Letters to the Editor
walter_map
Published Letters: 1429 Editor's Choice: 20
-
Vitter litter
[Read the article: Why David Vitter matters]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Some meaningful action must be taken against Vitter. If none is, his leadership will only further drain any sense of values left to our political culture. I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one.
Not that any is likely. As we've seen in one case after another, Republicans are soft on crime.
By the way. Mrs. Vitter might like to have herself checked for venereal diseases. The kids too.
Vitter: "I did not have sex with all those prostitutes."
-
Buffalonian
[Read the article: Why David Vitter matters]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I am so tired of people stating that Monica Lewinsky could not have consented because Bill Clinton was so powerful.
I can tell you from my own experience that charming, intelligent, powerful men like Bill Clinton are often on the defensive with women who throw themselves at them.
This is easily explained in terms of evolution, which makes it something Republicans aren't able to understand. Consciously or unconsciously, females seek out superior males so they can pass on their advantageous genetic traits to their offspring. The dynamics of sexual selection naturally makes guys like Clinton a target for predatory females.
Vitter, on the other hand, simply isn't a candidate for that kind of constant temptation, which is why he resorted to prostitutes. Again, sexual selection, or in this case, deselection. Although it's possible Mrs. Vitter was just charging a lot more than the going rate and he could get it cheaper elsewhere. Market forces are something Republicans understand.
-
Neocons believe
[Read the article: The National Review mind]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That two wrongs make a right, and in fact believe that the more wrongs committed by neocons, and the more heinous those wrongs are, the more right they are.
Let's take a quick look at the statements they utter, proving their criminality:
"Just take a couple of these anti-war people off to the gas chamber for treason to show, if you try to bring down America at a time of war, that's what you'll get."
Simple advocacy of such a position is a criminal violation of 1st Amendment rights. If we actually had any.
You must live near the UN building ... They should suicide-bomb that place."
Advocacy of terrorism. And NYC is already short a few hundred firefighters.
"There were WMD, and they were shipped to Syria ... This picture of a country in total chaos with no security is false. It has been a triumph. It couldn't have gone better."
Psychotic delusion. Podhoretz belongs in a prison for the criminally insane.
It gets worse the more you look at it, of course. This sort of thing was typical of right-wing posts on the NYT political forums, before they all got shut down, where neocon propagandists regularly advocated murdering 'liberal' Americans wholesale. It's been suggested by a couple of NYT right-wing posters that the real reason Democrats haven't impeached Bush is that people like them would exterminate congressional Democrats and then go on to commit genocide against anybody they can find who opposes Bush policies.
They weren't kidding. Apparently it's not a crime for Bushites to actively promote terrorism and mass murder against US citizens - which belies their claim that they're all for 'protecting America'. Apparently they need to destroy the country in order to save it, which goes a long ways towards explaining Bush's policies.
The neocons who have been running the country the last six years meet all of Lawrence Britt's specifications for fascism, in spades.
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html
By the way, Amerika is not a 'democracy' and has no such thing to export. Amerika is a corporatist oligarchic empire which will continue to pretend to be a 'democracy' until the opposition to overt fascism has been crushed. Which is exactly what neocons have been doing the last ten years, and have been pretty successful at it at that.
Then you'll see just how Hitlerian they can be when they put their little minds to it. The bad news is that it is probably too late to stop them.
-
Elephantman
[Read the article: The National Review mind]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Show me where ... Ann Coulter ... any other bogeyman of the right has seriously suggested ... that there ought to be a suicide bombing of the UN building.
Coulter is on record as having preferred that Tim McVeigh had bombed the UN building instead of the Murrah federal building.
Do you deny it?
Pat Robertson is on record advocating a nuclear attack against the US Department of State.
Do you deny it?
The rest don't need to come out and say it. They have paid anonymous slimeballs like yourself to do it for them.
Do you deny it?
Tell me something, neocon:
Are you of the opinion that anybody who opposes the Bush administration should be tracked down and killed as a 'traitor'?
I have records of dozens of pronouncements from the NYT forums from slimeballs like yourself saying precisely that. And worse, like a description of a plot to take down a small plane carrying Paul Wellstone two months before it happened.
No need to confess to anything at this point, neocon. This isn't an investigation.
How about you?
-
Elephantman
[Read the article: The National Review mind]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Bolton said, in 1994. "If the U.N. secretary building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference." There was no reference to suicide bombing
A distinction without a difference.
Bolton nevertheless advocated destruction of the UN building in the name of radical right-wing hatred.
Did he not?
Speak up, neocon. Let's see whatcha got.