I've recently been accepted as a book reviewer at Futures Mystery Anthology Magazine. My first review for them, of Killing Neptune's Daughter by Randall Peffer, is now available on their site: FMAM
Reviews for Blue Valor by Illona Haus, Wolves Eat Dogs by Martin Cruz Smith, and Philippene Fever, will be on the FMAM website in the near future.
Scroll down on this blog for a review of Ladies: A Conjecture of Personalities by Feather Schwarz Foster. I don't remember history lessons ever being this much fun!
I'll also be reviewing the following books in the near future: Crimes Against Commerce by fellow Writer's Chatroom member E.D. Easley, and A Red Dark Night by A.P. Fuchs. These reviews will be on my website blog, as well as, at Amazon.com and Barnes and Noble in the near future.
The latest articles penned by yours truly and appearing in Construction Equipment Guide magazine can be found at Cleveland Replacing Troubled Fulton Road Bridge and Award-Winning Mosser Construction Welcomes a Challenge.
Happy reading!
Linda J. Hutchinson
Freelance Writer/Copywriter
http://www.lindajhutchinson.com/
http://www.lindajhutchinson.com/blog
http://writerschatroom.com/
February 28, 2006
February 26, 2006
This article is free to publish so long as the author is notified and the complete article and bio box are also published, with no alterations:
Response to Congress and Condi Rice, “Stop Meddling!”
By Linda J. Hutchinson
Word count: 844
I'm just one person and my views will most likely seem naive to some, but: It seems to me that when Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, or Atheism is publicly rebuked or ridiculed anywhere in the world, the followers of that faith or belief generally pray for the offender—or not—and get back to what they need to be doing to make life the best it can be for themselves and their families and friends, including protecting themselves by whatever means necessary.
When Islam has been publicly rebuked or ridiculed, as in the recent publication of cartoons depicting Muhammad, there is rioting in the streets, death threats are issued, violence is assured. Extremists and zealots run amok wreaking as much havoc as possible, in very public showings.
My point is not to slander the personal walks of faith or beliefs of others, but to point out the differences in the actions of those believers and their practices, at least those differences that manifest publicly.
Why is it that mostly peace-loving Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindis, and Atheists will “turn the other cheek”, while so many Muslims seem willing to murder anyone who does not agree with them?
For the most part, non-Muslims are “free” to accept or not accept the teachings of their faith.
Muslims in Muslim-controlled countries are often murdered if they do not publicly bestow all to Muhammad. These Muslims are not allowed the freedom to choose, and do not accept the fact that non-Muslims are. If they do believe it, they also believe that it shouldn’t be so. From what I’ve read, listened to, and seen in the media, I’ve come to believe that many Muslims seem to believe that every person who does not believe exactly as they do, should die.
However, how many of us in the non-Muslim world hide our heads in the sand when it comes to what our own governments are doing? Our government here in America is working to erode the tenets of our belief systems by banning public displays of The Ten Commandments and banning “Under God” from our pledge of allegiance and on our legal tender.
Our President is currently overriding the rights and freedoms of our citizenry by using illegal wiretaps in the name of national security. And now our Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, is asking Congress for funds to provoke change in countries that don’t believe the same things that we believe in, to disrupt their governments and to pay for more extremism and violence—all in the name of promoting peace by fox-trotting in a new regime through insurgency and insurrection.
Our government has no more right to provide millions of dollars in aid and support to factions, political dissidents and human rights activists in Iran, than it would to give aid to the Nazi groups and home-grown terrorists within America’s borders. Let the people in Iran govern themselves, love or hate one another, and blow themselves up if that’s what they choose to do.
If Iran wants to provide an atmosphere where its citizenry kills one another off, why should we stop them? Stop them from doing it on our turf, of course, but why stop them from cleaning out their own waste system of extremists?
Why do we allow ourselves to be pulled into the bully ring? Attempting to choose a religion or government for Iran, or for Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Jordan, Albania, Afghanistan, and yes—even Iraq—or any other country, is not our business.
Why do we allow them to bully us? We know they will bring in the suicide bombers. We know they will create havoc. Why not let them do that to their own on their own sand lots, and with their own money?
