The north vs. the south in 'nor'easter'

The high tide of the recent northeast storm has passed, and the sun is shining, but the word 'nor'easter' remains, and I guess it will continue to appear in print and on TV weathercasts. It was on the front page of the Nov. 15 edition of The Pilot in the caption of the photo of the huge beached vessel at Sandbridge.

The use of the word 'nor'easter' has been called a 'festering sore in today's marine and weather journalism.' I think it survives because it is apparently an irresistible example of fake authenticity and, as such, is often used in newspapers and by broadcasters (especially TV weather people).

It is not authentic, but it looks as if it is. I think it is supposed to make us feel that we are using the New England pronunciation, but I've read that New Englanders (real ones) avoid pronouncing the letter 'r' but do include the 'th' so the phonetic spelling might be 'notheastuh.'

But we are not New Englanders. In northeast North Carolina we used to say something spelled phonetically 'nawtheastuh,' but we avoided the 'r' sound also.

Anyway, every time I heard a weather report during the recent northeast storm I had to endure this 'nor'easter' thing. It was as irritating as when we used to hear George W. Bush pronounce nuclear as 'nukular.' We are pretty much spared that experience nowadays, but unfortunately, 'nor'easter' has replaced 'nukular' as the fingernails-on-the-blackboard experience for some of us.

I know I'm shouting into the wind here. I can hope only that someone someday might slip up and say on TV or write in The Pilot 'northeaster,' pronounced 'nawtheastuh.'

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its Web sites. Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Report Violation" link below the comment.

Holiday at the beach

We have lived in Colonial Place for 20 years and are big Norfolk advocates. The prospect of being without power for several days after a storm is not new but led us to call local hotels on Friday. One place was full, another quoted full rates though it was without cable and Internet, and we received a terse, 'You better provide your credit card now because we only have one room left at $300.' Is that really the Friday night rate right on the Elizabeth River?

So we called the 31st Street Hilton in Virginia Beach, and imagine our pleasant surprise at being told right away that they noticed this was a local call and were offering a special rate of $89 per night for an ocean view room to people affected by the storm. We spent two lovely nights in this beautiful hotel with quite a few locals and truly appreciate the outstanding corporate citizenship displayed by the management at the 31st Street Hilton.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its Web sites. Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Report Violation" link below the comment.

Rebuttal: predatory lenders

Re 'Curb predatory lenders,' letters, Nov. 16: The writer, a registered lobbyist for the South Carolina-based Center for Responsible Lending, advocated for a 36 percent interest cap on loans in Virginia. What she failed to mention, however, is that for short-term payday lenders, a 36 percent cap is effectively a ban. Her proposal would plunge hundreds of Virginia employers into bankruptcy in the middle of an unemployment crisis. Evaluating a two-week loan by its annual interest rate makes no sense. Just as hotel prices are quoted by the night, not the year, two-week loans should be judged by their actual cost, not by some hypothetical future expense.

Virginia payday lenders make modest profits charging $15 for a $100 loan. A 36 percent rate cap would cut that down to $1.38, erasing any profits and making it literally impossible to stay in business.

The writer's plan means two things for Virginia: higher unemployment and fewer financial options.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its Web sites. Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Report Violation" link below the comment.

Clarity on health care

Re 'Activists in insurance debate forget who's really affected,' David Ashe op-ed, Nov. 15: This was the clearest explanation of President Obama's health care plan that I have read. Ashe succinctly laid out the points in a way that can be easily understood by the average person, without the confusing rhetoric that has been coming from both supporters and opponents of the plan.

It is such an important issue that I believe you would do our community a great public service by reprinting it. Everyone who may be affected by the plan needs to read that column.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its Web sites. Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Report Violation" link below the comment.

Sign of submission

I am outraged that President Obama would bow to any foreign leader, but most especially to the Emperor of Japan. My father was a Bataan Death March survivor and told me stories of GIs being bayoneted to death for not bowing deeply enough for their Japanese captors. In the last 60 years, Japan has become our good ally and a first-class economic power. But the submission of Obama was a clear insult to millions of veterans who suffered and died to ensure our leaders would never have to bow to any foreign potentate.

President Obama owes the few survivors of this period, who suffered at the hands of the Japanese, a sincere apology.

The president and our nation should respect all legitimate foreign leaders. However, bowing and showing submission are actions we gave up after Yorktown.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its Web sites. Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Report Violation" link below the comment.

Gay marriage is inevitable Re: '0 for 31 on gay marriage,' letters, Nov. 12: I take exception to the writer's ironic objection to 'forced affirmation of homosexuality under penalty of law,' while then suggesting a federal amendment banning homosexuality. If the writer objects to asserting one's own moral view through law, he should object to asserting his own.

