Letters to the Editor
Uncle Fester
Published Letters: 1346 Editor's Choice: 12
-
The weight of falsehood
[Read the article: Hillary Clinton's long strange journey on Iraq]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Before we invaded Iraq, we were in the middle of another war that many felt righteous. That's where OBL and the rests of the terrorist were.
Iraq was never an eminient danger to the US, with or without WMD. Many said invading would be a big mistake. Brent Scowcroft said it publically in 2002 and Dick Cheney said it in 1994. Scowcroft was the NSA security advistor to Bush 41, hardly what I would call an armchair lightweight. Saying that it is only hindsight is untrue.
As far as Kyle Libermann goes, fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Only the leaked NIE stopped the war drums and a strike on Iran.
The origins of the Islamic terrorist anger is fundamentalist-based - they are socio-religiously based even more often than they are soley politically based.
Why aren't we going after Saudi Arabia then? They've had a relationshp with the Wahabist extremists for over a 100 years.
I think that many of those voting in Congress thought and felt they and the military would have more say and mitigating power in the weeks and months to come than the Bush administration allowed.
Well, then they obviously didn't read or understand the legislation they passed. Hillary and the rest of the Senators gave a loaded gun to the president. They yielded their judgement to his. I don't buy the claim that they didn't know he wasn't itching to pull the trigger. Richard Clarke and the former Treasury Sec. claim that invading Iraq was discussed before 9/11. I don't see why we should reward failure or excuse it, especially in regards to an unnecessary war.
I've saved the first for last:
I think the reason why so many fail to grasp an understanding of these choices - is because their lightweight armchair analysis fails to register the gravity of other possible outcomes. (And even more so with the easy convenience of hindsight.)
War is the most serious undertaking of the State. That's why the Founders placed it in the hands of the Congress away from the Executive. Most wars have a horrific cost, such as the Civil War, World War I, World War II. And look how Vietnam turned out. We got lucky with Gulf War I and the initial invasion of Afghanistan, though now it looks like it is rapidly going downhill. The average citizen doesn't have to study at West Point or the US Army War College to know that. And one of the possible outcomes was exactly what Scowcroft predicted and what Dick Cheney said in 1994.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YENbElb5-xY
The idea that nobody could have predicted an unfavorable outcome is crap, certainly not "experienced" professionals who are supposed to be fluent in diplomacy and war.
-
Will Wright go away? Poll says maybe....
[Read the article: Politico: "Clinton has virtually no chance of winning"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If you think that Wright will go away because he made a celebrated speech comparing him to his slightly prejudiced grandmother, you're wrong. He'll linger, he'll come back in the fall, voters who haven't even heard of Wright yet (a much greater percentage than you'd think - not that many people watch cable news), much less Obama's speech
Over two million people have already downloaded his speech. Yes, this is a likely target for the fall, if Obama moves ahead. But there is already backlash about over-bashing Obama on this point (see Chris Wallace for example).
One of the first polls on this topic:
Sixty-nine percent of voters who have heard or read about Obama’s speech say he did a good job addressing the issue of race relations, and 63 percent of voters following the events say they agree with Obama's views on race relations. Seventy-one percent say he did a good job explaining his relationship with Wright.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/21/opinion/polls/main3958295.shtml
-
@ethics_professor Ads
[Read the article: Politico: "Clinton has virtually no chance of winning"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]They'll run the ads, but will they be effective? What segment of the population will buy into them? Will the Republicans have the money? So far they're not doing too well with funding and the NRCC scandal doesn't help. I also think Salon is underreporting other interesting tidbits like 29 congressional republicans are retiring and a number of them are still under criminal investigation. That means resources have to be diverted to elect non-incumbents. Plus Chuck Hagel may not endorse McCain.
I'm sure some privateers will launch 527s and we will see some nasty stuff. But if you explain that Obama went to church for 20 years, then the "Barack Hussein Obama is a muslim" meme loses air supply.
As I mentioned elsewhere to what extent will the speechs of Reverend Wright be discussed in church and in what context. Also, for McCain, if you hear the words of Hagee and Parsley, they are pretty over the top as well. Does America really want a holy war against all Muslims worldwide, a McCrusade?
So I think it's pretty murky right now on how this all plays out; it's only March. Obama has shown that he can get in their and mix it up a bit, and not necessarily by conventional means. His campaign seems really good at framing the issues. Much better than Kerry, who unfortunately thought he could remain calm and regal and above the fray, but was typecast as a wuss.
-
Banish these Spirits of the air
[Read the article: Obama debuts Pennsylvania TV spots]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's very nice of Salon to air Sen. Obama's ads for him.
Salon did show earlier ads, such as Hillary's famous 3:00am ad. I think it's really cool to see the ads from both sides. Looking forward to some crazy McCain ads RSN. McCain: Not quite dead yet
-
Hate to be rude
[Read the article: Politico: "Clinton has virtually no chance of winning"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This won;t even happen again. I'm positive of it.
But that's what everybody said the last time....
-
@madam
[Read the article: Clinton camp goes on offense against Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here][..] get in bed with him (after all she knows how to sleep her way to the top), he will die within the first 100 days from sheer ecstacy, and voila, [...]
Death by Hillary? Aren't you pushing that Black Widow motif a little much?