Letters to the Editor
William Timberman
Published Letters: 3298 Editor's Choice: 7
-
What do the American people support?
[Read the article: The American media's fringe ideological view of Pelosi's trip]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Everybody seemingly loves to hate Noam Chomsky, or at least to believe that his analysis is too, too, well, you know. Even here, he's honored more in the breach than in the observance.
Still, if you want a brief, succinct image of what the country would look like absent the raving lunatics of the right, you could do worse than to look here today:
http://www.tomdispatch.com/
I believe that Chomsky's got it about right. Vox populi, vox dei. If only it could be heard above the din. Even though I'm familiar with the whole depressing litany of reasons which purport to explain how we got here -- from it was always this way, dummy to Civilization and Its Discontents, I confess to harboring a lingering astonishment that Rush Limbaugh or Matt Drudge haven't long ago been stoned to death by an enraged populace, or deposited via cargo net on the most distant and barren island known to cartographers.
That we are in the grip of a mortal derangement is, I think, beyond dispute. That it isn't shared by a majority of our long-suffering fellows is still one of the wonders of the age.
-
What is it with you, Hankest?
[Read the article: The American media's fringe ideological view of Pelosi's trip]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Are you the self-appointed arbiter of jots and tittles? The confessor of the unfortunately inconsistent? The high priest of I love you, but....
I know not what course others may take, but as for me, I'd prefer you go elsewhere to have your autism treated.
-
Mea culpa
[Read the article: The American media's fringe ideological view of Pelosi's trip]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]But William, that last bit is unfair to autistics, and those suffering from Aspberger's syndrome, everywhere. ;-) -- L.W.M.
True enough, but the supply of politically correct yet pithy metaphors is so sadly diminished these days. Call someone a swine, and the Porcine Defense League will point out to you that pigs are intelligent, loving creatures, the epitome of thrifty, brave, clean and reverent when not caged by depraved humans.
I don't deny it, any of it; but what's a polemicist to do?
-
Well....
[Read the article: The American media's fringe ideological view of Pelosi's trip]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ondelette, we are the why and the how, the alpha and the omega. We are come not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. Tactics and strategy to be announced....
-
It's better this way
[Read the article: The American media's fringe ideological view of Pelosi's trip]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Jim C., regardless of what you think, you were never a liberal, which was kind of the point about bringing up views of yours which weren't directly germane to the topic of Glenn's current post.
You see, the introjection of the Logan Act into this discussion was a red herring, and is known to be a scripted one at that. The only relevance it has is to identify you as a right-wing mouthpiece. A visit to your Web site confirms just what kind of mouthpiece, and is more revealing than you realize about how you came to be one. You claim that it's your religion which informs your political beliefs. I agree, and that makes your religious views relevant.
From where I stand, fear appears to be your religion in its entirety. Your espousal of Christianity is, in my opinion, a degenerate one, one which considers certain forms of sexuality, indeed sex in general, as disgusting and immoral. I would argue that that such a belief is both ignorant and vengeful, and that it bears no relationship whatever to the Christianity iof the Sermon on the Mount, in that it denies the most fundamental Christian impulse, which is charity.
Finally, when you venture an opinion here which appears to be driven principally by ideology rather than reason, you can expect people to seek out the roots of that ideology, and when they discover them, to consider the messenger as well as the message. That we have done, and having done it, I for one would be glad to leave you to the tender mercies of your own congregation.
-
As I said
[Read the article: The American media's fringe ideological view of Pelosi's trip]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Fine Jim, come ye out from among them. That was my point, exactly, but that is not what has brought you here, where homosexuality is not considered a sin.
You decline to share the world with us, and lament that you and yours aren't running it to our detriment. This you won't ever do, because none of us will help you do it. Nor will God, for that matter.
-
Dazed and Confused
[Read the article: The right-wing brain in action]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Is that the movie we're watching here, or is it Dumb and Dumber? Either way, it's a quaint notion these folks have, that they can have the argument all to themselves if they can just define both sides of it. It's small wonder that they're sounding so hysterical these days. Can O'Reilly really shout shut up! loud enough to drown out the voices of 70% of the population before succumbing to his well-deserved aneurysm? I don't even play a doctor on TV, but I doubt it.
Untermenschen. A concept brought to you from the Nacht und Nebel of right-wing fever-dreams, make no mistake. It has nothing to do with us; never did, and never will.