Letters to the Editor

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

cwnidog

Published Letters: 398     Editor's Choice: 48

  • My Question ...

    [Read the article: Quote of the Day]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    would be:

    "Mr. President, can you tell us why you are unwilling to travel to Conn. to support your party's candidate for the Senate?"

    If, as Lieberman claims, W hasn't got Joe in his pocket why isn't he putting his weight behind the Republican - whom he can be sure will vote 100% down the line with him?

    Mr. "You're with us, or you're with the terrorists" doesn't seem to be a half-a-loaf kind of guy. Who's promised Joe what?

  • I Wish ...

    [Read the article: "That's just the way it is"]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    that I could attribute W's response to the steadfastness of a wise and patient leader who has a clear vision of the situation and knows that he's having us take the best path to peace in the Middle East and the rest of the world.

    Unfortunately, past perfromance leads me to believe that a more likely reason is his inability to admit that he made a mistake. Trying to determine the reason that W sent troops to Iraq has been akin to trying to grab a fist full of jello. Even the longest-lasting excuse, that we're there to present Iraqis with democracy on the point of an American bayonet, seems to be on its way to becoming what was once referred to as "inoperative" by a previous administration.

    The current posture seems to be an indication that the Administration are searching for a new reason as the current rationale melts away on them and are taking a "because I said so" stance until a new excuse presents itself.

  • SuperW?

    [Read the article: How the other third lives]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    Is he more powerful than a locomotive? Faster than a speeding bullet? Able to leap tall buildings at a single bound?

    No matter what the answers to these are, I somehow just can't see SuperW fighting for Truth, Justice, and The American Way.

    Q

  • Well Maybe ....

    [Read the article: It's a wonder he has time to lead the country]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    He could have read three of Shakespeare's sonnets, after all they're only 14 lines long. But, I imagine that poetry is too sissified for the Boy King, so I guess he's just bullshitting.

  • It's Not Just Sober

    [Read the article: Must-see TV: Olbermann on Rumsfeld]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    Olberman managed something we don't get very much of anymore - eloquence.

    I note we haven't had a comment from Joe on this one.

  • I Agree With Tony

    [Read the article: Mr. Snow, meet your boss]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    The idea of "stayingthe course" is "absolutely wrong". But somehow, I think he and I don't mean quite the same thing ...

  • K. Would Understand

    [Read the article: Bush: Move detainees, but deny them rights anyway]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    When Bush, Cheney, Rummy, et al. are having their futures decided at The Hague, I think it would only be fair for the ICC to use Gitmo Rules.

    I wonder how long it will be before these rules are applied to domestic malcontents and the government adds not telling the accused the charges against him to the list of permissable security measures. We've passed through Orwel and are now heading to Kafka.

    Bush wants these rules enacted into law. Will the Dems have the good sense and backbone to fillibuster, or will they be afraid to look "soft on terra"?

  • Just What I Like ...

    [Read the article: Couric to Bush: "I'm really grateful. Thank you. Thank you"]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    Hard-hitting, no-nonsense interviews.

    God, from Ed Murrow to Little Katie Brown-nose in one lifetime. How pathetic.

  • Even if W's Not Impeached

    [Read the article: This just in: No evidence of Saddam-al-Qaida ties]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    If he is NOT impeached, the Republican party will go down in history as an incredulous organization that is not to be trusted with this countries values or system of beliefs.

    I'd say that's been pretty well established already. Unfortunately, I'm not sure that the Dems are any more trustworthy.

  • How does he do it?

    [Read the article: Bonfire of the vagaries]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    I don't know how Tony Snow does it. How can he get up in the morning, know that he's going to spend another day lying and covering presidential ass, put a razor to his skin to shave and not cut his own throat just thinking about the pathetic creature that he's become? Our very own Baghdad Bob on the Potomac.

    He must use an electric shaver.

  • It's All in the Timing

    [Read the article: On spying, GOP senators "work together" -- with the White House]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    A question - will the Republican leadership have the guts to delay a floor vote until after the November elections? Or will this be 2006's version of the authorization of force in Iraq bill that the had come to the floor just before the 2002 mid-terms?

    If it comes up before mid-terms, and for some reason there is no fillibuster, how many of the Dems that are up for re-election will have the intestinal fortitude required for a "nay" vote?

    BTW - the post on Hillary made my milk come out my nose.

  • Plus ca change ...

    [Read the article: Iraq, Iran and here we go again]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    Gee, false claims about a mid-east country's nuclear capabilities by Republicans. How novel.

    The only thing new is this time they're getting called on it. I also heard about this on NPR, so maybe it'll escape the blogosphere this time.

  • "Legal Clarity"

    [Read the article: What we got from Abu Zubaydah]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    When Bush uses the term "legal clarity" in referring to wire tapping, internet monitoring, prisoner abuse, and other less than savory portions of the GWOT, what he's really asking for is legal cover.

    Bush claims that without this cover, the abuses will have to stop, because operatives belonging to the NSA, CIA, and yet-to-be-named agencies and departments will fear prosecution (not exactly his words, but it's what it boils down to). That's the best reason that I can think of not to provide the cover.

  • Like An Old Soviet-Era Joke

    [Read the article: A "heck of a job" for Iraq]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    This reminds me of an old soviet-era joke. Back in the 70s, when the old USSR was just starting to open up a little, the Party decided to open up a strip club in Moscow, for the westerm businessmen and their KGB "dates" only. It was an abject failure. As the manager was being sent off to the gulag he was heard to protest that it wasn't his fault - he had only hired strippers that had been loyal party members for 30 years or longer.

    It's amazing how much this Administration reminds me of the old Soviet model, right down to a system of gulags.

    Everything is based on party loyalty, which is interpreted as being measured personal to George W. Government jobs go to the party faithful and their kids. Goverment aid after Katrina goes to red states Missippi and Alabama, while Louisiana can just fend for itself.

    Works well for the new nomenklentura, but about as well as that Moscow strip club for the rest of us.