Rather than attempting to change their religion or government, why not wait until they have—as North Korea, Russia, China, India, and Pakistan have most likely already done—enriched their uranium with the help of Russia and other so-called friends of the US, and then send in a highly trained multi-nation team of like-minded covert military personnel to ensure the product is decimated, again on the host countries’ own turf?
Seventy-five million dollars would go a long way in covering the costs of monitoring uranium enrichment, if the United Nations did the job it was designed to do. It is the United Nations that should be monitoring the nations of planet Earth, especially those who show ill-will towards its neighbors.
If the United States would cut off funding to rogue nations, would develop other sources and replacements for foreign oil, would use its military might to protect itself, and to educate every citizen within its borders, then other countries just might look at us as great examples of how it should be done.
Let the peoples of other countries want to be like us, rather than encumbering our grandchildren’s grandchildren with our huge military debt that we incurred while showing them our way is better.
We should never let our guard down, but we don’t have to meet the bully on his terms.
Bio:
Linda J. Hutchinson is a freelance writer and copywriter living in central Ohio. She has written for magazines, trade journals, newspapers, newsletters, websites and e-zines. As at-home on a construction site as in an art gallery, she’s been told she “cleans up real good”. Her first novel is in process.
Website: http://www.lindajhutchinson.com/
Email: Linda@lindajhutchinson.com
Response to Congress and Condi Rice, “Stop Meddling!”
By Linda J. Hutchinson
Word count: 844
I'm just one person and my views will most likely seem naive to some, but: It seems to me that when Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, or Atheism is publicly rebuked or ridiculed anywhere in the world, the followers of that faith or belief generally pray for the offender—or not—and get back to what they need to be doing to make life the best it can be for themselves and their families and friends, including protecting themselves by whatever means necessary.
When Islam has been publicly rebuked or ridiculed, as in the recent publication of cartoons depicting Muhammad, there is rioting in the streets, death threats are issued, violence is assured. Extremists and zealots run amok wreaking as much havoc as possible, in very public showings.
My point is not to slander the personal walks of faith or beliefs of others, but to point out the differences in the actions of those believers and their practices, at least those differences that manifest publicly.
Why is it that mostly peace-loving Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindis, and Atheists will “turn the other cheek”, while so many Muslims seem willing to murder anyone who does not agree with them?
For the most part, non-Muslims are “free” to accept or not accept the teachings of their faith.
Muslims in Muslim-controlled countries are often murdered if they do not publicly bestow all to Muhammad. These Muslims are not allowed the freedom to choose, and do not accept the fact that non-Muslims are. If they do believe it, they also believe that it shouldn’t be so. From what I’ve read, listened to, and seen in the media, I’ve come to believe that many Muslims seem to believe that every person who does not believe exactly as they do, should die.
However, how many of us in the non-Muslim world hide our heads in the sand when it comes to what our own governments are doing? Our government here in America is working to erode the tenets of our belief systems by banning public displays of The Ten Commandments and banning “Under God” from our pledge of allegiance and on our legal tender.
Our President is currently overriding the rights and freedoms of our citizenry by using illegal wiretaps in the name of national security. And now our Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, is asking Congress for funds to provoke change in countries that don’t believe the same things that we believe in, to disrupt their governments and to pay for more extremism and violence—all in the name of promoting peace by fox-trotting in a new regime through insurgency and insurrection.
Our government has no more right to provide millions of dollars in aid and support to factions, political dissidents and human rights activists in Iran, than it would to give aid to the Nazi groups and home-grown terrorists within America’s borders. Let the people in Iran govern themselves, love or hate one another, and blow themselves up if that’s what they choose to do.
If Iran wants to provide an atmosphere where its citizenry kills one another off, why should we stop them? Stop them from doing it on our turf, of course, but why stop them from cleaning out their own waste system of extremists?
Why do we allow ourselves to be pulled into the bully ring? Attempting to choose a religion or government for Iran, or for Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Jordan, Albania, Afghanistan, and yes—even Iraq—or any other country, is not our business.
Why do we allow them to bully us? We know they will bring in the suicide bombers. We know they will create havoc. Why not let them do that to their own on their own sand lots, and with their own money?
Rather than attempting to change their religion or government, why not wait until they have—as North Korea, Russia, China, India, and Pakistan have most likely already done—enriched their uranium with the help of Russia and other so-called friends of the US, and then send in a highly trained multi-nation team of like-minded covert military personnel to ensure the product is decimated, again on the host countries’ own turf?
