Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

walter_map

Published Letters: 1444     Editor's Choice: 20

  • Newt goes off message

    [Read the article: Newt goes off message]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    He does this to fake people into believing that he's a "reasonable person." It's a tactic to advance the ultraconservative agenda: since he's "proven" that he's a "reasonable person" his agenda can't be all that bad, now can it?

    He does this sort of thing every once in a while, like in 1995:

    The greatest leaders in fighting for an integrated America in the twentieth century were in the Democratic Party. The fact is, it was the liberal wing of the Democratic Party that ended segregation. The fact is that it was Franklin Delano Roosevelt who gave hope to a nation that was in despair and could have slid into dictatorship. And the fact is, every Republican has much to learn from studying what the Democrats did right.

    Of course, he never followed up with any meaningful action based on these sweet words, but he did proceed to engage in a laundry list of radical right-wing smear campaigns, con jobs, and gross self-serving hypocrises.

    Republicans frequently resort to this ruse whenever they need to drum up support outside of the extremist wing of the Republican party: they start talking like libruls. Remember that Dubya got as far as he did in the 1999 campaign by posing as a moderate, and most people didn't figure out he was somewhere to the right of Genghis Khan until years later.

    Ultraconservatives have to do these things because they know that they're fighting against the future, and that time is therefore against them.

    The extremists don't get upset when a pub leader goes librul because they know it's just another con job and par for the course, and that the pub will act in the proper ultraconservative manner when the time comes. Intellectual dishonesty for political gain is expected among radical right-wingers.

    So it is a con job. So don't fall for it.

  • The Bush Gestapo is upon us.

    [Read the article: Democrats' responsibility for Bush radicalism]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    Dubya was going to do it anyway, and the Democrats were going to let him, because even Democrats are neoconservatives.

    You might have thought it was a little weird that the Democrats would whine at Dubya about his illegal conquest of Iraq but then very strangely turn around and fund his military ambitions anyway. And now the Democrats illegally "legalize" his continued trampling of the the Bill of Rights.

    Why would the Democracts do that? Because the US isn't a democracy. It's a single-party Soviet-style military empire operated for the benefit of the military-industrial complex and related faceless transnational corporate conglomerates, with two branches of the same Party vying for control. You just hadn't been notified yet.

    But you should have gotten a clue from the power-grab Executive Orders and the almost total acquiescence of the Democrats in these power grabs. Except for a little whining, just to make it look good.

    Clinton didn't need these extraordinary Police Powers to prevent eight 9/11-level "terrorist attacks". Bush doesn't need them to prevent "terrorist attacks" either, but he does need them to establish a totalitarian police state. He also needs enormous concentration camps and a string of overseas gulags to deal with people who disagree with him. Those he already has. What did you think they were for? Fighting "terrorism"? Come on.

    Bush has clearly shown - by deliberately permitting the 9/11 attacks (as the 9/11 Commission proved), by deliberately enabling gaping security holes, and by deliberately provoking would-be "terrorists" - that he has no intention of "preventing terrorists attacks."

    Quite the contrary. Bush is most grateful for everything that "terrorists" and done for him. That's why he's let OBL off the hook, and that's why he's kept the insurgency going in Iraq: because he needs them as pretexts to continue his power grabs. The Democrats aren't going to stop him from having the dictatorship he's always wanted.

    This is how it's done, people. How else would you think they'd do it?

    Hi Scorp.