Letters to the Editor
Uncle Fester
Published Letters: 1506 Editor's Choice: 13
-
@madam no harm no foul
[Read the article: "Clinton will not be able to win the nomination"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm just telling you what I tell myself whenever I want to flame some moronic comment. The "electoral college" math argument is a small example of the harmless but stupid. brrrrgh. There's obviously worse than that. Still, while we're busy beating the crap out of each other (and enjoying it far too much, based on letter counts from stories like these vs. McCain stories) we are all supposed to be on the same team. And the other team is getting ready to unload a dump truck full of steaming doubleplus ungood. Winning can salve quite a few injuries.
-
Ossifer Mancuso: Planet Janet
[Read the article: Matthews rails against "Clinton-centric world" ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Too funny to be true!
-
Problem is|was not borrowed money, but cheap borrowed money
[Read the article: Hillary Clinton's plan to fix the economy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The real core of the problem, as Krugman and others have tirelessly pointed out, has been the rise of an essentially unregulated "shadow banking system" of hedge funds and investment banks that used borrowed money to bet without restraint wherever they saw the chance to turn a profit.
From my armchair investor perspective, it's all about the spread (e.g. difference between cost to borrow and return on investment). And Greenspan is the dude that flooded our monetary system with lots of cheap money that got leveraged into mortgage and other derivative products. Huge profits were made, for awhile. If borrowed money is expensive, then more care is going to be taken. Now that money is getting cheaper again, everything is going to be just fine, right?
-
If you want to put the media on the hook for Iraq
[Read the article: Matthews rails against "Clinton-centric world" ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]And I do, then I don't see how you give the Congress a pass. Constitutionally, they are the ones with the power to declare war. And they did authorize the use of force.
-
TP: Lessons
[Read the article: The Democrats' anti-momentum]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The lesson of Adams, for those few watching who know little of American history, is that these amazing, tremendous characters were deeply flawed men. That is the cool part, or the divine providence, as they would say back then. That means there's still hope for us.
-
re: Clintons and Iraq (and a host of other minor characters)
[Read the article: Matthews rails against "Clinton-centric world" ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Well, the last poster failed to mention the Congress. They just wanted to blame Bush and the Media. Which is backwards to me. The War power is in Congress. Maybe it is necessary to elect a constitutional law professor to the Highest office. The congress should not be the rubberstamp it's become under the Bush Administration.
So I hold Biden, Dodd, Edwards, and Hillary Clinton responsible. And I think the pro-war vote for each of them was a drag on their campaigns.
Hillary Clinton is the last one standing, aside from McCain. I'm certainly willing to send a pass to Bill Clinton if he counseled not to vote for the war.
-
@billcap Did you watch the video?
[Read the article: "It is possible ... that she misspoke"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If you watch the video, you will hear her speech describing the event, followed by footage of the event. According to the (always truthful) media, Hillary has repeated this same speech over the course of the last several weeks. It's hard to reconcile the two different pieces of footage. Let's just say it was a war story and move on.
-
Exceptionalism
[Read the article: Rev. Jeremiah Wright isn't the problem]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What I find interesting is that the Founders were pretty cynical about America's prospects. Franklin said "It's a republic if you can keep it" and Jefferson thought the entire system would have to be scrapped and restarted every 20 years or so. They had a dim (or realistic, if you prefer) view of human nature in general, and Democracy in particular, a view largely upheld by history.
I'm not sure when that viewpoint began to fade, but it seems to me that we are now at the point where attempts to return to the original views of the Founders are seen as unpatriotic. Nobody wants to question our feet of clay.
Both parties have bought into slightly different notions of Exceptionalism that at the core are identical. We are now a chosen people, instead of being merely favored by that divine providence, and each generation inherits this exceptionalism instead of earning it anew through our actions.
IM!HO This election cycle offers us a crossoroads where we could strike out in a new direction, maybe we can even head Back to the Future.
-
Tyranny of OR
[Read the article: Rev. Jeremiah Wright isn't the problem]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If Wright would use his considerable influence to preach that individuals should take responsibility for themselves rather than paint themselves as victims, he would be doing his parishioners a real service. After all, this is the lesson of life and it applies to all of us.
It seems to me that the role of a real teacher is to point out shortcomings and things that need fixing, instead of merely allowing everyone to develop a false sense of perfection every sunday. If you would take a look at the web page for tucc, you'd see there's a lot going on, too much to list here: http://www.tucc.org/ministries.htm. Having not been there, I'm sure it could all be a facade. On the other hand, it doesn't look like the work of people intent on being victims.
It's possible to raise people up AND wag the finger. It may be necessary to do both.