Letters to the Editor
casual_observer
Published Letters: 1249 Editor's Choice: 1
-
My party, right or wrong
[Read the article: Fox News' attack on the honor and integrity of our war generals]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]{Note: using this as a departure point, and not claiming that WT holds positions below.}
In politics, support the Democrats, even when they do things -- like voting for the Kyl-Lieberman amendment -- which makes my skin crawl.
This is what party leadership depends upon when setting policy that a majority of its members don't agree with. This is the "political capital" that will lead to ~40,000 troops still in Iraq 5 years from now, under a democratic president.
Taken to its unhealthy extreme, when party members assure their leaders that there are no limits to their faithfulness, party leadership is set free to turn the party in any direction whatsoever, regardless of consequence, and regardless of how their policies may diverge from party canon. This is essentially how the republican party has become the party of big-spending, big and intrusive government.
Make sure liberal issues are always on the table in internal party discussions, but don't threaten to take my ball and leave when I'm outvoted.
A party is nothing more than a tool for achieving specific ends. When the tool itself assumes greater importance than the work it is supposed to be doing, any party ceases to be a means to a policy solution and becomes simply another roadblock to individual political expression. Or perhaps it simply becomes a machine for laundering money.
Perhaps the most formidable tool the party member has is his/her freedom to disolve their bond with the party. The ultimate power over a thing is the power to destroy it. Obviously, over-use of this threat negates its influence. But members should never give it away, either.
-
WT @ majority-crafting
[Read the article: Fox News' attack on the honor and integrity of our war generals]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Is it better to achieve more consistent and coherent personal political expression, or to craft a majority that will enclose contradictions to personal political beliefs? Of course there's a rubicon of tolerance in there somewhere, and each individual will know when and where they encounter it in their own political geography.
Many of the so-called leaders of the Democratic Party are with me on a number of important domestic issues.
WT, if we look at the sum total of legislation passed out during the current Democratic Congress, can you estimate the percentage that you agreed with? Even if it's just a ballpark, impressionistic number?
-
@ susan sunflower
[Read the article: Fox News' attack on the honor and integrity of our war generals]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've also speculated that MoveOn may have benefitted by the dustup. In the earler question to WT I did have MoveOn in mind. We think of alternative parties as Green, Libertarian, etc., but I'm wondering if MoveOn might be best considered a nascent political party, rather than a PAC.
They exhibit party-like behavior. They debate planks and platform on a 24/7 basis. A constant, year-round political convention, it appears. They pay for political advertising, including contributions to candidates.
I've joined moveon just recently, with the intent of treating it as if it was a political party. I'm speculating that one may be able to have a better public/political life through it than one could have through a party.
-
WT
[Read the article: Fox News' attack on the honor and integrity of our war generals]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You may well be right about MoveOn. There is surprisingly little on their website. I'm on their mailing list. If anything notable happens, I'll communicate.
Theoretically, it might work...
-
Toxic Exposure
[Read the article: Charlie Savage at FDL Book Salon]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Well Glen, I'm sorry you have to be exposed to that crap. It's unfortunate, mostly for Mr. Groenhagen.
-
WT
[Read the article: Fox News' attack on the honor and integrity of our war generals]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]From Digby this morning:
Update: For those who think you have caught me being naive and foolish once again, please re-read the post and you'll notice that I didn't say that the radical religious right was going to actually break off or that they wouldn't make some sort of a deal. I actually think they are applying political power in a pretty effective way.
My point is that a significant conservative constituency is actually threatening to run a third party candidate if they don't get their way and yet all we ever hear about is how the Democrats are being led down the path to perdition by the Move-On hippies who are pushing them to respond to the large majority of Americans who want the US to begin withdrawing from Iraq.
-
Remarkable
[Read the article: Angry, hateful liberal bloggers]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I have only glimpsed the .pdf file, but the quoted section itself is remarkable enough.
I'm sure one could spend many hours pondering how Mr. Podhoretz's personal history (and how he interprets same) projected him along a certain path.
But one has to remember that one will never get those hours back.
Mr. Giuliani has made a very interesting choice for his foreign policy advisor. I hope the voting public will assess that choice when making their own decisions. I hope many bloggers in left blogistan will pick up on this post.
-
@ RMP and EFPs
[Read the article: Angry, hateful liberal bloggers]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"The articles seem to be leading to a military and Bush Administration conclusion that the best way to defeat these devices is to kill them at the source- Iran.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/29/AR2007092900751.html"
RMP, I've looked at this article, and see no mention of Iran. In fact I couldn't find the word "Iran" in the piece.