Letters to the Editor
vmcla1
Published Letters: 42 Editor's Choice: 1
-
Hitting her stride...
[Read the article: Clinton: "My opponent gives speeches, I offer solutions"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It seems a bit late; but that is exactly how Clinton should have been challenging Obama from the beginning.
I hope people are still able to hear the differences. Actions matter. Speeches do not.
-
Dear BO Lovers...
[Read the article: "Name some of Barack Obama's legislative accomplishments ... if you can" ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You are all no doubt shocked, SHOCKED by the temerity of Chris Matthews to behave like a racist and actually ask some pointed questions about your candidate.
Let's face it, you don't like these probing questions because you can't answer them and you want them to stop.
I say get used to it. Now that Clinton is LOSING, the tough questions for the stick man will continue to mount.
And please expect the questions and the framing to become even more hostile once the entire Republican establishment gets into the act.
In response, you can call all of us BO skeptics racist. But that won't win the election. And by your devotion to a man who is all talk, you have handed the supreme court and the future of our country to John McCain and his band of thieves.
You have spoiled the party for Hillary and her supporters. Now you are intent on spoiling the country for everyone.
I hope you're satisfied.
-
You're likeable enough, Tim!
[Read the article: No Hail Mary for Hillary]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yes, Tim, you're likeable enough.
The way you insert yourself and your demands... what you need.. .into every debate and show you're on.
That way you use your hands to push back at people who don't want to play your tune.
It reminds me of an exasperted person who is about to resort to violence when the world isn't going his way.
I guess your pugnacious approach and ugly mug is appreciated somewhere... Buffalo?
And while you are likeable enough, Tim, you are the worst of corporate gotcha journalism.
Like last night when you popped a question at HRC about the name of the incoming Russian President.
Don't you remember back in 2000 when you were busy licking George W Bush's ass? You got all upset when a local reporter in Boston gave Bush a pop quiz about world leaders.
If I recall, you were offended for journalism that a reporter would do such a thing.
What do you have to say for your own bloviation?
America, with BO in the white house and with the media we have, we are in big trouble as a country.
God save us!
-
Proud of his name, Hussein?
[Read the article: Obama should be proud to be named Hussein]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]How can the Big-BO possibly be proud of his middle name in public?
That would screw up his carefully calibrated PR campaign against the American people.
He knows that too much scrutiny will lead to buyers remorse amongst the Democrats.
And buyers remorse will be real. Just ask Jimmy Carter about 1980. Many remorseful buyers stayed home and allowed Ronald Reagan to become president in order to avoid another term of Carteritis.
Given how fast the world works today, I have no doubt that buyers remorse will break out bigtime just in time to make McCain president and hand over the next generation of the supreme court to the radical right.
Way to go fellow-democrats. You've blown it again!
-
Tucker & Tim...
[Read the article: Tucker Carlson unintentionally reveals the role of the American press]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]... are employees of NBC news. Once, a proud and respected journalistic brand. Now being ruined by "journalists" who chatter rather than gather. what happened to the craft of finding out what's going on? Breaking real news.. full of secrets and accountability. Is Tucker still wearing that silly bowtie? That was another peak at his truth: Spoonfed and happy.
In comparing Tim to the British host, they have an equal amount of pugnacity. The difference is where they're coming from: Tim distorts and bullies about income tax returns and whitewater; the brit is focused on public accountability.
Which was more dramatic and satisfying? For me, it was the shave he administered to Mr. Bolten. And a lot of other viewers would agree and were galvanized by this spectacle. Unable to turn away from a captured man, tormented in public by the truth.
So Tim & Tucker and the people who hire and pay these distortionists don't necessarily need to go safe and banal for viewers, readers and profits. They choose to go there. Their laziness is destroying our society.
-
Apologize... Ah hahahaha ha ha.. (yeah, right!)
[Read the article: Geraldine Ferraro still needs to apologize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]When the BO Moonies apologize for labelling everyone who remembers the legacy of LBJ as racist, then GF should apologize.
Remember LBJ? The president who passed the civil rights legislation? The same one who got swept away in the revisionist history about MLK getting it passed all byhimself?
The sanctamony of the BO Moonies makes it pretty safe there will be no apoligy; therefore, GF will never need to apologize...:)
-
Let's ask Jake Tapper...
[Read the article: Politico: "Clinton has virtually no chance of winning"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yes, let's ask Jake this question...
Jake, about HRC, would you say that we should "put a fork in her, she's done"?
Jake: Ah, no. The last time I used that line, "put a fork in him, he's done..." was during the 2000 recount. It was a big article here on Salon about why George w. Bush wouldn't reach the 270 electoral votes. The piece was actually triumphant in its analysis. Brilliant, prescient and convincing, I thought.
Only trouble is, I was wrong. Way wrong.
-
Reporting or Stenography???
[Read the article: Nagourney: "At least one scenario where Clinton could win"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It seems that WAR ROOM has become the spot where Salon places its stenography.
It used to be a place for original reporting throughout the day.
But we now have the spectacle of a Salon writer doing "quick reads" of material first published elsewhere.
Honestly, if any of us wanted to read Adam N., we would have done so at the NYT site. Same goes for all of the other reporters you crib for us.
What you're doing is not journalism... it's stenography.
Shame.