Letters to the Editor
Magritte's pipe
Published Letters: 129 Editor's Choice: 6
-
Air Force Vet in Amsterdam-
[Read the article: The John McCain "centrism" fallacy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Media in England does get it
Not really. I read The Economist and they've definitely inconsistent.
Feb. 28th, 2008-
The Republican candidate has a difficult path to the White House
Mr McCain had no trouble wooing the media when his rivals were George Bush and Mitt Romney. A few hours shooting the breeze with the senator on the Straight Talk Express and most journalists are eating out of his hand….
…He is also a hawk in a country where hawkishness is normally considered a virtue. He was calling for “rogue state roll-back” in 1999 when Mr Bush was arguing for a more humble foreign policy (remember that?).
http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10766687
Which is as close a criticism of MSM journalists and McCain's hawkishness as Glenn's compared to most other newspapers.
But then, March 6th 2008:
"... Mr McCain is betting that, as well as his superior policies, his more open style will win voters round. He takes questions from anyone and actually answers them. “Americans aren't interested in an election where they are just talked to and not listened to,” he maintains."
http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10809120
And March 27th:
"He has happily picked fights with all and sundry, including his own party. For example, he was one of the leading critics of the Bush administration on torture. He also cares deeply and personally about national security. He risked political suicide by supporting the “surge” when his party looked as if it was willing to soften on the Iraq war."
http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10873410
I don't think any MSM outlet is really sufficiently critical of McCain
-
Bklyn260
[Read the article: The John McCain "centrism" fallacy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The "pro-life" vs. "anti-life" is a valid argument (though hardly the cornerstone of the post". "War on terror" is another one of them... Most people thought it was a stupid label but many have succumbed to playing along with Bush and using it.
-
llex
[Read the article: The John McCain "centrism" fallacy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]... use of words such as "conservative" and "liberal" in foreign policy are misnomers. Once the country's objective is defined; I'll take a shot: "Support and encourage the involvement of all citizens in self government, oppose abuse of human rights (with force when necessary), recognize and work with globalization from economics to weather, and prefer policies which lead in these directions without jarring or destabilizing regions of the world whose reactions cannot be predicted and, if predicatable, are undesirable for our safety and leadership."
But what if the Right and the Left have different objectives? You are arguing that the means of achieving the objective can neither be classified as left or right. But that's assuming that their working towards the same goal. Thus the Bush/Cheney/McCain militarist, imperialist, bigoted objectives are arguably conservative, while Democrats' objectives are "more liberal", so to speak.
-
elephantman
[Read the article: The John McCain "centrism" fallacy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]But voters seeking a centrist would be better advised to support McCain.
Since you're so adamant that McCain is a centrist, why don't you give us evidence?
-
elephantman
[Read the article: The John McCain "centrism" fallacy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]while you're at it, why don't you define what "centrist" means?
-
Cuchulain2007
[Read the article: The John McCain "centrism" fallacy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What does McCain care? He doesn't have to actually participate in the war... As long as there is the slightest bit of advantage or profit from war McCain will not hesitate. Remember how McCain was tortured in Vietnam? And as GG points out, he didn't vote to ban water-boarding...
-
@ WT
[Read the article: The John McCain "centrism" fallacy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]point well taken
-
Iokannan in the Well
[Read the article: "Great American Hypocrites: Toppling the Big Myths of Republican Politics"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I agree. Especially how "GREAT" is emphasized with larger font size. Great, Glorious GOP leaders!
-
therealcervantes
[Read the article: "Great American Hypocrites: Toppling the Big Myths of Republican Politics"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Such cynicism! While I agree that this book is not exactly going to shatter the entire MSM industry, I don't think it won't have any impact at all. If people never wrote criticism because they believed it wouldn't make an impact at all, what would our society be like? Rampant colonialism, slavery, racism, domestic abuse, etc... would be the norm (not that any of these don't exist today). I agree, right-wing voices are overwhelmingly dominating the discourse today, but we can't just sit on our laps and not do anything about it.
-
shooter
[Read the article: Why doesn't the 9/11 Commission know about Mukasey's 9/11 story?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Oh please, how has our invasion of Iraq preserved our Constitutional liberties? -- Aycharaych
If nothing else it has prompted a thorough airing out of what's important and current. That, and we haven't been attacked since. Like it or not, it's an unassailable point.
Yet. Haven't been attacked Yet. Apparently to you, not being attacked is a great feat, great enough to justify doing the same to others. Hey, you know, maybe, if the US gov't respected the rights of all individuals and didn't interfere and make a huge mess out of the Middle East in the first place, there would not have been 9/11 at all.
-
LWM
[Read the article: Why doesn't the 9/11 Commission know about Mukasey's 9/11 story?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As per your brilliant observation, If Israel wants to take over the ME, I say let them. If Russia wants to forcibly annex Ukraine, no problem. If Columbia wants to bomb Venezuela, I say go ahead. Perhaps China will invade North Korea and solve their problems. Hopefully they'll leave South Korea alone. Let's get it all out and done, and harmony will reign. Meanwhile we'll have money to burn and the world's gratitude.
Keep mouthing those cliches and perhaps we'll get world peace after all.
A person who says this is not an "Internet nuisance".
Shooter must be either:
1)delusional,
2)brainwashed, or
3)Donald Rumsfeld (or is he Dick Cheney? I don't know.)