Dan Rodricks

Thanks to Dan Rodricks for shining the spotlight on that annoying expression, "spot on" ("Razing the JFX, lowering O's expectations," April 2). It is a British way of thinking that something can be perfectly correct, while in America we know that nothing is perfect. The ultimate irony is that the "spot on" users are referring to Supreme Court arguments where neither side is perfect and a decision will probably be split 5-4. The broccoli analogy was a specious statement by Justice Antonin Scalia to oversimplify the argument and appeal to the anti-government movement.

Now your opinion writers are masking their invective. I thought it was a new and fair Dan Rodricks in the first two paragraphs of his recent column ("Razing the JFX, lowering O's expectations," April 3) that reflected the headline. But the remainder of the column was the usual rationalization of President Barack Obama's poor health care law. Healthcare should be improved - coverage for uninsured and an extra year for kids is fine. But we don't need 2,000-plus pages to do that.

In his recent column ("Razing the JFX, lowering O's expectations," April 3), Dan Rodricks continues his attacks on the Supreme Court for asking the tough questions of the lawyers presenting the Obama administration's case for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Mr. Rodricks refers to the observation of The Sun's Eileen Ambrose 's that two years after the law's passage, most Americans don't know what it does. Mr. Rodricks fails to mention that the Democratic Congress failed to know this also but voted for it anyway.

Unfortunately, Dan Rodricks ' column about our so-called "progressive" tax system in Maryland ("Land of pleasant living - thanks to your taxes, folks" March 25) has it wrong. The alleged "rate" of income tax is not the same as the true percentage of your annual income that you pay under state and federal income tax systems. You can have an apparently high rate, but given the abundance of tax shelters and various tax breaks that are available primarily to the wealthy, you can end up paying little or no tax. For decades now, the wealthy having been paying much, much less than the middle class in terms of the true percentage of total income.

Dan Rodricks ' column "Maybe Bobby Zirkin should be a Republican" (March 20) really cracked me up. Between Mr. Rodricks' column and the editorial slant of The Sun, I am led to believe that if you don't completely agree in lockstep with the party line, then you are not a good Democrat. I paid attention to this, and Sen. Bobby Zirkin said it best: One serving the people must not only be able to dissent against other political parties, but also within one's own. Not being able to do this doesn't serve those you were elected to represent.

I was disappointed and, quite frankly, surprised to read Dan Rodricks ' column in which he wrote that based upon his opposition to the tax increase, Senator Bobby Zirkin should switch political parties and become a Republican ("Bobby Zirkin: secret Republican?" March 20). As a guest on Mr. Rodricks' radio program last year, I discussed my decision to support marriage equality and the fact that I was the only Republican senator to do so; support, I might add, that Mr. Rodricks applauded.

It isn't often that I find myself agreeing with columnist Dan Rodricks , but his idea of more really local TV and less redundant reporting is one I've had myself ("Let's put more 'local' in local TV," March 11). Why not add even more topics to his list? How about a 30-minute spotlight on local historical sites, of which our area has literally hundreds. Or a scenic cruise segment, for which, again, there are many candidates in our region? You could ask for viewers' home video input.

Regarding Dan Rodricks ' column on the problems created on the Anne Arundel County Council "when its only black member went off to federal prison for failing to file a tax return" ("An embarrassing deadlock in Arundel," Feb. 26). Let's get the facts straight: It was not just one year's tax return, it was multiple years of tax returns. Why does Mr. Rodricks attempt to minimize the seriousness of the crime or gloss over it? Also, isn't the issue who is best qualified the fill the vacancy, not whether he is white or African-American but who will do the best job for the constituents?

In his column denouncing Maryland Citizens for Responsible Government, Baltimore Sun columnist Dan Rodricks dismissed our concerns about transgender people in ladies' bathrooms with the advice that we females use our restrooms to "Go in, do your business, and get out, no eye contact. Oh, and wash your hands. " ("What's this obsession with transgender people and bathrooms?" Feb. 12.) It's obvious Mr. Rodricks has no idea of what women do in bathrooms, and why should he? Women recognize each other.

Will Maryland voters see super PAC money spent here to influence the outcome of an election in 2012? If a certain congressional race gets close - say, the general election in the reshaped Sixth District - it's possible, even likely. Only two of the state's eight House seats are Republican. With the new Sixth in danger of slipping to the Democrats, some fat-cat super PAC might decide to throw money into advertising on behalf of the Republican candidate. Vice-versa if the Democrat needs an edge.