Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 6 Editor's Choice: 1
-
Shouldn't that be ...
[Read the article: If the shoes look right, you must indict]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"If the shoes look bright, you must indict"?
-
Shame on Salon
[Read the article: Don't get "Fooled Again"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I expect to read slanted propaganda like Farhad Manjoo's recent "review" of Mark Crispin Miller in, oh, the National Review Online. I don't, or at least I formerly did not, expect to read National Review-caliber tripe at Salon.com. However, having read the words of Farhad Manjoo (which I suspect is Jonah Goldberg writing under a pseudonym) one too many times at this site, I'm about to give up on you.
Did Mr. Manjoo even read the book? Or did he fabricate something from talking points he cribbed from GOPTeamLeader.com? His review reads closer to the latter.
Voter fraud is no joke, and anyone who makes light of it, especially given the dictatorship-level quality of federal government we've suffered under for nearly five years, is engaging in the same rank sycophancy that we've come to expect from the kind of old-guard media outlets that are controlled by defense contractors. Manjoo's snarky tone reads like something one might read on a neoconservative blog.
I have supported Salon since it started charging a subscription fee. I can go to plenty of mainstream media sites and read book reviews that are more evenhanded than Manjoo's for no cost. I can read wingnut blogs for no cost, either. This I certainly will keep in mind the next time my subscription comes up for renewal.
Salon is sliding downhill fast. Please stop the slide, or you'll lose a lot of people who have supported you in the past.
-
Goldberg's impeachable bias
[Read the article: Bush's impeachable offense]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]My problem with this piece is similar to what I've found in other pieces by writer Michelle Goldberg. Midway through the second page, Goldberg quotes Bruce Fein, a former associate deputy attorney general during Ronald Reagan's presidency. Fein is quoted (it is unclear if this is from an opinion piece in the not-leftist Washington Times or from an interview with Goldberg) thus:
Fein says Congress should probe Bush on whether he plans to keep "skating the edge" of federal law by trying to concentrate power in the executive branch. "That's the key. It's that probing that's essential to knowing whether we're dealing with somebody who's really a dangerous guy. If he maintains this disregard or contempt for the coordinate branches of government, it's that conception of an omnipotent presidency that makes the occupant a dangerous person. We just can't sacrifice our liberties for ourselves and our posterity by permitting someone who thinks the state is him, and nobody else, to continue in office."
Immediately, Goldberg follows with this statement:
In fact, though, that may be exactly what America is permitting Bush to do. "Politically, I see no possibility that impeachment will succeed," says Jonathan Entin, a professor of political science and law at Case Western Reserve University.
Goldberg continues with Entin opining on whether or not the Democratic minority can recruit enough Constitution-defending Republicans to the cause of impeachment (Entin doesn't think so).
How does ms. Goldberg know that Americans lack the political will to impeach George W. Bush? Does she have a crystal ball? Or is it that she buys into the mainstream media's conventional wisdom (which may or may not be rooted in fact) that it was OK to impeach President Clinton over lying about a consensual sex act, but it's not OK to impeach George W. Bush for crapping in the Constitution and behaving like some tinhorn despot in a banana republic? Which one is it?
Simply put, we're pretty early in the timeframe for how this is going to play out. My guess is that a core group of Constitution-loving Republicans understand that Bush is a threat to the survival of our republic, and will do the right thing by cooperating with Democrats in getting rid of this dictator-wannabe, along with the rest of his Constitution-shredding neocon team, and will replace them with someone a little more in keeping with American democratic tradition. Perhaps that's more a wish than a guess.
Anyway, whenever I see Michelle Goldberg's byline in Salon, I know I'm reading the work of someone who might be better off moving to a venue more consistent with her quality and style of journalism, like Fox News or National Review Online.
-
And Boyle is different from the rest of the GOP sewer precisely how?
[Read the article: Controversial Bush judge broke ethics law]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]These days with Republicans, the anomaly is when they're not openly whoring for the robber barons who greased their path. I mean, isn't "quid pro quo" the official Republican motto? And why would you think this crooked lawyer who got foisted into multiple judicial benches would behave ethically in the first place? If Hello Kitty Frist had any part in putting this guy up, you pretty much know he's someone the Right People can rely on when they need that fix to be in.
The only ones who are losers are those of us outside the gates to St. Reagan's shining gated community on the hill.
-
Manjoo again? Feh
[Read the article: Was the 2004 election stolen? No.]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Was the 2004 election stolen? Farhad Manjoo says no, even though there is a mountain of evidence to the contrary.
Is Farhad Manjoo a Republican Party hack masquerading as a journalist? I'd say, based on the evidence at Salon.com, that he may very well be. And I really wish Salon would stop hiring GOP hacks like Manjoo and, before him, Jake Tapper, and hire some journalists with real investigative skills, not the ability to rewrite Karl Rove's latest talking points.