Letters to the Editor
bucky1
Published Letters: 1714
-
Blogs and politics ...
[Read the article: Blogs and the establishment media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glenn,
Congratulations on the book and its early sales. I look forward to getting my copy.
I think the country would be in far better shape if many more people read blogs from the left, middle, and right and became more educated on the realities of our country's actions and choices. Do you predict that is coming? Can anything be done to increase blog readership or is it just an evolutionary thing?
Keep up the good work.
-
Hoover
[Read the article: How did the Bush administration use its secret eavesdropping powers?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]GG: "The point is that we ought not have to assume or speculate about that matter. We ought to know, and Congress ought to force the administration to disclose this."
Exactly. I am inclined to think that the purpose of using the information was exactly as in the case of the FBI under J. Edgar Hoover, who amassed significant power by collecting files containing large amounts of compromising and potentially embarrassing information on many powerful people, especially politicians.
-
@ kdwmson & William Timberman
[Read the article: Standards of American justice under George W. Bush]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You both could talk to your hearts content among nice people at:
http://www.wendymcelroy.com/smf/index.php
It will take a day or two to get 'approved' but would be worth it to see a real debate without hate mongers destroying the conversation.
I take it that William has decided not to respond to my follow up of his response. Fine, but it does seem a bit odd given what you wrote.
-
I missed this train for a while ...
[Read the article: Standards of American justice under George W. Bush]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]WT: Not inconsequentially for my argument, it also allows you to assure the gullible of the purity of your own doctrine while casting aspersions on those who've had to wrestle ingloriously with real issues of governance in the mass societies of the present century. Yes, the U.S. kept slaves and butchered native Americans and runs an imperial war machine. Did/do the Swedes, or the Finns, or the Swiss?
What aspersion did I cast your way? Please be specific.
What argument? You are keeping anything you believe very close to your vest. You seem to hint that you believe in big government and can not imagine society without it. You ask me if there is anyway a society could exist without a strong government.
At least that is what I think you are asking. Is it?
What you overlook -- what every so-called libertarian seems to overlook -- is the extent to which concentrated economic activity, and the wealth it produces, acts against democracy. The sad condition of the fourth estate in our era is as much a product of this concentration of wealth as that of the Congress. Can you make that go away? Are you even interested in it? It doesn't seem so.
The above is unproven conjecture. But let me stipulate that point for a moment; Democracy is that form of government where the winners plunder the weak. Ask the natives, blacks, poor, homosexuals, ...
This is good in what way? The question I thought you wanted to know was how can the common man seek protection if there is no government. Was that not it?
what does it mean to you to ...work toward returning to the original republican form of representative democracy? You know, in a world which contains Exxon and Shanghai, as well as Osama bin Laden and SLBMs?
You missed the point entirely.
I was saying that since I live in an empire, at this time the best I can hope for is a return to the republic. Is that a hard concept? Sometimes we must work for the possible, even if the ultimate good is unobtainable.
If your answer amounts to anything more than don't tax me, don't let brown people live next to me, and don't tell me I can't ride a motorcycle without a helmet, it would behoove you not to stop where you've stopped. Otherwise, it leaves you in a place most serious people have already left.
That may have made sense when you wrote it, but it seems to be bluster to me now.
First: my answer to what? What would be the ultimate good; no state? --- Or, what seems to be obtainable in the near future; a return to a constitutional, representative democracy?
Both have little to do with motorcycle hats.
Did you scan over the url I left?
-
re: This Is Why I Hate The Democrats
[Read the article: How did the Bush administration use its secret eavesdropping powers?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]David: "This article explains so perfectly the intensity of my loathing for the Democrats, and why I hate them just infinitesimally less than the goddamn Republico-fascists. Could someone please explain to me why there hasn’t been a daily parade of torture victims testifying before Congress, describing their rendition and imprisonment at the hands of the CIA? Or how the hell the Democrats have been in power for six months without having served a single subpoena on Karl Rove? Or even, for that matter, what possible reason there was to give the Republicans political cover by including more goddamn tax breaks in the minimum wage bill?
It seems nothing terrifies the Democrats more than the prospect of uncovering some actual, concrete evidence of Republican criminality, compelling them to take a public stand and DO something about it, like, say, impeachment, God forbid. ..."
Great stuff, I agree 100%. All that work in 2006 and we just get Libby? If the loyal opposition can not stand up to the illegality of a president now --- when on earth would they?