Letters to the Editor
Lynx
Published Letters: 1773 Editor's Choice: 127
-
Rehabilitation
[Read the article: Nixon knows best]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sure, Nixon did some good, but it was far outweighed by the bad he did. The Right is trying to rehabilitate everyone they can because all their heroes are villains. Even Nixon's mentor McCarthy had a book put out not too long ago claiming he was a hero. Of course, it, like the attempts to rehabilitate Nixon, was a load of crap.
Remember that Nixon started out on HUAC and that philosophy drove him all his days. It helps explain Watergate too.
The current administration has its roots in the Nixon administration and they've been trying to re-establish it ever since, just without the little bits of good that he did.
In my library, I have quite a few books from the late 1950s that all explain what a vile, evil little man Nixon is. They mention the dirty tricks he pulled to get elected, the lies he spread, his time on HUAC, etc... I also have a series of books from the late 1960s that pretty much say the same thing. Now we have a new crop of books about Nixon. Seems like they also are saying this, despite the reviewer's plea to speak well of the dead.
Also, Reagan didn't bring down the "Evil Empire", they did that to themselves. At most Reagan and Nixon made minor contributions to the downfall of the Soviet Union.
-
Faulty Assumptions
[Read the article: Nixon knows best]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For a man derided by so many of our intellectuals, Nixon loomed large in 20th century history and culture. With the exception of Lincoln, Nixon has probably been portrayed by more great actors than any other chief executive
Probably? And then you ask two questions about the operas? Too lazy to do research? There's a lovely little thing called Google that'd let you find out simply. There's also a thing called the "library" where you can do research on things called "books" that are remarkably similar to what you're reviewing here.
Also, "Great Actors" and then you lead off with Rip Torn! No wonder you're saying Nixon was good, your standards are abyssimally low.
As far as his being of interest, just because he "loomed large" doesn't mean he shouldn't be derided. Many criminals have been the subject of derision, of films, books, etc. Would we say Al Capone was good simply because there have been so many movies and books about him? I think not.
-
Why not just say "I was his therapist"
[Read the article: I know my co-worker's evil secrets -- because I was his therapist!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Because if the employer knows it was a very specific type of therapy, say drug treatment or at a halfway house for previously incarcerated people or anything specific at all, then the LW is giving away information simply by acknowledging the relationship. Information that could be detrimental to the other person and a violation of confidentiality.
Many fields like this do not pay well at all and are stressful enough that it'd be easy to "burn out" and need to switch careers for awhile. Maybe they just switched 'cause they wanted more money than social work provides. Either way, it is entirely plausable that the writer could find themselves in a situation such as the one described.
-
Poco
[Read the article: A tragic legacy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Just keep reading. There are stories about the investigations the Dems are doing every day. They've also passed quite a bit of legislation, are passing more despite Bush's vetos and veto threats. Bush is promising to veto one of them today, in fact.
Sure, the Dems haven't been perfect, but they've been a damn sight better than what came before.
I know reading is hard for you, but if you make the effort you'll see the stories you claim are absent. Of course, ignoring evidence is just what you Righties do, isn't it?
-
RealName
[Read the article: The hullabaloo over Digby]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Just ignore him. He's just stated that only .0006 of a person has ever heard of Digby.
He's a nihilist. Hates just about anything and likes to argue for the sake of arguing. Doesn't like liberals, conservatives, democrats, republicans or independants. Doesn't care for men, women, the elderly, the young, the middle aged. Will rant about how horrible just about anything in the world is and how you're stupid for giving a damn about just about anything.
He's so bitter and full of hopelessness that I pity him. Or her if that's the case. I can only hope for his sake that he's a diehard conservative that takes the positions he does here in order to dishearten liberals. Sadly, I think he's just a poor, frightened man who is very aware of his own lack of power and comes here to vent his belief that we're all doomed and nothing we can do makes any difference.
Fortunately, he's very wrong.
-
RealName
[Read the article: The hullabaloo over Digby]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]No personal attack, just explaining you. I hope someday you manage to find something you like.
And thanks for crediting me with 15,000 times as many friends as have heard of Digby.
-
Poor brickbat
[Read the article: The CIA's torture teachers]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Seems as though someone's hit him in the head with one too many times.
So, who'll you name when you're being suffocated? Haven't done anything wrong? Doesn't matter, someone named you, now it is your turn.
-
Tiberius
[Read the article: The CIA's torture teachers]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]We already know.
0
-
Shooter242
[Read the article: Face of a psychopath]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You're asking for proof of a hypothetical negative. Something that is impossible. That's like asking for proof that I will never build a rocket in my backyard and fly to Mars with it.
Saddam's getting the bomb was about as likely as my building that rocket.
Life entails risk. There is no such thing as perfect security, only acceptable risk. Saddam & the bomb fell well within that area.