrate from within.

Jay Robins wrote:

The link to your column was e-mailed to me by a relative who is by no means a conservative thinker. But the fact that she and others like her are tuning in to ideas like yours indicates to me that there is a change out here in America regarding our attitudes toward our international partners. I don't think that European leaders realize how drastic this change in attitude could be. Thanks again for stating precisely what many of us who are less articulate are unable to express.

From England, Darren Clare wrote:

I appreciate the fact that America is the sole remaining super power and embrace this. However the world does not revolve around America. America is a part of the world and should therefore take a more active interest in world affairs from an integrated, as opposed to separatist, perspective. I would like to thank Mr. Adelman for his article and hence provoking my response. I look forward to articles in the future.

Lara Di Sabato wrote:

I was very disappointed to see such blatant racism on your site. Is this what we call journalistic integrity? Mr. Adelman is using his position to spout hatred, ignorance and racism. How could you allow him to spew such hatred as he represents Fox News? Is this Fox's official stance? I have to say that I will no longer use Fox as my news site nor will my peers if I do not see a published apology on your site this week. I will not aid in the propagation of such hatred and I hope Fox News editors will have some understanding and deal with this racism appropriately.

George Mills from New Jersey wrote:

It is the objective and truthful writing by writers like you that makes me check each morning. You aren't afraid to be "politically incorrect." Thank you for telling the truth. Keep it up.

Thomas A. Simon wrote:

Thank you very much for providing a voice in opposition to the lies, hatred, name-calling, and downright fascism that spews forth from NOW and their mirror groups. For much too long, they have destroyed families, vilified men, and promoted societal decay based on misinformation, propaganda and deception. Please be sure to give Wendy McElroy the resources she needs to take on the misinformation campaign they are waging. She and Fox News have restored hope and faith that this nation will once again be a great place to have a family.

Sherri Gregory from Kansas City, Mo. wrote:

Thank you for having the courage to stand up to these self-serving organizations who pretend to be defending women when they are only out to promote their own agenda. I am very tired of reading these kinds of accusations in the media from organizations such as NOW. Do they think that the average person is not smart enough to figure out that their articles never seem to contain any facts, only allegations? I wish they would go quietly into the night and leave us women alone. I don't need or want this kind of an organization fighting for me or my children. Not all fathers, or fathers rights groups, are guilty of the horrible accusations that NOW made against them. I commend your courage in taking on such a vocal and hate-filled organization.

George Arconti Jr. from Maryland wrote:

I am a single father in Maryland. I was the first "Dad" to receive an order of sole custody, where the mother lost all parental rights. I have been a target of the NOW standard of ‘spread the hate.’ I don't know what you pay Wendy McElroy, but it is NOT ENOUGH. She is right on the money and up front. Give her a raise.

Randy Farmer from Baltimore, Md., wrote:

Anybody, women's groups included, who resort to intimidation and extortion to force "non-believers" to agree with them should be exposed and punished. Their rabid attacks on the innocent do a disservice to their cause and to the rights of women, men and children.

Bill Wagner wrote:

As a divorced father, I have faced some of these issues myself. I have always wondered at what point does a woman stop allowing herself to be victimized by other women? Cloaked in the guise of NOW, it has always seemed to me that it has been too easy for a woman to play herself off as some helpless by-product of a merciless society. Yet, more government programs and health research are focused on women's needs than those of men. Please keep writing...