Tit-for-Tat

 

I appreciate Mr. Brooks' lamentation of the loss of give and take in our political system at the federal level (David Brooks, The Rot Creeping Into Our Minds. New Yourk Times, October 24, 2025: A20),.

However he fails to appreciate that  the Democratic minority  are engaged in a game of tit-for-tat with the Republicans. Republicans have not even tried to constrain Mr. Trump's failure to adhere to the budgets passed by Congress. His recissions have decimated agencies and programs supported by Congress. The Republican majority have just accepted his cuts. 

This is the Repubican "tit," the refusal  to support a continuing resolution is the Democrats "tat."

Research has shown that tit-for tat is the best strategy  for re-establishing a cooperative relationship. Not that I am holding my breath.

Sent to New York Times

Traditional marriage

 I must query one phrae in your columnist's piece (Carine Hajjar.  A new era at Harvard: Once shunned, conservative students are now welcome to share their views, Boston Globe, October 10, 2025:A9)

In her description of Michael Knowles, she comments that he "supports traditional marriage."

What does this mean? Is it that he opposes marriage between two persons of the same sex? Or does it mean that he believes that wives should not enter the paid workforce?

In both cases I vehemently oppose his view.

All persons deserve the right to marry persons of their choice and all coouples deserve the right to make the domestic arrangements that suit them.

Sent to Boston Globe