Letters to the Editor
Margalis
Published Letters: 614 Editor's Choice: 16
-
rogue governments
[Read the article: Kit Bond and the credibility of war supporters]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Notice he didn't mention Saudi Arabia. You know, where most of the foreign fighters actually come from, and where most of the 9/11 terrorists came from? A place that has no pretense at democracy?
I LOLed at the 75% comment. There has been no dramatic turnaround or 75% of one. Or 5% of one. At best there has been "progress" - of course the exact same progress we've been hearing about for years, as in not actual progress at all.
How dumb do you have to be to fall for the same false story twenty times in a row? There was good progress in 2004, good progress in 2005, good progress in 2006 and now good progress in 2007. Except strangely enough despite all that good progress things have gotten worse.
Why, it's almost as if the claims of good progress are merely propaganda!
But don't worry, in Januray of next year we'll be told that we had the wrong strategy etc etc but now we have the right one, Bush has the right people in place and things are looking up. Just like they always are. That dramatic turnaround is always right around the corner of the infinite corridor.
-
OH RLY?
[Read the article: Let us now praise editors]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's also about millions of readers who need to sort through this endless universe and figure out which writers are worth reading. Who is going to sort out the exceptional ones?
We seem to be doing ok so far without the help of our enlightened overlords.
Given the shit Salon has produced recently, this ode to editors seems bizzarely mistimed. The editors here bring us "uppity", Camille Paglia and the "Obama isn't black enough" woman. Meanwhile the best thing here, Glenn Greenwald, isn't edited at all.
Curious.
-
crazylibertarian didn't read it either apparently
[Read the article: John Yoo -- then and now]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yoo says that executive privilege only applies to the President discussing something with another official. But Bush has stated that he was not involved in the USAG decision in any way, so by his own logic claims of privilege are inapplicable.
-
nabalzbbfr I already covered this
[Read the article: John Yoo -- then and now]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Try to keep up.
-
Klein is funny
[Read the article: Joe Klein and Beltway seriousness]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Every time he writes a response like this he just digs his hole deeper. He is either stupid or dishonest; he seems incapable of understanding the nature of complaints against him and responding to them. Instead he confirms that those complaints are valid by engaging in more of the same behavior.
As for [Kristol and Kagan], Krugman's right: they've been wrong about Iraq. But at least they've taken the trouble to read the doctrine and talk to key players like Keane and General David Petraeus. Liberals won't ever be trusted on national security until they start doing their homework.
Translation: We shouldn't listen to people who are right, but rather people who have access. (And get it by kissing ass and trading fawning press for it)
It must suck to be Klein - he is constantly exposed as a fool. He has *nothing* going for him other than being part of his little in-group. It is increasingly obvious that he and people like him understand politics far less than many bloggers. He is a worse writer, a worse reporter, worse at analyzing.
What is clear right now is that there is absolutely nothing that distinguishes serious beltway journalists from bums.
-
Anon is annoying because
[Read the article: Who are you, Anonymous?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]it's impossible to tell different Anon posters apart. If you have multiple Anon posters trying to discuss something you can't tell who's who.
In a letters section to a paper each person writes a single letter, here you have discussions, and you can't discuss things when everyone has the same name.
Let them make up stupid fake screen names.
Also threaded discussions would be nice.
Also Camille Paglia sucks ass and anything anyone can say here she's already said worse, so the trolling aspect is a bit of a red herring. It's kind of hard to take complaints of meanness seriously when you publish someone who exists only to be a vapid douchebag.
-
How do our troops prevent killings?
[Read the article: Joe Klein and Beltway seriousness]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The same way this magical rock I'm holding prevents tiger attacks. Oh shit a tiger!
-
Being serious
[Read the article: Joe Klein and Beltway seriousness]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]in the end means one thing. You bloviate about how serious you are and your beltway buddies do the same.
The collective emperor has no clothes, it's just a bunch of beltway idiots patting each other on the back while everyone laughs at them. Being a serious journalist has nothing to do with your competence and reporting, it is measured only by the company you keep.
-
Perjury for Gonzo
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The problem right now is the nomenclature is so vague. It's always "the program which we were discussing" or "the program referred to earlier" or "the program the President had confirmed." It's just a vague mess, on purpose.
If I were asking questions I would ask the following:
"How many programs are there, and what are there names? From now on, when discussing a program, please refer to it by name, always."
The language has been very carefully chosen to obscure everything - what is being talked about, how many programs there are, etc.
-
Embargoes and other inanities
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]We must do whatever we can to maintain the status quo - because that is working so well right now!
I agree completely with Glenn - the fewer of these gentlemen's agreements the better. This sort of thing is common in consumer industries that release info with the understanding that it won't be propagated right away. Companies give access to reporters who in turn don't ruin PR opportunities.
That makes sense for say video games. There isn't any news of great importance there to begin with, and consumer industries live and die by marketing.
The US government and other political issues are genuinely newsworthy, and preserving PR opportunities is not something to be concerned with. Unlike in consumer industries, in politics citizens have a right to know.
If that spoils some big PR coup then so be it.