Letters to the Editor
kingfelix07
Published Letters: 45 Editor's Choice: 2
-
I am a little confused
[Read the article: The Dan Gerstein sham]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Hamsher's Lieberman smear DID happen. She apologized for it, but it was still unpleasant. However, it appears she gets a pass from Glenn Greenwald for this, for apologizing.
While she may not be Rush Limbaugh, there seems to be an inconsistency here in what GG says, in that, if guests on Rush and Hannity (a dreadful fascist) were subject to similar manufactured non-stories as this one directed at Clinton, then he would accept the non-story as representing what??? "Balance" an equal distribution of mud?
Also, by using the phrase 'extreme right-wing blogs' you imply that FDL is an extreme left-wing blog.
I am not sure that's the case, but I do think it matters that the person who runs FDL has engaged in the kind of behaviour that Hamsher has, and I don't find it any more acceptable for having been done by somebody on the left. Acquainting myself with the Lieberman episode, I have to conclude that it was truly a gross error of judgment and that Hamsher is damaged goods.
Or is there some progressive atonement process of rehabilitation that I missed? That doing good Libby coverage absolves everything?
Would fairness really equate to right-wing pols being able to consort with debased journalists a la Rush only if they receive public opprobrium like those on the left do? Surely the better solution, which you don't bother to point out, surprising, given your usual forensic approach, would be for politicians of BOTH SIDES to eschew contact with both the Limbaughs and the Hamshers.
But, no, instead you assert that FDL, by dint of its reputation and number of readers, is respectable. You feel obliged to repeat this fact twice, as if you don't quite believe it yourself.
I read this blog religiously, but this post is the weakest for a long time, and I feel the reason it ties itself in knots is because you are trying to argue from a position other than your usual position of strength.
-
You do me a disservice GG
[Read the article: The Dan Gerstein sham]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]But, no, instead you assert that FDL, by dint of its reputation and number of readers, is respectable. You feel obliged to repeat this fact twice, as if you don't quite believe it yourself.
More brilliant logic. In the last week, I've said that the media was too compliant in the run-up to the war probably 15 or 20 times. So I guess, by your reasoning, that means I don't REALLY don't believe that.
--- Not at all. I admire your consistent line in pursuing non-partisan goals of journalistic accountability from mainstream media figures. However, this instance was different from that, and you with your brains should be able to see that. With you repeating yourself twice in the space of a couple of paragraphs, your usual dispassionate voice gave way to something more anger-driven. I don't know, you explain your lapse into repetition. ---
I read this blog religiously, but this post is the weakest for a long time, and I feel the reason it ties itself in knots is because you are trying to argue from a position other than your usual position of strength.
The post is about the impropriety of Dan Gerstein as a source to attack blogs. That is the topic of the post. Do you have anything to say about that? It doesn't seem so. It seems instead that you have some animosity towards Jane Hamsher and think she's the equivalent of Rush Limbaugh. That's fine. I don't agree, to put it mildly. But that point is, at most, secondary to the post. The actual point is one that you seemed to have overlooked in your desire to focus on Jane.
--- I think again you back up my comments. I don't agree with your basic point here. This blog post seems as much about the defense of the person you familiarly refer to as 'Jane' (is she your pal?) as about the antics of Gerstein. Of course, his actions are of a type, and he benefits through the erroneous expansion of his bought-and-paid-for spouting being redubbed as the views of Democrats. Nothing new. But FDL's creator Hamsher does have a past, and the fact that other commentator's do to, doesn't relieve people who are featured on her blog from criticism, as you yourself confusedly claim elsewhere, when you advocate a similar standard being applied to Right-wing politicians featured on extremist right-wing blogs.---
Generally, your slamming of my comments so soon after I posted them, suggests you did not really devote any time to pondering their merits. Instead, you just zoomed back with a type-as-i-think comment that is not representative of your usual standard of discourse.
-
Link to speech not working?
[Read the article: "Fringe liberal bloggers"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I am getting a page not found on your link to Digby's speech.
-
Just one small error
[Read the article: How secure are you? ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]One of no doubt many.
"... whose work has far more substance and staying power than the glitzy rubbish turned out by her fine arts contemporaries of the '90s, notably that overpraised, overpriced pack of Young British Artists whose balloon, except for the redoubtable Tracey Emin, has slowly sagged."
Damien Hirst recently sold a piece of his art for 50 million UKP, as well as setting a record for highest price for work sold by a living artist 19.2 million US$. I don't use money as a measure of greatness, but it is hard to seriously contend that his balloon has sagged, given his extremely high profile.
-
Best yet
[Read the article: One-sided rules of political debate]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've been reading GG for more than a year now and, without doubt, this is the best post I have read.
Bravo!
-
Such a beautiful legacy
[Read the article: "Control"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I love Joy Division as much now as I did back then, in my teens, getting into them, in the mid 80s, nevermind the band's career was already over.
Hopefully the film will bring more people on board for what is compelling music.
I have since strayed, as I used to consider Joy Division the greatest rock n roll band, but now, for their body of work and its quality, I feel that Swans are the ultimate.
Long live Joy Division! Long live Swans!