Letters to the Editor
Margalis
Published Letters: 614 Editor's Choice: 16
-
A convenient rationalization
[Read the article: A beautiful mosaic of anti-blogger hatred]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Kleiman, who has personally known Edsall for many years notes that the guy is notorious for his utterly dead-pan humour & that if he opined "Broder is The Voice of the People", it would almost certainly have been said with heavy irony, even sarcasm & probably referred to how Broder regards & positions himself.
That contradicts how Alter would have remembered it, had he in fact not forgotten it.
So let's review: you have someone who was there but doesn't remember it, and someone who wasn't there making idle speculation.
That's real compelling evidence.
This is a perfect demonstration of shitty reporting. If Alter wants to make his case he could listen to the tape and claim it sounded sarcastic. He could call up Edsall and ask him what he meant. Kleiman could do the exact same thing.
They have access to the tape and access to the person who made the comment. This is not difficult. Aren't these guys professionals?
It's like they are looking at a nail with a hammer in hand, pause for a moment, then start hitting themselves in the head with the hammer. These guys don't get event the simplest aspects of their trade.
What exactly Edsall meant is a lot less interesting than the reaction to it. These supposed professionals are completely flumoxed by a situation that calls for a few minutes of actual reporting and investigation.
-
Another point about the Edsall stuff
[Read the article: A beautiful mosaic of anti-blogger hatred]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Let's say that Edsall does, as his friends suggest, say things in a serious tone that are not serious and that he does not believe. And let's say that that is what he did in this particular circumstance - he said "David Broder is the voice of the people" as a psuedo-joke, but with normal serious intonation.
In that case, how is Reed guilty of bad reporting? He reported what Edsall said, the tone he said it in, and Gravel's reaction.
The criticism then essentially boils down to that Reed and Gravel are not personal friends of Edsall. And furthermore that you can't properly report on people unless you *are* friends with them, or at least highly familiar with them on a personal level. In that case is it any wonder that the MSM routinely trades credulous stories for access in an obvious quid pro quo?
-
@Sneaky little zionist Jew
[Read the article: The Islamic enemy within]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Good grief, I think Ms. McLachlan just called me a sneaky little zionist Jew.
If someone called you a "sneaky little zionist Jew" why don't you just quote them? It seems fairly black and white, either Ms. McLachlan called you that or she didn't. You "think" she called you that? Can't you be sure by, you know, reading? (Helpful Hint: the "letters" on the page spell out "words")
--
How many Christians think of themselves as Christians first and Americans second? Among evangelicals I would guess the percentage is extremely high.
How many believe that killing someone to defend Christianity is sometimes ok? Again, I would guess an extremely high number.
-
What religion *is* the religion of peace?
[Read the article: The Islamic enemy within]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It isn't Islam and it isn't Christianity, that much is plainly obvious to anyone who can pick up a book.
Attempting to characterize an entire religion is a rather silly proposition to begin with.
-
Why do you morons keep responding?
[Read the article: Large number of Americans favor violent attacks against civilians]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]GoldenBoy is a troll, that is his excuse. What excuse do you all have? Never address a troll directly. (Rule #1 of "Troll Club")
Look, the poll showed that 5% of Muslims thought X and GB claims that number is 25%. That is a conversation ender right there. You don't get to pull numbers out of a hat and keep pretending you are having a serious conversation.
It is pure comedy that you all engage in. You can't have a serious conversation with a clown. You keep reasoning and he keeps honking his nose at you, it really is quite hilarious.
The poll does not show that 25% of Muslims support AQ. Any rational person who is vaguely literate can see that. Either GB is not vaguely literate or he is troll - it really doesn't matter which. You are arguing and arguing when GB is clearly factually incorrect - you may as well argue about whether the moon is made of cheese.
Refusing to answer a poll question does not indicate assent or dissent. It has a wholly unknown meaning and any speculation is just that.
I have no interest in convincing GB that he is wrong because he either already knows it or is a blithering idiot. What I am interested in is convincing the non-idiots here to stop wasting their time and letting such a transparent ploy derail them.
Nothing in the poll data indicates that Muslims are any more violent or evil than anyone else. That is the sole scientific conclusion. The purely personal opinions of the science and math illiterate are irrelevant.
-
@noteapot
[Read the article: Large number of Americans favor violent attacks against civilians]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Did the survey ask practising Christians or Jews the same question ? I would like to see a survey question that says to all Americans - would you be willing to kill or die for your imaginary friend whether god, aliens captain kirk etc.
That would provide an actual basis for comparison wouldn't it? A seemingly elementary concept that is far beyond most people apparently.
Polls are useful if you understand how to apply the results - the vast majority of people of course do not. In the original poll, the only basis for comparison was between Muslims of different regions. Of course *none* of the commentary here has been about that. Instead it has been about either Muslims vs. other people, which the poll says absolutely nothing about, or Muslims vs. personal idealized norms that have no basis in reality.
-
Last couple of paragraphs hit the nail on the head
[Read the article: Improvement in Iraq: Trust Joe Klein and his secret sources]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Since when do we give a shit what is happening in the Anbar province?
Iraq has been a constant shell game - one area flares up, then the next flares up while the previous one cools off. I'm sure at any time it is possible to find *some* part of Iraq that looks peachy-keen.