The reality of readers on TV, Kennedy, war, peace and Bears

Last week's column about a couple of suburban-born models who overcame addictions and want to star in a reality-TV show about their lives drew more comments (almost universally negative) from readers than any of my newsier columns. I wonder why that is?

A lot of them were just nasty name-calling, but I like this creative e-mail from Jane McCaffrey of Inverness, who dismissed a show about "pretty people overcoming addictions" as "one more in a long string of non-real reality shows."

"I propose a show titled 'Remarkably Normal.' It's about families like yours and like ours, regular families with yards and trees and bills and businesses," McCaffrey e-mails. "Cameras could follow families of diverse ages, cultures, faiths and economic backgrounds and then skillfully interweave these stories so that they portray the common traits that lead to a healthy and happy family life.

"Wouldn't it be great to follow stories of high-achieving students side by side with those on the steady climb to a 'C-' and both are considered a success; wealthy families creatively finding reasons to say 'no' other than 'because we can't afford it'; immigrant families working together to build a business or a community or a church; extended families including grandmas and grandpas and aunts and uncles and cousins, all participating on the journey to becoming a 'Remarkably Normal' family?" she asks. "A show like this could actually make a positive contribution to strengthening family values, one that raises instead of lowers standards, enriches instead of depletes, inspires instead of discourages. How great would it be if 'Remarkably Normal' was the new reality?"

Thanks, Jane. Good idea. But we don't have to depend on TV for that show. I watch episodes of "Remarkably Normal" live every day in my neighborhood, followed by episodes of readers commenting on my column about how Ted Kennedy proved the government can do good things to help Americans.

"If you like the idea of helping people do it yourself. Do not ask an inefficient and wasteful government to do it for you," writes John V. "Instead of the government taxing us and losing much of that tax to waste and fraud, the individual could more efficiently help the unfortunate. Or are you a typical liberal who is for helping people as long as it is with other peoples' money? Help one person without health insurance by adding him to your policy or pay the rent of a homeless person. If enough of the enlightened class were to put its money where its mouths are instead of granting this responsibility to government we could solve these problems. We would still have lazy, uneducated or irresponsible people but at least they would be more comfortable."

I'm not sure the private health insurance I get through my wife's job would let me add a homeless person to the policy. We liberals get called naive and unrealistic, but I suspect John's "ask not what your country can do for poor people, ask what you can do for your country's poor people" plea might fall apart when people are given the option of buying a big-screen TV or footing the bill for a poor person's dental insurance.

While some readers called me a socialist along the lines of Kennedy and Barack Obama, I got several e-mails from people who referred to our war in Afghanistan as "Obama's War." Our wars and our recession now rest on President Obama's shoulders, but pinning him with the blame for those messes is like blaming a baby's dirty diaper on the dad who happens to be changing it.

For readers who appreciate history, I suggested in a 2001 column one week after 9/11 that George W. Bush's "Old West" promise to get Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida "dead or alive" with a plan to "smoke them out of their holes," "get them running," and "bring them to justice" didn't "bode well" considering the Soviet Union's failure in Afghanistan. (That column didn't get near the response my fluff piece on models did.) We can blame Obama for not fixing Afghanistan, but he wasn't the one who broke it.

Several readers responded to the column about Kennedy and government by pointing out the senator's numerous private sins and even crimes. I don't know where Kennedy stands with the Pope or where he is spending eternity, but I think Kennedy did a good job in the Senate when it came to following the Biblical command to plead the cause of the poor and the needy.

Finally, no matter how cynical liberals and conservatives can be about the other's viewpoints on serious matters, we can learn something about unity from Cubs fans and Sox fans. Even as fans from both teams watch their World Series dreams circle the drain, they unite in a giddy dive into the deep end of the Bears' Super Bowl pool.