Madame Vp?

The choice of Sarah Palin as a vice presidential candidate poses an acute threat to women who've been struggling to assert their reproductive rights. What makes Palin's campaign more worrisome is that her pro-life pronouncements are made in the name of feminism. While much remains to be desired in Barack Obama's positions on reproductive rights, a win for the Democrats is the only way for reproductive justice to be articulated at the White House and to potentially put an end to the "global gag rule." A Republican victory would most likely mean the denial of federal funds for reproductive health services, even for those women and girls who survived rape and incest. The continuation of the gag rule will mean increasing maternal mortality, orphaned children and another long episode of denial and violation of human rights and civil liberties.

Nina Somera, ISIS International
Quezon City, Philippines

Barack Obama has been compared with John F. Kennedy, and now John McCain has provided his own Kennedy factor: Jackie Kennedy in the form of Sarah Palin. We will see which "Kennedy" pulls in more votes in the presidential sweepstakes. Obama may make history by becoming the first African-American president, while Palin has the chance to become the first woman vice president. Obama talks of change but chose a longtime senator, Joe Biden, as his running mate. Palin's fiery convention speech proved that she has what it takes to shine in this campaign, outshining Biden with her charisma. The choice may be difficult, but either way, it will come down to that moment in the voting booth when Americans will decide in what way they are ready to create history.

S. Mohanakrishnan
Auckland, New Zealand

Whether John McCain's selection of Sarah Palin helps or hurts his candidacy, it certainly helps focus on the key questions we should each be asking as we approach the election. Let's keep in mind critical issues like health care, energy independence, the environment, stem-cell research and possible new appointments to the Supreme Court. These issues should really determine the election rather than the distracting peripheral questions about who is more patriotic or whether experience as a governor or a senator is better.

William C. Holmes
Granite Bay, California

The Mentally Disabled, Documented
Your Sept. 8 photo essay, "'No One Much Cares'," which depicts human suffering in psychiatric institutions and social-welfare homes, leaves me wondering what you were trying to achieve. The fact that hundreds of thousands of people with mental disabilities worldwide are relegated to spending their lives in horrific and inhumane conditions is, sadly, not news. It would be informative, and a welcome change, if in addition to depicting the horrors, you would write about what some organizations, like the Open Society Institute, are doing to change this unacceptable situation by supporting the reintegration of people with mental disabilities into their local communities so they can live with dignity like the rest of us. We run such programs in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.

Judith Klein, Director
Open Society Mental Health Initiative
London, England

Russia ' s Strategic New Commodity?
You report that "like oil, food supply is becoming a strategic commodity" ("As Food Becomes the New Oil, Russia Plans to Seize Control," PERISCOPE, Sept. 8). Well said, indeed. Naturally, the Kremlin's food-control logistics follow those of oil and gas. With a colossal fortune from black gold, Russia is basking in the glow of unprecedented wealth. Now as the global price of grain is surging, Russia is focusing on increasing its output. If funds are made available, Russia could increase its cultivated land use to boost production significantly, given that Russia has the world's largest expanse of good farmland. But all this newly discovered prosperity has a negative impact on world peace. For the Kremlin has been quickly rejuvenating its military prowess, pushing its tentacles of influence over to some immediate neighbors. Georgia could be the first (but probably not the last) test of Russian hegemony. Has the world forgotten the once mighty but cold Soviet Union?

Munti Dann
Georgetown, Malaysia

Can America Afford Free Trade?
Daniel Gross's Sept. 8 article, "Is America Losing At Globalization?" hit a sensitive nerve with me. I own stock in an American company that specializes in intellectual property. Foreign companies have been using the technology developed by this company without paying royalties and are making millions of dollars with their products that utilize someone else's intellectual property. These companies ignore U.S. intellectual-property laws even while selling their products to the United States and have had the owner of the technology tied up in court for years while they go on making profits, probably assuming that a settlement at some future date is cheaper than paying now. In the article, Robert Reich says, "We still lead in building intellectual property—products and services connected with the Internet, computer software." So, what good is that if foreign countries can use intellectual property without paying the American owner? I'd say that the United States is losing at globalization. Not all Americans, of course. Some who own parts of these foreign companies are doing quite well.

Harry G. Gibson
Lebanon, Indiana