Seventy-five million dollars would go a long way in covering the costs of monitoring uranium enrichment, if the United Nations did the job it was designed to do. It is the United Nations that should be monitoring the nations of planet Earth, especially those who show ill-will towards its neighbors.
If the United States would cut off funding to rogue nations, would develop other sources and replacements for foreign oil, would use its military might to protect itself, and to educate every citizen within its borders, then other countries just might look at us as great examples of how it should be done.
Let the peoples of other countries want to be like us, rather than encumbering our grandchildren’s grandchildren with our huge military debt that we incurred while showing them our way is better.
We should never let our guard down, but we don’t have to meet the bully on his terms.
Bio:
Linda J. Hutchinson is a freelance writer and copywriter living in central Ohio. She has written for magazines, trade journals, newspapers, newsletters, websites and e-zines. As at-home on a construction site as in an art gallery, she’s been told she “cleans up real good”. Her first novel is in process.
Website: http://www.lindajhutchinson.com/
Email: Linda@lindajhutchinson.com
February 18, 2006
I'm Not Looking at the Pictures, Lord, but Please Help Us
I spent at least a part of this week questioning my political beliefs—and writing about them. Probably not one of the more sane things I’ve done lately, but there is a freedom in writing about my feelings, at least that’s what I’m told.
All of my deadlines were met for the week—except one. I’m still chasing that last interview. He’s in my sights. I’ll have that story completed by Monday.
Am I upset that the Vice President of the United States of America accidently shot his friend while bird hunting? Or, more to the point, that he didn’t report it to the media immediately? I’m sorry his friend is hurt. I’m certain VP Cheney is not only remorseful about the accident, but embarrassed by it.
Do I think he did anything wrong? No. Mr. Cheney hauls with him the best medical team one could have because of his own health issues. If he had called in the media it would have become a circus and stolen every ounce of dignity his well-respected friend had, all so the man could have been photographed and interviewed while he lay in a field, his upper body full of bird shot.
I think Mr. Cheney and his hunting party, including the owner of the ranch where they were hunting, made the correct call. We, as Americans, don’t need to see everything as it happens.
The looting, rioting, and killing in the Muslim world over some cartoons of their prophet has been in the news all week. Newspapers in the US chose not to print the cartoons—so why are we being hated anew over something other countries did, that we didn’t?
Christians have the same commandment: Those shalt not make any graven images.
Just what constitutes a “graven image”? My handy paperback dictionary is fine most of the time, but when I need a real dictionary I reach for The American College Dictionary, published by Random House circa 1947. The definition of “graven”: adj. Deeply impressed, firmly fixed. Archaic. Carved; engraved.
I think we all understand what an image is, regardless of the year.
There are likenesses of what people think look like Jesus everywhere. In the Bible, in Christian homes, in churches, in books. So have we all broken a commandment by viewing a “graven image” of Christ? Or was the commandment written to prevent the caricaturization ie; a picture, description, etc., ludicrously exaggerating the peculiarities or defects of persons or things?
Can anyone ludicrously exaggerate the likeness of a person or being no one has seen?
I’ve written about this, too, and shot it off to the New York Times. I’ll know by next Friday if it is printed on the op-ed page. If they don’t print it, I’ll post it here.
I’m off for the weekend to enjoy some time with my daughter, son-in-law, their son and foster children, and to attend daughter’s baby shower. The prospect of becoming “grandma” again next month is fulfilling—and may keep me out of political hot water for a short time.
All of my deadlines were met for the week—except one. I’m still chasing that last interview. He’s in my sights. I’ll have that story completed by Monday.
Am I upset that the Vice President of the United States of America accidently shot his friend while bird hunting? Or, more to the point, that he didn’t report it to the media immediately? I’m sorry his friend is hurt. I’m certain VP Cheney is not only remorseful about the accident, but embarrassed by it.
Do I think he did anything wrong? No. Mr. Cheney hauls with him the best medical team one could have because of his own health issues. If he had called in the media it would have become a circus and stolen every ounce of dignity his well-respected friend had, all so the man could have been photographed and interviewed while he lay in a field, his upper body full of bird shot.
