Letters to the Editor
Lynx
Published Letters: 1595 Editor's Choice: 126
-
What liberalism isn't
[Read the article: The most revealing three-minute YouTube clip ever]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Gerry does a good job articulating what liberalism isn't. He just says the opposite.
all those cultural indicators that I named are undoubtedly promulgated and championed from the left side of the political spectrum
Except that they aren't. They are aspects of our culture, a culture created by both left and right sides of ideology in this nation. The only real difference is that liberals believe people should be able to live their lives without governmental interferance and conservatives want cameras in the bedrooms making sure you're only doing what they permit.
When an Illinois Republican congressman was found guilty of the same thing, he resigned in shame
Likely because he'd spent lots of time condemning people doing what he was doing. However, you're confusing your terms again when you start substituting "Democrat" for "Liberal" and "Republican" for "Conservative." While they may tend to line up that way, there are conservative democrats, and theoretically there can be liberal republicans.
What good was a Civil Rights struggle if many black people were left to wallow in government-supported ghettos built with plenty of "compassion" but not much common sense, with fatherless boys left to fend for themselves because government policies discouraged marriage and child-rearing, all in the name of "compassion," with multiple generations reared on the notion that self-reliance is bad and the government owes you a living?
Ah, a good traditional rant here, but also traditionally way off the mark. The housing projects were experiments at low cost housing, they failed and new experiments are being tried now. Boys (and girls) aren't fatherless because of government policy, they're fatherless because of interpersonal dynamics and likely because of poverty. There are no government policies discouraging marriage or child-rearing, just ones created and perpetuated by conservatives that ensure the wealthy continue to accumulate wealth at the expense of the poor.
reared on the notion that self-reliance is bad and the government owes you a living
Is that what explains conservative efforts to repeal estate taxes and buy college degrees for their children whether or not they pass their courses? Liberals are the ones that are pushing self-reliance by ensuring they CAN become self-reliant. Job training, minimum wage laws, maternity leave, universal health care, etc... These all allow people to be self-sufficient. Conservatives would rather ensure people stay dependant on the government and on the wealthy because then they are supposedly more controllable.
Stop buying into the old rants and do a little research.
-
To Wake Up
[Read the article: Run, Elizabeth, run]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]And let's consider the situation if it were reversed...say, a republican candidate did this. He would be crucified by all of you defending the Edwards
And you're wrong right out of the gate. You make the classic conservative assumption that liberals are just like you. We're not. Hell, most of the posts about Tony Snow are get well wishes. Everyone knew Cheny was very ill when he ran both times and liberals weren't clamoring for him to get out of the race (not for those reasons anyway).
-
Estate Tax and more
[Read the article: The most revealing three-minute YouTube clip ever]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sorry buddy, I'm not buying your anecdotes. The guy with the hardware store would have had many other options if he really wanted his kid to take it over. It isn't double taxation any more than 99% of the rest of tax policy. You're taxes when you're paid and you're taxed when you buy something from your friend with the hardware store.
If a single woman with children married, she lost her welfare benefits.
Well if she married Newt Gingrich, sure! Again, you're vague and anecdotal, I'm not buying it.
As for familiar leftist rants and talking points based in the politics of resentment,
Now we're back to conservatives assuming everyone is just like them. These aren't rants or resentment. I'm sorry the truth has a liberal bent, but that's the way it is.
-
Subsidies
[Read the article: Gone with the wind]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've seen a number of people comment that there'll be subsidies for the wind farm, like that's unusual. Just about all power generation gets a subsidy of one sort or another. This is the same reason we don't get better train service in this country. People whinge about the subsidies to Amtrak and ignore the HUGE subsidies the airlines get and that cars get. Yes, windmills will likely need subsidies at first. In return we get cheaper power in the long run, cleaner air, less dependance on fossil fuels from all over the planet and have taken steps to reduce global warming. This is what government does, it creates the social environment in which we live.
-
DurianJoe
[Read the article: Gone with the wind]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It isn't an either/or thing. We'll need both conservation and the turbines. And turbines don't wreck land or seascapes, I've seen them and they're less obtrusive than other power plants or billboards or even just buildings.
-
Location
[Read the article: Gone with the wind]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]DurianJoe,
So if they are fairly unobtrusive as the article made them seem or like all the ones I've seen on land, they'd be fine with you? Airborne ones are a great idea, but from everything I've read about them, they're not quite ready yet and they'd require an even greater initial investment.
-
mizbinkley
[Read the article: Death threats dog female blogger]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Don't hold your breath. Your comment contained 3 words Ben won't understand.
-
Ben
[Read the article: Death threats dog female blogger]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Substantiate my claims? Sure. If anyone wants to see that you're an idiot all they have to do is go read your other posts.
-
Ben
[Read the article: Death threats dog female blogger]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm not making any claims about the story at all. I'm just calling you an idiot.
Heck, I'll also call you a misogynist. I've been reading your posts since Broadsheet started and these are really the only conclusions one can reach.
-
mizbinkley
[Read the article: Death threats dog female blogger]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It wouldn't surprise me at all to find that Rageboy is Ben Dover. His vitriol towards women is unfortunately strewn about the letters sections of many past Broadsheet posts. Hell, look at his chosen name here. His responses are barely coherant and he likes to make things up. Check his responses to me, he assumes like there's no tomorrow.