Letters to the Editor
Holly McLachlan
Published Letters: 559 Editor's Choice: 3
-
2 things
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]1) Bartlett, said Wolffe, [...] was known for pushing the President to be more candid and forthcoming, especially regarding Iraq.
Part of the political newsmedia's over-fervent admiration for Bartlett may stem from his willingness to tell them anything at all back when they had to scratch at the Oval Office door like cats put out for the night. Bartlett may have been the Bush team's "good cop" for managing the press -- and they may still love him for it. It's easy to forget exactly how contemptuously unforthcoming the Bush administration was a few years ago. They are forced by circumstance to let out more information now.2) Regarding news of Anbar province -- I haven't re-read your post, but the memories I have of it are: a) that you did confine your criticism to the method, not content, of Klein's article, and b) that the tone of post was harsh and snarky to a greater degree than is usual for you. Those aren't tightly constrained observations, they are the fairly unreliable memories I have of it. I will go back and read it again tonight. I agreed with the core criticism in that post, that habitual, casual overuse of anonymity is bad practice.
There was coverage of an improving situation in Anbar in the New York Times prior to Klein's article, but I'd argue that it wasn't so all over the print media that his piece amounted to a newsless rehash. Given that, arguments from Drum or CJR regarding his loose use of sources aren't all that sound.
Critics of your article may have been spurred to speak up by the tone of the post, and by a desire to see the little good news we have from the Iraq occupation treated as well as possible. Ultra-rightist whining to the contrary, most Americans, journalist included, would much prefer to see the whole Iraq project go as smoothly as the Balkans.
Bad news from Iraq has been the norm over the past 2 years. The occupation management practices that are working in Anbar should have been employed throughout the country starting in '03. Anyone asking me to get pumped up over the sight of our government finally doing part of its job right is asking too much. -
Insufficient Broadcasting
[Read the article: New disappearance revelations]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Are we at a point, now, where most Americans are unlikely to be shocked -- or even to care -- if these allegations of CIA child abduction and torture turn out to be true? [...] in the past, I could reassure myself that the fact that I was learning about them meant that "the truth was coming out," with everything that that implied. Now the truth comes out, but the results are different -- no public outrage (except among the readership of certain blogs), no apologies, resignations, investigations, etc.
Most Americans are unlikely to be shocked, because they are unlikely to know if these allegations are proved true. They aren't hearing about it in the 10 minutes of news that's covered on-the-hour on the radio station that plays during their commute home. It's not above the fold on the local paper. It's us international news junkies who are following this matter, not the bulk of the population. But the lack of media interest in following up on these kinds of allegations is new. The MSM would have treated this as a bomb-shell issue ~30 years ago. If the same editorial sensibilities prevailed now... it might have allowed us an entire day without news of Paris Hilton's travails!
Perhaps in 2007 people are more coarse and cavalier about the degradation of our standing in the world, but their tolerance for news of child torture hasn't been put to the test the way it would have been a generation ago.(BTW, if you are 7, and a large foreign guy your parents are afraid of puts bugs on you, and your folks are prevented from stopping him -- it is torture. Most parents worthy of the name would consider killing someone who did this to their young child.)
-
A Fine Whine on a Sunday night
[Read the article: Joe Lieberman, warmongering centrist]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]arne [...] the fact that Lieberman was elected against all the wishes of people like you and Glenn is a perfect example of what you guys hate about our election process.-- tiberius
Funny, that. I distinctly remember rightwingers foaming at the mouth when "carpetbagging" Hillary Clinton was elected to the Senate by a solid majority of the voters in New York state. Back in 2000 you'd almost have thought when reading some of their exhalations that they despised the citizens of New York for exercising their franchise. But.... winger couldn't be so anti-American as to doubt the virtue of our election process, could they? Naaaaahhhh......
Joe Lieberman is a prominent senior senator, and he's devoting his considerable political capital to an ideologically-driven effort towards softening up the populace for more war. He doesn't get a pass on this matter -- he's a big boy in the big leagues, in a free country.
-
Poppycock
[Read the article: Joe Klein's stirring defense of Lewis Libby]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]... I never expect to be taken seriously by this group unless the logic or documentation is irrefutable, and even then denial is the next step. If someone asks me a real live question, I will happily answer. But if I have to guess whether a reply is rhetorical, I won't.-- shooter242
I have repeated ask you legitimate questions in comments (UT) and letters (Salon) over the past 1 and 1/2 years, and you have very rarely made substantive replies. I do not abuse you the way the men do, but have gotten the same supercilious non-response more often than not. You statement above is simply false.