Letters to the Editor
rtf100
Published Letters: 179 Editor's Choice: 8
-
Coronary Kariya
[Read the article: How the Democrats blew it]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Kariya is going berserk again about the Beltway Dems for their delaying tactics and presumed acceptance of the status quo in Iraq. The Dems are actually performing a public service by being objective on Iraq. GK knows that the last few times the Dems took similar strong actions were in 1974 and the mid-80's when the Dem-controlled Congress cut off funding for the Vietnam war and for the Contras in Central America. In both cases, the Dems' achieved their desired results by allowing their lefty allies (or comrades) to prevail rather easily in Vietnam and Nicaragua. Kariya knows full well that the immediate pullout of American forces will embolden Iran and Syria to step up the pressure on Israel, which is Kariya's number one objective. Who knows what will happen to Iraq, but Kariya is not interested in Iraq, only Israel.
The difference this time around is that the Middle East is slightly more strategic to the US than Vietnam and Nicaragua ever was or ever will be. Of course, Kariya is not interested in the long-term interests of the US.
-
There is more that laugh than just nervousness
[Read the article: Clinton laughs off laugh attack]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Hillary "laugh" is annoying to people because she normally comes across as condescending and know-it-all-ish and now she jacks up her negative ratings into the stratosphere with an annoying little laugh, particularly when she shouldn't be laughing. Imagine after each question that comes her way she answers first with a little giggle, a smirk and a cackling laugh as if to say "you little s---". This will eat her up on the campaign trail. The late-night crowd will have a field day with it along with the repugs, for sure.
-
Hey Anon, you're right
[Read the article: Beyond the Multiplex]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Anon, you are right. As usual, Catholic teachings are totally twisted out of shape by the atheists and agnostics at Salon. Catholic views on abortion are clear: it is an evil act and cannot be justified or rationalized away under any circumstances. Period. There is no common ground, no gray area, no wiggle room and that is all one needs to know on the subject. Church views on capital punishment are not as black and white as abortion but the official church position is that it is immoral under most scenarios. The Church also articulated the "just war" theory over 1500 years ago.
Liberals would be shocked at how "catholic" their main positions are on such matters as war and peace, care for the poor, universal healthcare, capital punishment, etc etc. But you would never know it as they routinely "piss" all over anything catholic. That includes the display of a crucifix placed in a jar of piss, and the liberal media announced that it was "art".
-
Camille Paglia is worth reading
[Read the article: The paranoid withdrawal fantasy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Let's face it, Camille Paglia gets to the heart of the matter very quickly minus all the hatemongering that Salon readers usually crave for. Her comment about the lack of basic American understanding of history and geography is spot-on with respect to the Middle East and has allowed Bush to get away with a lot of misinformation. Her argument that we should exit Iraq ASAP carries more weight in my mind as compared to other Salon writers because she also explains why it is in the best interests of this country and world for the US to do so. It's not about "Bush lied" or the "Democrats are lame" but, instead, carefully weighing the costs versus the benefits of the next course of action which is to get out now. Similarly, many Democratic senators like Diane Feinstein want to get their information from sources other than MoveOn.org and Glenn Greenwald so they give the appearance, at least temporarily, of siding with the neocons.
Paglia's views on global warming are interesting considering that the p.c. police have, by now, shut down meaningful debate on the matter and how do we know that all relevant information is in? Paglia was putting up a "strawman" suggesting that not all the information is in yet and also to see how berserk the p.c. police would react. The reactions on this website ranged from shock to heresy. Maybe, what she was really saying was: will meaningful debate on global warming resume if HRC or Obama becomes president?
-
Blame Bill for Al's loss
[Read the article: Al Gore's win, America's loss]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Let's be clear: the poor judgment of Bill Clinton in the last 2 years of his presidency made it infinitely difficult for Al Gore to succeed him in 2000. The same thing applies to others such as George Allen's "macaca" episode, Larry Craig's on-going saga and even Gary Hart feels that he should have been president in 1988. Gore had a great economy to run on in 2000 and NATO had just kicked butt in Kosovo and had ZERO fatalities during the conflict. To this day, I don't understand how Gore could have lost. The table was clearly set for him but he could not close the deal.
Even though Bill has moved on since 2000 and he has the bank account to show for it, he is largely responsible for the 2000 debacle. To blame political elites and the media for 2000, or Florida, is a convenient untruth.
If for some reason the GOP prevails in 2008, it should be clear, once and for all, that the electorate places greater value on personal conduct than policy substance.