Bizarre Star Tribune Letter to the Editor

[ISUGRADIA]

This one came off very weird to me. Am I tone deaf? Is this some attempt at satire or is this guy serious? "Luminous purple shirts and gaudy pink ties do not represent a workforce united in the stand against terror." WTF?

http://www.startribune.com/stories/563/5187695-2.html

"Since Target and other corporations have mandated the change to suits and ties for men, I've noticed a disturbing trend as I walk through the skyways downtown. Most have embraced the change and look very handsome in their new apparel. Unfortunately, a few individuals are trying to make a mockery of the uniform.

Blue spiked hair does not go with a suit and tie; neither do large gold earrings. Luminous purple shirts and gaudy pink ties do not represent a workforce united in the stand against terror. Wrinkled shirts, blue jeans with sport coats, Daffy Duck ties, shaggy goatees, long hair past the collar -- all of it contradicts the intended message.

How are we going to present our new button-down conservative American values to the world when these malcontents refuse to behave? It is the 1960s revisited."

Richard Crose, Bloomington.

[crispini]

1. WTF?

He's got to be kidding, right? That's one total loon.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

2. This guy sounds like some old grouch who

himself is stuck in the 1960s. I'll bet anything that in 1968, he was walking around mumbling, "You can't tell the boys from the girls anymore."

[atommom]

3. Very weird. It's hard to tell what kind of a crackpot he is...

a sarcastic crackpot, or an uptight conservative crackpot! He should have given us a little more to work with here... :shrug:

[xchrom]

4. somebody forgett to take his nice pill today?

richard, daaaarrrrrling, they have to Know you're being sarcastic.
otherwise, you're just another bitch, and quite possibly one with unforgiveably bad taste.

[ixion]

5. yeah, I'll tell ya what you can do with your button-down

conservative 'Murikan values. :grr: :mad:

[Eric J in MN]

6. My guess is that he's sincere, because

why would someone who doesn't object to men with "blue spiked hair" or "purple shirts" bother to write that letter?

[Dickie Flatt]

9. For a laugh

Obviously a bit too subtle

[Deja Q]

7. Stand against terror? And I for one am proud to see the 1960s revisited.

It's called INDIVIDUALITY. WHich is one thing I thought the US stood for. :shrug:

[Dickie Flatt]

8. Spotted this too - I'm 95% sure he is NOT SERIOUS

"our new button-down conservative American values"

Come on. How could someone say that with a straight face? This is clumsy comedy.

[dflprincess]

10. That's how I took it too.

And, we don't know how the Strib may have edited the letter. Maybe they left out a line or two that would have made the writer's meaning more obvious.

[Dickie Flatt]

11. I hate the editing

The PiPress butchered one of my letters. They should contact the author to agree on any edits; sometimes it seems like they're more concerned with getting in under a word limit than with presenting a coherent letters page.

[Zookeeper]

12. I had to read that letter twice this morning....

and had to think about it for a minute before deciding that it is way too subtle sarcasm.

The tip-off is, "...a workforce united in the stand against terror."

OR, Richard is just a crazy, paranoid crank.

[no name no slogan]

13. "Back in my day, the men were men and the women were women..."

"Nowdays, I can't even tell the men from the women".

Sounds like a big joke at many peoples' expense, to me-- especially since the guy lives in Richfield. You usually don't see cranks like this so close into town-- they're usually from some place north of Red Lake and have tinfoil over their windows to ward of stray microwaves.

:P