In addition to being an instructor who is not afraid of in-class, political shouting matches--and in fact welcomes them--Dr. Perlstein is an academic (as well as an ideological) anomaly. That is, he is a rare and welcome alternative in the sea of ideological secrecy and/or lock-step ideology that many students around the country are subject to today. Similarly, as a Perlsteinian "damn liberal," I found my (often public) debates with Professor Perlstein to be invaluable heuristic experiences. In fact, his presence at Portland State has played an instrumental role in not only my basic technical understanding of domestic and international terrorist tactics and official responses, but also in my understanding of the sentiments that propel the desperate politics of the disenfranchised. In demonstrating empathy (if not agreement) for many in this world whose last resort is violence, Dr. Perlstein has shown me that he has a firm intellectual grasp on the "informal" political struggles that continue to shake this world.

I think we all welcome a healthy critique of our talking heads on occasion, but I am curious as to why Dr. Perlstein was singled out for such a shredding. Where are the other "usual characters"? Where is the front-page condemnation of the multiple and blundering buffoons who chatter mindlessly about Oregon politics on a regular basis? If this article is an opening salvo in an ironic media war on talking heads, then sign me up.

Robert Swan
Graduate student, Portland State University
North Commercial Avenue

DRAW THE LINE
When oh when will Willamette Week join the civilized world and stop publishing the offensive, juvenile and misogynist cartoonist Callahan? His Nov. 6 depiction of Anna Nicole Smith--admittedly, no great icon for women--is reprehensible. Why is denigration of women the last outpost of acceptable bigotry? You'd be put out of business, and Callahan would be run out of town, if that cartoon depicted a person of color.

Meg Daly
Northwest Thurman Street