Letters to the Editor
Martin Gifford
Published Letters: 150
-
Non-strategy advocates like Greenwaldians demand that you forget the past
[Read the article: War advocates like Anne-Marie Slaughter demand that you forget the past]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Iokannan in the Well wrote: “Simple plans to deal with complex problems invariably result in nothing but absolute and costly failure.” I agree. But I’d almost say that simple plans are better than no plans because simple plans fail and that hurts and that SHOULD wake up those who can make better plans.
Frankly, my dear, ... wrote: “Don't give up your day job. Anyone who remains willfully ignorant of history doesn't get the Cliff Notes for life.” I agree.
Cocktailhag wrote: “Rich people, having any conceivable needs and wants satisfied beyond their wildest dreams, will use their excess to buy the government, cement their power, and silence everyone else.” Hm. Rich people = bad, huh? What about rich people doing good? There are many of them.
Bystander, the priorities in order are: emergencies (war and starvation), security, happiness. The middle part of your comment was just an ad hominem attack. Regarding Bush and Cheney, they will survive because of the “trauma” of 9/11, the media and the Democrats supported them (and they don’t want to face their culpability), and so many people voted for them. But in a just world, what you said would happen.
Kitt, you and others seem to miss the distinction between implementing a plan and the results. I’m just saying they got the war they wanted. That doesn’t mean I like the war and its effects. I’m starting to sound like Glenn Greenwald in his efforts to explain basic logic. I’m surprised that you haven’t noticed by now that I don’t like war and I didn’t support this war. I’m just saying that those you criticise are getting what they want. Yet you Progressives who are supposed to be smarter can only complain. Very eloquently mind you. Put that energy you have for eloquence into solutions. You are seriously tripping if you think I have ever waxed poetic about the Reagan days. You’re pulling that out of thin air. Now, just to be as explicit as possible, I AGREE when you say, “[Bush] should, of course, be in prison rather than the White House.” And I’m NOT trying to compliment the conservatives. I’m just using their “success” to ILLUSTRATE that you should STRATEGISE to take over the agenda like they did. Regarding your last comment, are you saying that strategising long-term like the PNAC people did is a bad idea for Democrats? If so, then good luck with that. You know what will happen? Obama will come in, make a few made-on-the-spot adjustments and then the Republicans will change it back and Glenn Greenwald and you can complain some more and mock people who suggest establishing long term strategies. You’ll say they are to blame rather than taking any responsibility yourselves for failing to plan.
Dogfather, Australia was in the Coalition of the Willing. We had the same thing you had, but I agree it was much heavier in America. I agree that holding people accountable and returning the media to factual reporting is important. But that will only get you back to square one. In the meantime, the pro-war people will be establishing a new agenda, etc. so along with what you are doing, you should work at establishing the agenda and getting into positions of power like the PNAC people did.
Settembrini, there are more than one definition of “utopia”. From dictionary.com: 1. an imaginary island described in Sir Thomas More's Utopia (1516) as enjoying perfection in law, politics, etc. 2. (usually lowercase) an ideal place or state. 3. (usually lowercase) any visionary system of political or social perfection.
Here’s what I think is going on:
You are all so used to attacking Republicans etc. that you think there are only us (goodies) or them (baddies) and so when I come along with a third option, your brains start squirming in shock and you try valiantly to squeeze me into the Republican category or the looney category or the Nazi category etc. rather than simply considering what I say.
This has happened repeatedly. I’ve been called a neocon, a wingnut, a thinktank member, a Hitler clone, a looney, a treehugging dirty hippie, a moonbat, kooky… It’s freaking bizarre!!! It’s like the robot in Lost In Space getting it’s circuits blown, and throwing its arms about saying, “It does not compute, it does not compute…”
What’s controversial about thinking big, thinking positive and creating a long term plan? Your responses are very strange. But this is a political blog, so “us vs them” thinking is to be expected.
-
The Democrats have taken a risk with a woman and a black person, but it's now or never.
[Read the article: One of Instapundit's favorite blogs speaks on race]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Hold on to your seats - it'll be a rough ride to November!
If a woman or a black person is ever to become president, this is the time it can happen. The majority are sick of the extreme rightwingers and the incompetent Bush. McCain is also incompetent, so now it is hard for a Democrat to lose.
While it is true that some black people complain and generalise about whites, some white people complain and generalise about blacks too. Instapunk and Instapundit should look in the mirror when they attack blacks as complaining and generalising about whites. ;)
Something definitely needs to be done about the race issue in America. And we have a solid metric: the percentage of blacks in prison. Let's hope Obama can fix it.