Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollections

Growling at Goldberg

August 15, 2009

Re "Dogs don't care about dogma," Opinion, Aug. 11

I'm happy to read that Jonah Goldberg loves his dog, Cosmo; it somehow makes him more human. But does he realize there are millions of Americans who don't have access to the expensive and easily accessed medical care that Goldberg is able to provide for his pet?

I'm sure he and Cosmo did not spend an entire day sitting in some free-clinic waiting room, nor did they anxiously seek care at an emergency room. And of course Cosmo, regardless of any preexisting doggy conditions, was not denied medical treatment or the battery of tests necessary for these treatments, nor did he lose his coverage if he lost his job chasing balls in the doggy park. I begrudge Cosmo none of these advantages.

I like dogs very much. I just can't help thinking of the millions of Americans who would sure envy Goldberg's dog.

Jean Sapin

Sherman Oaks

--

How did a hard-core right-winger like Goldberg end up taking his dog to the neurologist? Not just "because his dog needed one," as Goldberg claims -- but because he could afford it. Plenty of dogs in this country need medical care that far exceeds their owners' ability to pay.

I wonder if, given Goldberg's celebration of all that "innocent doggy goodness," he laments the fact that so many dogs are denied MRIs and spinal taps -- or are simply euthanized -- when they are sick and their owners don't have money to burn.

There may not be giant bureaucracies in veterinary care, but I'm not sure that a system in which patients are regularly put to sleep is one worth exalting, even if it does demonstrate a kind of effectiveness.

Maybe dogs aren't "beyond the reach of ideology" after all.

Susan McWilliams

Claremont

--

What a guy! Isn't Goldberg wonderful? How loving of Goldberg to take his dog to a neurologist. How wrong this liberal could be to think that a conservative doesn't have a heart.

I'm nauseated.

Goldberg's sweet column about taking his dog to a neurologist even though he is a conservative only shows how unfeeling he is. What about the parents who are told by their insurance company that they are not covered for a CAT scan for their child? What about the people who do not have insurance?

If true conservatives can think lovingly only of their animals and not of people, then we can only equate them as being heartless and uncaring toward people in need.

E. Rhoda Lewis

Palm Desert

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|