While it is perfectly reasonable for religious groups to not recognize a union contradictory to its teachings, it is equally unreasonable for our society not to allow two consenting adults to legally arrange their lives and receive the same benefits as all others.

When stated honestly, disapproval for homosexuality is rooted in one's own personal beliefs, not in any consequence to society. There is nothing a homosexual couple can be guilty of that a heterosexual couple cannot be.

Approaching the broader point, it would be very easy to imagine this letter 50 years ago being written about interracial marriage.

That view does not prevail now because it is wrong. In 50 years, this one will not prevail either. A majority opinion does not excuse unreasonable fear, and time inevitably changes it. As Einstein said, 'The only cure for racism and prejudice is enlightenment and education; this is a slow and painstaking process.'

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its Web sites. Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Report Violation" link below the comment.

Breast cancer betrayal

AFTER READING 'Mammograms before 50, self-exams discredited' (front page, Nov. 17), I felt as though I had been punched in the stomach. All the strides that millions of Americans have made over the years to put breast cancer on the map were just spit on by a panel of uninformed, deep-pocket bureaucrats.

I am the third generation in my family to be diagnosed with breast cancer, at the ripe old age of 25. I found the lump doing my monthly breast self-exam. I was not able to have a mammogram, as my insurance company thought that three relatives with breast cancer warranted me a denial of benefits.

So I turned to the only advocate for breast cancer that I then could rely on myself. That breast exam saved my life, and I am now three years in remission. Many of my dear friends in their 20s have not been so lucky.

I have watched more than 50 women, all under age 40, die of breast cancer since I was diagnosed.

This study definitely is an indication that the guidelines will be more lax and the insurance companies will have more ammunition to deny women of their right for a mammogram.

I can say with assurance than no one on this 'expert panel' has lost someone they love to breast cancer, but if they have, I am deeply saddened by how heartless our government has become.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its Web sites. Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Report Violation" link below the comment.

Cancer death panel

I was appalled to learn about the new guidelines for mammograms. Not only will doctors no longer encourage women to get mammograms at certain ages, but insurance companies will probably no longer pay for them outside of the guidelines.

My mother-in-law recently died at the age of 91, after being diagnosed with breast cancer 12 years ago, at the age of 79. My brother-in-law's sister, now 61, was diagnosed in 1992 at the age of 47 with breast cancer. Both had reoccurrences that were treated, both would have fallen out of the new mammogram guidelines, neither had a family history of breast cancer, and both would probably have died long ago if they had waited for physical signs to show up.

The only winner is the insurance industry, which will save on the cost of mammograms and prolonged treatment plans. President Obama talks about preventive care as one of the goals of a revised health care program, including preventive screenings. For all those people out there who oppose any change, can you now see that death panels are being set up without any legislative action?

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its Web sites. Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Report Violation" link below the comment.

Early detection success

To reverse the long-standing recommendations of the American Cancer Society and move the mammogram screening age from 40 to 50 is ludicrous. In 1977, my mother lost her battle with breast cancer. She fought quietly for eight years.

There were no support groups, 5K runs, or pink ribbons. Now we have pink martini nights, bra ha-ha's, and pink ribbons as far as the eye can see. There is heightened breast cancer awareness, and a little longer wait to schedule a mammogram.

Above all, there is early detection, and this equals survivorship no matter what a group of pencil-pushing, bean-counting government analysts conclude.

At age 45, I was diagnosed with Stage II breast cancer during an annual mammogram. It was an early detection.

My battle was waged with chemotherapy, radiation therapy and surgery. In addition, I have a team of devoted doctors and the support of family, friends and fellow survivors.

A ponytail now swings from my once-bald head. I cannot imagine if I had not been diagnosed until I was 50 years old.

At 49, I am now a 4 year survivor.

The argument against mammograms creating false positives is not realistic to all the 'young' women whom I have sat alongside in treatment centers.

Early detection catches a cancer when it is not only smaller and contained but when a higher rate of survival is achieved with less treatment.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its Web sites. Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Report Violation" link below the comment.

Breast cancer roulette

The breast cancer task force admits that mammography screenings in woman between the ages of 39 and 49 reduces the risk of death by 15 percent. It suggests the 'unnecessary treatment' can cause pain from biopsies, anxiety and distress.

I would choose a slight discomfort from biopsies, a little anxiety and distress to prevent possible death from breast cancer. What is most frightening is that this task force sets the standards for the preventive services that insurance would be required to cover. This could translate into no covered screenings for women under 50.

Apparently, the task force has decided that the cost savings outweigh the number of deaths that would occur. This epitomizes the practice of placing a dollar amount on the value of life.

Let's hope your daughters are not in the 15 percentile that develop breast cancer before the age of 50 after the 'government health care guidelines' are enacted.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its Web sites. Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Report Violation" link below the comment.