Letters to the Editor
Margalis
Published Letters: 614 Editor's Choice: 16
-
Awful examples
[Read the article: Dick Cheney's top aide: "We're one bomb away" from our goal]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]They remind me of the folks in the seventies who used to hold forth about the ways in which organic sugar was ever so much better for you than refined sugar, or that evil red meat stayed undigested in your gut for months on end, and that only high colonics and brown rice could purge the nasty remnants of a lifetime of hamburgers from your system.
Red meat is terrible for you and organic sugar is better for you than refined IIRC. You might want to choose examples that don't validate your opponents next time.
-
@WT
[Read the article: Dick Cheney's top aide: "We're one bomb away" from our goal]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That's all right, M. If it works for you, believe it. It won't hurt you any worse than believing in the Rapture, UFO's or, for that matter, Cheney's demolition squad.
Believing that red meat is bad for you is hardly the same as believing in the Rapture. You can't be serious. It does not stay "undigested in your gut for months on end" but it is certainly true that it is bad for you, and brown rice is pretty good for you.
I don't think understanding basic nutrition makes me some sort of crazy person, and to equate scientific nutritional knowledge with believing in the the Rapture and UFOs is plain silly. When you say that you come off as someone who will dismiss any and all opinions that disagree with yours as invalid, even when those opinions are more informed. Whole sugar is better for you than refined sugar, just as whole grains are better for your than refined grains.
My point is not to say that 9/11 was an inside job, my point is simply that your examples were pretty poor and the ones you chose are validating rather than invalidating. That doesn't mean 9/11 actually was an inside job, just that your reasoning was flawed.
It's like saying "the only people who believe 9/11 was an inside job also believe the earth is round instead of flat."
-
@Holly
[Read the article: Dick Cheney's top aide: "We're one bomb away" from our goal]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]He wasn't implying that red meat and white sugar are good for you; he was implying that fixating on eliminating them from your diet isn't going to free you from death or alleviate all sorrow and boredom.
I don't see how you get that from his original post without reading your own meaning heavily into it. The people who used to "hold forth about the ways in which organic sugar was ever so much better for you than refined sugar" were right. It's a lot better for you.
The problem with dismissing things as "conspiracy theories" is that some are quite valid. Some people consider the idea that neocons wanted to attack Iraq before 9/11 a "conspiracy theory". Many people believe that the government can be trusted with unlimited power because they will use it only to our benefit -- to believe otherwise is to believe in some grand conspiracy.
As far as being single-issue, this blog is fairly single-issue that seems like a silly complaint as well.
Not all crackpot issues are created equal. It turns out that refined sugars and grains are really bad for you, even though the movement that stated that appeared to be crackpots. (There is a reason people in the US are so fat.)
Now thinking that red meat sits in your system forever is pretty silly.
My point is just that if you compare me to people who think organic sugar is better than refined you're complementing me.
-
The President's actions are now legal?
[Read the article: Dick Cheney's top aide: "We're one bomb away" from our goal]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glenn didn't address this point and I was meaning to tackle it for a while so I wrote about it in my blog.
The short version is that actions the President takes are not legal just because Congress passes a law, because Congress simply does not have the power to pass certain laws.
There may be a law on the books that says something is legal, but that doesn't mean it really is. Congress could pass a law tomorrow declaring Bush the King of America but that wouldn't make him our king.
The Constitution lends the right to Habeas Corpus, and that takes precedence over any Congressional law. I suppose it depends on what you mean by "legal", but suspending Habeas Corpus, just like declaring Bush the king, is simple not allowed under our system of government without Constitutional changes.
-
I'm sure he's quite the stud
[Read the article: National Review's new tough guy, Mark Hemingway]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]in World of Warcraft.
-
Titles
[Read the article: National Review's new tough guy, Mark Hemingway]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I would probably go for something a bit less snarky and more erudite than some of the other posters. For example:
"Pay no attention to the men behind the curtain. "
Or shorter:
"The men behind the curtain." (Along with some appropriate sub-title)
Or some mythological character or historical figure who turned out to be a big phony.
I would avoid typical left-wing stuff like "Commander Codpiece." I personally love that stuff but if you use something like that you'll get dismissed as a "partisan" complainer right out of the gate. It's too typical of left-wing writing.
-
Appearance is relevant here
[Read the article: National Review's new tough guy, Mark Hemingway]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Right-wingers talk about how effete liberals are for having faggy hair and the like and how manly they are for their awesome shoulders, so appearance becomes fair game. No, it isn't a serious refutation, but that someone is a "sissy mary" is not a serious argument to begin with. Asking them to play by their own rules is perfectly fine and should be expected. Don't create a logical framework if you can't stand the natural applications of it. Appearance is relevant because they've explicitly made it relevant.
As far as the whole "it was a joke" thing, conservatives sure do tell a lot of jokes about how effeminate liberals are. "It was a joke" is the defense of a typical internet troll. Just write whatever BS you want then come back with "it was a joke" for the parts that were stupid.
Anyway Hemingway is a fat ugly fuck. If that offends you just assume I'm joking.