Letters to the Editor
many spaceships
Published Letters: 7
-
War/Occupation
[Read the article: Fred Hiatt and the "Triumphant Top Gun"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Even in a war there are lulls in the action. In an early lull, the Bush Administration took an opportunity to declare the war over, regardless of whether it truly was or not. That was their framing at the time and they thought they could use it to gain poltical advantage. That framing is now not useful and the ongoing "war" is now used to justify a lot of other stuff.
I imagine they thought the "post war" period would involve a small amount of low level violence, but they counted on the short attention span of the media to pull the curtain on the whole thing and they could roll into 2004 with a Reaganesque Morning In America sort of campaign. In reality, the Iraq war never ceased and we are still fighting the disbanded army, as well as many Iraqi "irregulars" or "partisans" as they used to be called.
Does
-
What Sirica did...
[Read the article: Bush's magical shield from criminal prosecution]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Before Nixon caved, Sirica was going to cite him for comtempt and fine him personally. His logic was the potential criminality involved outweighed any claims of privilege. The use of Executive Privilege was supposed to be extremely narrow and was only relevant to the info NOT under investigation. In other words, for a converstation that covered Vietnam and Watergate, the Vietnam part would be covered, the Watergate part wasn't. His big difficulty was separating those two parts. He relied the 1800 Aaron Burr treason case. This is all in his book about Watergate.
His book is very instructive, Glenn, you might want to check it out.
-
Liberal War Approval
[Read the article: The really smart, serious, credible Iraq experts O'Hanlon and Pollack]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It is amusing that in every other instance at sites like Powerline calling someone "liberal" is an insult and is meant to imply the person is traitorous and full of love for terrorists and hate for America. Yet when the "liberal" NYT (normally, in their minds, a source of homo-loving left wing propaganda) produces a column by "liberals" they rush to use it a proof of how great the war is going. If in every other case it is enough to simply point out that someone is a "liberal" to discredit their ideas, why is that not true here? Aren't they concerned that if they agree with "liberals" they are agreeing with America hating terror lovers?
-
Cary's advice
[Read the article: My boss says I'm a lesbian but I'm not!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't know if you read your letters Cary, but you should.
Recently, you have been on a real run. For example, your answer to the guy with the religious daughter was so bad that he sent the same letter to another columnist (Prudie at Slate) and got a real answer. This is even worse. The answer for this woman is simple: Tell the boss to knock it off in no uncertain terms and then get a new job. The discussion of her clothing was clueless and bigoted.
I have to admit, I am going to stop reading your column, there's better advice in the letters.
-
Within the law
[Read the article: Jay Rockefeller channels Dick Cheney's fear-mongering to urge telecom amnesty]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Over the past year, the Senate intelligence committee has examined this issue, along with the need to bring the warrantless surveillance program within the law."
Did I miss something? If something is not "within the law" isn't it illegal? Doesn't the Senate care about illegality?What a rotten neologism THAT is.
-
First time he's been asked that question?
[Read the article: Huckabee on the NIE: Huh?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Jeez, if you want further proof our press is screwed up.
-
Innoculation...
[Read the article: Shaheen resigns from Clinton campaign]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This is the best thing for Obama, Clinton's doing him a favor. Now he can say the drug thing is old news and the penalty for mentioning it is getting fired from a campaign. I think it is good politics and it shows the Democrats MIGHT be getting their act together and thinking ahead.