I think Mr. Cheney and his hunting party, including the owner of the ranch where they were hunting, made the correct call. We, as Americans, don’t need to see everything as it happens.
The looting, rioting, and killing in the Muslim world over some cartoons of their prophet has been in the news all week. Newspapers in the US chose not to print the cartoons—so why are we being hated anew over something other countries did, that we didn’t?
Christians have the same commandment: Those shalt not make any graven images.
Just what constitutes a “graven image”? My handy paperback dictionary is fine most of the time, but when I need a real dictionary I reach for The American College Dictionary, published by Random House circa 1947. The definition of “graven”: adj. Deeply impressed, firmly fixed. Archaic. Carved; engraved.
I think we all understand what an image is, regardless of the year.
There are likenesses of what people think look like Jesus everywhere. In the Bible, in Christian homes, in churches, in books. So have we all broken a commandment by viewing a “graven image” of Christ? Or was the commandment written to prevent the caricaturization ie; a picture, description, etc., ludicrously exaggerating the peculiarities or defects of persons or things?
Can anyone ludicrously exaggerate the likeness of a person or being no one has seen?
I’ve written about this, too, and shot it off to the New York Times. I’ll know by next Friday if it is printed on the op-ed page. If they don’t print it, I’ll post it here.
I’m off for the weekend to enjoy some time with my daughter, son-in-law, their son and foster children, and to attend daughter’s baby shower. The prospect of becoming “grandma” again next month is fulfilling—and may keep me out of political hot water for a short time.
February 05, 2006
A BOOK REVIEW
Ladies: A Conjecture of Personalities
by Feather Schwartz Foster
ISBN: 1-59286-361-2
PublishAmerica, LLLP
http://www.featherfoster.com
http://www.amazon.com
Never before have I enjoyed a romp through history so thoroughly. From the introduction by Lucy Hayes to the author’s epilogue claiming fictional, yet plausible, conjecture on the part of the “voices” who wrote their stories, a full and satisfying story is told. The reader feels what our First Ladies are re-living as they tell about their place in history—or lack thereof, about their husbands and about the times in which they lived.
I got the distinct feeling several of our First Ladies knew they would have made better Presidents than did their husbands, if the times had allowed. In reality, only the times have changed; we humans are as raw or refined, as wild or as tame, as selfish or as giving, regardless of the century we inhabit.
Through the many friendships and rivalries, the politics, and the “place” each woman was expected to inhabit, we learn how they lived and loved. To fully appreciate these women who were our First Ladies, we must allow them to live in our minds, to breathe and function, to grieve and rejoice. Feather Schwartz Foster brings the stage and the characters to us. All we need to do is sit back and enjoy the ride!
Reviewer:
Linda J. Hutchinson
Freelance Writer, Reporter/Photographer, Copywriter
Linda@lindajhutchinson.com
http://www.lindajhutchinson.com
http://www.lindajhutchinson.com/blog
http://writerschatroom.com
Ladies: A Conjecture of Personalities
by Feather Schwartz Foster
ISBN: 1-59286-361-2
PublishAmerica, LLLP
http://www.featherfoster.com
http://www.amazon.com
Never before have I enjoyed a romp through history so thoroughly. From the introduction by Lucy Hayes to the author’s epilogue claiming fictional, yet plausible, conjecture on the part of the “voices” who wrote their stories, a full and satisfying story is told. The reader feels what our First Ladies are re-living as they tell about their place in history—or lack thereof, about their husbands and about the times in which they lived.
I got the distinct feeling several of our First Ladies knew they would have made better Presidents than did their husbands, if the times had allowed. In reality, only the times have changed; we humans are as raw or refined, as wild or as tame, as selfish or as giving, regardless of the century we inhabit.
Through the many friendships and rivalries, the politics, and the “place” each woman was expected to inhabit, we learn how they lived and loved. To fully appreciate these women who were our First Ladies, we must allow them to live in our minds, to breathe and function, to grieve and rejoice. Feather Schwartz Foster brings the stage and the characters to us. All we need to do is sit back and enjoy the ride!
Reviewer:
Linda J. Hutchinson
Freelance Writer, Reporter/Photographer, Copywriter
Linda@lindajhutchinson.com
http://www.lindajhutchinson.com
http://www.lindajhutchinson.com/blog
http://writerschatroom.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)