Letters to the Editor
Silenced
Published Letters: 1358 Editor's Choice: 75
-
So they're finally learning -- when will you?
[Read the article: The NYT's Michael Cooper demonstrates what real reporting is]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Giuliani's claims are not merely reported, but subjected to scrutiny and determined to be factually false."
I honestly do not understand how Salon is run. You people seem to be all for objective, fact-based reporting when comes to the publications you criticize.
But when Joan or Rebecca gets up a full head of steam over some female celebrity and stages some public group hate, facts and accountability and quality of information go right out the freaking window.
Everyone here was slandering the hell out of Lee Baca for letting Paris Hilton out early and nobody at Salon ever checked the facts or admitted to them after they'd been checked by the LA Times.
BY the way -- Baca, bless his heart, is now forcing the county to build a new jail, and the ACLU is behind him and they're even helping him design the jail.
And they're going to make early release and home detention officially part of the law, to prevent overcrowding in the new facility.
You guys should start evaluating your own performance as journalists using the standards you apply to others.
There was an interesting and valid news story behind Paris' early release -- one that's still making news now -- but nobody at Salon proved to be capable of finding it.
-
Wow too early to judge, people
[Read the article: Hostages taken at Clinton office]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm praying for the campaign workers still inside.
Right now I think it's way premature to blame any of this on politics.
The guy is supposed to be psychotic. If he's operating under a psychotic delusion, that delusion might have nothing whatsoever to do with the rabid hyperpoliticization of this country.
So let's stay rational and wait for the facts to come out before blame gets thrown around, please.
-
So @Amity
[Read the article: Hostages taken at Clinton office]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You don't think it's worth waiting for actual facts before we decide what the actual facts are?
-
What I think deserves more coverage
[Read the article: Joe Conason responds]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Giuliani's gross ignorance of WWII history, like editing out the Eastern Front and pretending it was just America vs. Hitler all along.
The disrespect he pays to the soldiers who gave up their lives on that "other" front just disgusts me beyond belief and gives the lie to his supposed Catholic reverence for human life.
-
gradysu I disagree
[Read the article: Alleged hostage taker filed molestation suit]
[Read more letters about this article: Here](And by the way, I agree with a previous letter writer -- no one is "molested" at 21.)
Maybe he meant fondled as opposed to penetrated. And if he's mentally ill, he might have been childlike in his capacity for making sexual decisions when he was 21.
People with schizophrenia can have a very childlike affect and a childlike capacity for understanding sexual matters if they're not taking medication and they haven't had some kind of positive help with their socialization skills by family and/or psychiatric professionals.
Gee it sounds like a lynch mob in here.
I prefer Hillary's own cool and compassionate response. He's someone desperately in need of help, who sought it in absolutely the wrong way.
-
Organic or not, it still leads to breast cancer
[Read the article: Does organic wine taste bad?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You cover the drug that leads to breast cancer and yet you won't cover the drug that kills breast cancer cells and even appears to block the gene that teaches breast cancer cells how to metastasize.
Okay, that's politics. I get it. It's politically safe to love the drug that causes breast cancer but it's politically risky to show any interest in the one that appears to fight breast cancer.
See -- that's why I hate politics. Information is not the only thing that politics can destroy.
By the way, the drug you won't cover definitely does taste better when it's organically grown.
-
@heyjude
[Read the article: Police confirm identity of hostage taker]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As a caregiver for two mentally ill adults, I salute you.
-
I am a liberal Democrat, not a neocon, but I do not like the way you exploit every human weakness for your own political use
[Read the article: Corruption in Iraq: Where did they learn that?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I can already anticipate worldly-wise neocons pouncing on their keyboards to explain this is just how those Arabs operate,
Okay so anyone who disagrees with you now gets to be shoved into the Bush corner -- whether they live there or not?
And this is supposed to be different from what Bush does?
I think you need political detox, Joan. You're way over the limit.
You're turning into a mirror image of the people you oppose.
Way to encourage open debate in an open society, Joan!!!!!
-
By the way I'm not blaming "just the Arabs"
[Read the article: Corruption in Iraq: Where did they learn that?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Look at Russian capitalism after the fall of Communism. It was horribly corrupt. Contract killings almost every day. Kidnappings for ransom almost every day.
I wouldn't blame any of that on Clinton.
Certainly Bush is to blame for going to Iraq in the first place. Bad decision! Accomplished through wicked means!
But we have lots of examples now that show widespread corruption can erupt in the wake of the collapse -- whether natural or "pre-empted" -- of a large authoritarian system. That was one of the major "life lessons" of the nineties.
It's awful that one can be sent into the cornfield as a "neocon" for recognizing something as obvious as that.
-
Benazir Bhutto provides a cautionary example
[Read the article: Feminists want just a female prez?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Benazir Bhutto wanted to "stabilize" Afghanistan so she helped the Taliban take Kabul and then she officially recognized that gang of religious sociopaths as the legitimate government of Afghanistan.
I can't think of a bigger betrayal of women's rights by an elected female leader in modern times.
She has since apologized for this mistake, but one wonders how she possibly could have ever believed that stability at the hands of the Taliban was a good thing.
I think she just wanted to get them out of Pakistan. But see how that worked? They're still in Pakistan, but now they run southern Afghanistan too.
And what did she do for women's rights in Pakistan? Not anything that anyone has considered worth talking about.
The only reason she's politically relevant now is because people have run out of patience with Musharraf.
If she gets back in charge of the country, who knows what rotten decisions she'll make.
She's already campaigning in the tribal areas advertising what a great friend she'll be to tribal Pushtuns if she gets back in power.
So she hasn't really learned a thing. She's already buddying up to the burka crowd. Utterly shameless.
-
Do you know what "rootless cosmopolitanism" means?
[Read the article: The case against homeownership]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It was a Stalinist euphemism used to attack Jews.