The Readers: Executions, Power Plants

The reaction was fairly divided to Thursday's column about Florida's last botched lethal injection. Naturally, some folks didn't care whether the guy suffered:

I bet he was more comfortable than he would have been with "Old Sparky!" More bleeding heart BS!

Others helpfully came up with suggestions for alternative methods: firing squad, hanging, even gradual and painless oxygen deprivation (that one came from a World War II B-17 crew member). One even suggested a guillotine -- I don't know if he was joking, but in fact the guillotine WAS originally intended as a more humane way of execution. Them French guys gave it a bad reputation, though...

I also am still getting reaction from a recent column about requiring customers to pay up front for nuclear power plants. Most folks were against the idea, but I did get some lively feedback from those who said it was only fair. My favorite lumped me in with some disfavored members of Congress:

The problem is that the process created by self -appointed defenders of the public like yourself, Commissar Waxman of The People's Republic of California, Markey of Massachusetts and other feeders at the public trough ... is as onerous as it is hideously expensive.  In so much as the process was created in the public interest, what is unfair about asking the customers to pay for it?

Comments

[Lorraine Margeson]

Hi Howard!!

Welcome to the bloggesphere!! I'm glad that Harry is looking that well still.....send him my best and a pat on the head!
Can't wait to see how this "NEW TECHNO HOWARD" works for 'ya! Cheers!!!

[John Horsting]

Asking the public to pay for the power plants yet to be built is like Toys-R-Us asking the public to build them a chain of stores because: look at all the fun the kids will have.