Site Presented By
Saturday, Nov 7, 2009
L.W.M.
Published Letters: 6225 Editor's Choice: 5
You just have no idea how fucking cravenly dishonest and evil these people are or how much they have to hide and how desperate they are to do that.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040517/wiener
The Archives and Allen Weinstein
The White House nomination of Allen Weinstein, a historian of Soviet espionage, as archivist of the United States has caused a storm of protest in the normally quiet world of archivists and historians. Nineteen organizations, including the Society of American Archivists and the Organization of American Historians, have issued a joint statement expressing concern and calling on the Senate, which must confirm the nomination, to hold hearings to find out why the current archivist is being replaced and whether Weinstein is qualified. That call was heeded; hearings will be held "in the coming weeks," according to a Senate spokesperson.
The groups' first concern is that the nomination appears to be a political move, while the position of archivist was supposed to have been depoliticized. Weinstein has close ties to Republicans in Congress, and the board of his Center for Democracy includes Henry Kissinger. The archivist should be a non-political appointment because, as the custodian of the nation's history, the person is confronted with issues that have major political consequences--from the JFK assassination records to the Nixon White House tapes. Decisions about access ought to be nonpartisan; that's why the archivist's term is not linked to the President's. It is indefinite, and the archivist can be fired by the President only for cause. There was no need to replace the present archivist, John Carlin, a Clinton appointee; Carlin had made it clear that he intended to remain at his post until July 2005. He did announce on April 8 that he would leave before that--reportedly in response to White House pressure--but declared in his statement that he is not resigning until his successor is sworn in.
Why, then, has the White House nominated a new archivist? Many speculate that George W. Bush, as well as his father, thinks the younger Bush may lose the election, and they want their man in control of their archives before that happens. The new archivist will deal with access to the papers of the 9/11 Commission after it closes up shop in August and with the release of the archives of the presidency of Bush Senior, which, under the Presidential Records Act, can be made public starting in 2005 (except, of course, for classified documents). These records include, for example, documents on Bush Senior's role in the Iran/contra scandal of the late 1980s, when he was Reagan's Vice President. And if Bush Junior does lose the election, the new archivist would have a third new task: appointing a director for the Bush Junior presidential archives...
http://www.correntewire.com/the_overton_window_illustrated
I found this (again, the Overton Window, it's down in the comments) reading a post by Henry at Crooked Timber that Atrios had pointed to. It's about a recent Chait TNR article on the netroots. I urge you all to read Henry's post
http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/04/chait-on-the-netroots/
and understand the concept of the Overton Window. Especially Sammis.
Sammis,
It's OK to have been a kool-aid drinker once. I drank the kool-aid and was for the Iraq invasion before I was against it. Now I'm a flip-flopper. It's OK to be a flip-flopper as long as you that after you stop drinking the kool-aid. It's bad news to do it after you start drinking the kool-aid.
Is it just me or does Shooter sound a little shrill to the rest of you?
I don't think you are an enemy troll, not yet. I have been fooled before. But I think you have been fooled into believing what you claim to believe. From Henry's post at Crooked Timber:
As for the claim that netroots bloggers’ attacks on “fairness,” “moderation” etc are motivated by their fundamental distaste for compromise and honest intellectual debate – it’s nonsense. Again, netroots’ criticisms of ‘moderation,’ ‘bipartisanship’ and so on are historically limited. I had one discussion with a prominent netroots blogger about bipartisanship which is worth quoting.Bipartisanship isn’t necessarily bad. Bipartisanship in the current political atmosphere, where only one side is being bipartisan, is bad. In the six years that Bush has been in power, when has he compromised? … There is nothing inherently bad in bipartisanship. There is something inherently bad in bipartisanship with this crowd.
I do read some "politically right" credible blogs. Not for news so much as other ideas. I'm much more of a conservative than many of those who claim the title these days. But if you've been reading Glenn awhile, you know these people are not conservatives in any way. They are right wing authoritarians. They are radicals.
Now might be a good time for you to defenestrate yourself through the Overton Window before it starts moving back to the center. It just can't go any farther to the right.
http://www.correntewire.com/the_overton_window_illustrated
Stupid
So now you want to limit people who have political connections to participate in politics.
You think "journalamism" is politics. That's why you are being excluded from both politics and journalism. The Overton Window. Defenestrate yourself.
Glenn isn't black, cracka.
Black rappers made him do it!Who countenanced Bernard McGuirk calling Hillary Clinton a "bitch" who'd "have cornrows and gold teeth before this fight with Obama is over"
Kelley Cracka responds...
"Well, I mean, did you hear her at that church in Alabama? Why does she get a pass on an offensive imitation of stereotypically black speech and co-opting the rhetoric of a civil rights struggle she wasn't a part of, but this McGuirk guy (I assume he must be this Imus guy's radio sidekick) can't point that she's trying to "out-black" the guy? I mean, trenchant analysis, that line's not, but it sounds to me topical enough that I'll bet I know what he's referring to."
http://letters.salon.com/7c1216f5c1798d6dae40fd242cadbb92/author/
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The Maine fight was supposed to be the dress rehearsal for repealing California's Prop. 8 -- but gay marriage lost
Once one obtains Seriousness credentials in the Washington media, they are irrevocable no matter one's conduct.
Salon headlines in your mailbox
