Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
mcgregor
Published Letters: 40 Editor's Choice: 6
Personally, I'm surprised at Salon! If I wanted comprehensive, fair election coverage, I'd probably turn to ten other news outlets before I bothered coming here. Please don't spoil the party by telling the truth about vote suppression, now! Salon is as credible on this subject as George Bush is on the existence of WMDs in Iraq.
Manjoo has zero credibility on this subject. He can't even write a simple review of this doc. without managing to take a swipe at the people who've criticized his "research". Lines like "The film's other virtue is its commitment to the facts" sound innocuous. But the words that follow (along with links to Salon's archive) reveal his game. The funny thing is, Manjoo might actually be a great writer, if only he'd drop the petty "I'm smarter than you" tone of his articles on this subject. Salon readers deserve better.
...that Salon was also the first to tell you that the election of 2004 was not stolen, it was just Democrats sour grapes. Oh wait, no that was Rush Limbaugh. And then Hannity. Then Salon. Let's all thank Salon for helping making it so easy for four more years of getting raped by the republican party. Thank you, Salon. Thank you, Joan. Thank you, Farhad.
Not knowing anything about this program other than what I've read today, it's hard to judge. As a progressive, it's easy to presume this is boondoggle like D.A.R.E. or your typical faith-based initiative (read: federal giveaway to churches). And yet I can't help but think that any program that promotes involved, responsible fathers might not be a bad thing. Maybe I spent too many years living in NE Washington, D.C., seeing the effects of absent fathers almost everywhere I turned. Every fiber of the social fabric of that city is touched by the absence of married men, and boys raised by understandably struggling single mothers and grandmothers.
Yes, women are bound to children by birth. And the physical and physiological part of that men just can't touch. But is it not worth something for the government to try and explore and encourage responsible fatherhood - even in most-likely misguided and heavy-handed programs like this one? And would it kill NOW to admit that fatherhood has a unique value, and that maybe funding one freaking program for men and parenthood would not be the end of the federal gravy train for funding for women's programs (health, family, etc.)? Maybe I'm naive, but even if there isn't already an equal amount of federal money for a "Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Initiative" for women, aren't women inherently better equipped to deal with the very issues this program is trying to address in men?
Seriously, Salon, you fall into Coluter's trap once again. I mean, one could almost tolerate her foolishness if she actually made a point. But she only throws bombs, doesn't make a single argument. Her column is a virutal "Who's Who" of fallacies of logic. C'mon Salon -- do yourself a favor and try highlighting conservatives who are actually trying to compete in the marketplace of ideas. What's next, an interview with Michael Moore on foreign policy?
...but if you're going to hang Imus, at least hang him for what he actually said or did. The "cleaning lady" and "quota hire" comments were not made by Imus, but taken out of the context of radio bits (attacking racism) on his show over 20 years ago.
Still, the irony of Imus being compelled to spend an hour apologizing to Al Sharpton - an anti-semite whose use of terms like "diamond merchant" are at least as egregious as "nappy headed ho's" - for the racist comments he made last week was positively delicious.
You can't buy better radio than that!
The less people who are allowed to publicly flaunt these sorts of attitudes without consequences, the better it will be for gender and race relations.
when we start enforcing "attitudes" with consequences, let the chips fall where they may. today it's don imus. tomorrow, it may be bill o'reilly or bill maher (again). soon, anyone who expresses an opinion that offends anyone will be off-the-air and only government-approved personalities will tell you what to think.
i wonder if those so quick to crucify Imus know the root of this story was david brock's media matters. progressives were only too happy to welcome brock into the fold after he turned tables and apologized for authoring (err, fabricating) troopergate. will they allow Imus the same path of redemption? or is forgiveness only for those who agree with you?
...please continue to post spoilers within headlines and taglines. Then those of us with DVRs don't have to watch the shows, or even read your reviews for that matter.
Unfortunately, most institutions of higher learning have a blanket "no guns, period" policy. Even if a student is trained and capable, even if he's an off duty police officer, even if he has a security clearance higher than God Himself, he still can't carry on school grounds.
As someone who works on a college campus, all I say say is: Thank G-d. Arming a student population - on the extremely unlikely chance there will someday be a massacre - is going to make campuses more dangerous, not less.
To all the closet Rambos out there, I assure you that over the course of your lifetime, there is a 99.9% chance you will not have an opportunity to pull out your concealed weapon, blow away a Seung-hui Cho, and save a college campus. Get over yourselves.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
