Letters to the Editor
Amity
Published Letters: 1110 Editor's Choice: 106
-
That's some squeaking there
[Read the article: Clarence Thomas is not a sellout]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]By narrowing his definition of who qualifies as a betrayer of the race to extreme cases -- for example, "an African American member of a black uplift organization who reveals its secrets to anti-black adversaries out of malevolence" -- Kennedy allows [Thomas] to squeak under the gate.
Squeak under, indeed! We may safely regard the US Supreme Court as a traditionally white institution — nevertheless, inasmuch as it pursues justice it is an uplift organization for every American unfairly treated, black or otherwise. And inasmuch as affirmative action represents (for the many reasons Hannaham lists, as well as others) one of the great machines of justice in modern America, and Clarence Thomas has built a successful career out being "the one black guy who votes white" (there's not a lot of competition), the definition Hannaham cites appears to apply in every practical sense.
Does it make sense to say that Clarence Thomas' views are, indeed, his own? He appears to subscribe to a judicial philosophy which is as blandly predictable as that of any reactionary troglodyte. In what way does he express a unique or idiosyncratic jurisprudence?
-
Ought to be.
[Read the article: Why campaign coverage sucks]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Journalists ought to be bringing new knowledge into the system ...
As brilliantly incisive a characterization as one could hope for of the central problem of journalism in the US today — it doesn't bring any new knowledge into the system. Karl Rove understood this very well, in much the same way that liberals who continue to tune into the same crypto-Republican debating points day after day do not. Is Hillary a bitch or a pussy? Is Obama too black or too optimistic? Tastes great? Less filling?
My one gripe, Editor, is that I would have loved to see Jay Rosen delve more into the peculiar press psychology he so perfectly captures. Why are press people so herd-like? What in their training fails them when it comes to being able to intelligently, autonomously conduct themselves like actual reporters?
I remember the hue and cry from the established press, years ago now, when Salon scooped the Columbine sherrif's report on the shootings there. How did some internet rag's lowly reporter gain access when those representing the prestigious papers could not? It was all about not following the herd.
-
Clarity about affirmative action
[Read the article: Clarence Thomas is not a sellout]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It bears mentioning that affirmative action, properly speaking, is not a system for permitting members of racial minorities to achieve positions of prominence for which they were otherwise incompetent or unqualified. Affirmative action is simply the policy of choosing, from among a selection of equally qualified possibilities, someone who is otherwise at a disadvantage in a prejudiced society.
That Clarence Thomas was a beneficiary of affirmative action in his early career is perhaps the case. It's incorrect, however, to say that it was affirmative action from which he benefited during his astonishing climb to the top of the judicial ladder. He was simply one of a few — a very few — right-wing blacks with a legal pedigree, which made him a natural choice for any and all appointments that right-wing Republicans had a chance to fill.
That isn't affirmative action. It's more like abandoning morality, decency, and identity for the sake of expediting your career — in short, what we might call selling out.
-
Which is worse?
[Read the article: Heroes of Katrina, ghost of "Gonzo"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]OK, here's a Cliff Note for the bewildered ...
Which is worse: Andrew O'Hehir adding this painful disclaimer in the middle of an otherwise decent Sundance diatribe? Or the fact that if he hadn't, his readers would have been earnestly cluck-clucking about Salon's toleration of drug-addled journalism and the kind of message it sends out?
It's a sad age we live in, when Hunter Thompson is gone and we want to replace New Orleans with something more suitable for our brittle morality.
-
Ain't seen nothing yet
[Read the article: The knives come out in South Carolina]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For pity's sake, sure, call it knives coming out, but one of these people is going to end up in a gunfight come the general election, and the kind of genteel stabbing about which Walter Shapiro appears to be so alarmed is going to seem quaint and polite by comparison.
We had a nice, restrained, well-behaved campaigner in John Kerry. He was a flop. He was at a total loss in the face of the Republican machine. It was a testament to how little the Democrats had to do to win in 2004 that Kerry, doing virtually nothing to defend himself, nearly won anyway. So come on, if the fantasy of happy smiling perfect politeness isn't dead after that, please, let's find a way to kill it with all possible haste.
The forthcoming election is a fight for the soul of the nation. We Americans are in the grip of a struggle between negotiable centrism and complete and utter insanity — nobody who pulls punches or can't handle receiving them has any business in that contest.
Democrats don't always get along, and they don't always have nice things to say about each other. They don't have to. They're not together in one party to enjoy each other's company and agree all the time — that's not why it's called "politics." All they need to do is vote together — and win.
So let's hear more hard words, not fewer. Let's keep hearing them, in fact, until all of the Republican talking points are out in the open for everyone to see, and the candidates have been able to learn to keep their balance and perfect their ripostes. The long, closely-contested primary election cycle is a great opportunity in that respect. I hope they take as much advantage of it as possible.
-
What indeed?
[Read the article: A bizarre turn on the investigative trail ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I still have no idea what he meant.
The answer to Mark Benjamin's confusion is simple. He scared the crap out of his interview subject by coming after him, all the way from the seat of national government, after the dude pretended to be a veteran.