The paper comes out every Thursday, and I picked up the July 6th issue because the cover mentioned an essay about Rush Limbaugh and the Viagra situation. Gotta see if the lib was going to be funny about that; unfortunately, the essay wasn't as funny as the quotes I'd heard from Limbaugh on the topic. But there was still the rest of the paper to go.
One letter to the editor caught my eye. Apparently in a prior issue, someone wrote an article that portrayed pit bulls in a negative light. Here's the final paragraph of a letter in response to that article:
I would caution SN&R, a paper that proposes to be progressive in its thinking, from allowing further unfair slights such as Mr. Reany's to be printed amongst its pages. In all fairness, a dog of any classification should be judged on its individual deeds, not according to its mythical, and many times inaccurate, legend.
My regular readers can already see where I'm going to go with this.
No conservative would use the word "progressive" as the writer did above; we'd say "liberal". The writer is clearly a lib. In geometry terms, that's a "given".
So this lib thinks dogs should be judged on individual deeds and not as members of a breed (group). How many times must I say it? One of the many differences between the American Left and Right is that the right sees people as individuals while the Left sees people only as groups--hence, the identity politics of the left. And here we have a leftie who is willing to treat a dog as an individual. I wonder if he'd give the same consideration to a human.