Letters to the Editor
Taste of Death Publishing Company
Published Letters: 19
-
Don't Underestimate Their Subtlety
[Read the article: The Kucinich court decision and "judicial activism"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The term Judicial Activism means much more to the Right Winger than "I disagree with the court's ruling." It clearly is intended to mean that the judge is a liar, that the court's sophisticated legal analysis of statutes and codes and case law is all just a cover up to mask the judge's secret, hidden agenda for liberal world domination; i.e. the establishment of a Marxist-Homosexual-Mexican dictatorship on US soil to bring the Midwest states in line with the likes of New York and California.
-
You Still Don't Get It, Do You
[Read the article: Lawbreaking telecoms still conniving to obtain immunity from Congress]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glen, why do you insist on acting surprised that Democrats are agreeing with Republicans on telecom immunity? Why do you keep saying its a form of capitulation, implying Democrats, deep down inside, do not actually want telecom immunity? Do you really believe Harry Reid secretly loves poor people and only out of dire fear is being coerced into helping the rich? Why, because he wears a gold "D" on his lapel? Are you that gullible?
-
Sur-Reply To Reply On Democrats' Selective Submissiveness
[Read the article: Lawbreaking telecoms still conniving to obtain immunity from Congress]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glen, your reply is well-taken. But I maintain my criticism of your article's implication that Democrats, as a whole, are being coerced against their paper-thin will into helping the wealthy corporations. You do indeed make this implication in your article:
"betting on Democratic Congressional submission
to Bush's demands is one of the surest bets there is.
... Reid and most of the Senate Democratic
leadership [are] specifically committed to delivering
yet another victory for Bush."
Telecom immunity is as much a victory for Democrats as it is for Republicans. They both are doing their duty and will get their pay-off. Democrats are not "submitting" to Bush's demands. One could just as easily say Bush is submitting to Democrats' demands (after all, Bush's dreams of laissez-faire capitalism will be destroyed by the FISA legislation).
You correctly say Harry Reid & Company are doing everything in their power to pass this immunizing bill. But, read in context, your wording leaves open the interpretation that you are being sarcastic, i.e. that Harry Reid is so wimpy it appears almost as if he wants to get his ass kicked by Bush. You should make clearer that this telecom immunity bill is bipartisan through and through. The Democrats are doing the ass-kicking alongside the Republicans, and have as much to gain by the bill's passage.
-
Barack Hussein Zelig
[Read the article: Barack Obama: "Committed Christian -- Called to Bring Change"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't think I want to see the brochures Obama is distributing in the San Francisco area.
-
Hiding Behind Weakness
[Read the article: Will the Democratic presidential candidates adhere to their rhetoric?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Democrats want to spy on people just as much as Republicans do. Let's not mitigate their guilt by painting them as the weak ones being overpowered by outside forces. If this FISA spying-free-for-all bill passes, it will be at the will of those who vote for it.
Remember, if you don't have any terrorists hiding in your closet, you having nothing to fear when the government searches your closet 10,000 times per day.
USA = Under Surveillance Always
-
I THINK JOANIE'S IN LOVE
[Read the article: John McCain's endless war]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Hour after hour, day after day, we hear nonstop from the rush limbaughs and sean hannitys and hugh hewitts how mean and unfair McCain is to poor little victim Mitt Romney. It sure is a good thing we have Joan Walsh to remind us of this ever-present fact, in case we forgot it during the five-minute station break on right wing radio. But really, what could possibly compel a supposedly left wing writer to parrot Rush Limbaugh's nauseating pro-Romney/anti-McCain talking points? Is Walsh suggesting that NOT ENOUGH pundits are choosing Romney over McCain? Every single right wing pundit (except Michael Medved) is 100% against McCain and in favor of Romney, and they spout anti-McCain pro-Romney propaganda 24/7. But Ms. Walsh apparently feels some emotional need to add her voice to the right wing chorus singing its neverending lovesong to Romney. It's obivous Romney's going to win the nomination. So why would anyone on the left waste time going after McCain? Unless this is the one chance Ms. Walsh will have an excuse to prove to Mitt her true inner womanly feelings. I hate to disappoint you Joanie, but I don't think Mittsy reads salon.com; if he did, he'd figure out by now he doesn't need to spend so much money campaigning.
-
Oh you poor dear
[Read the article: Signs of life from House Democratic leaders]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glenn, Glenn, Glenn, Glenn. When will you ever learn. Of course this new House bill will get shot down, and the Senate bill, giving full retroactive amnesty to corporate lawbreakers and stripping all judicial oversight of government spying on Americans, will pass with flying colors. I can hear Bush's signing speech now:
"My Fellow Americans, I am so pleased that the House Democrats finally decided to put American children's lives ahead of their desire to please Islamo-Fascists. Though their delay did cause many innocent Americans to die, and placed our nation in terrible danger, luckily they figured out that the hardworking American people will no longer tolerate the Democrats' terrorist-loving ways."
Though your article today demonstrated a charming, even quaint, 'hope against hope' optimism about our government, I think you knew in your heart that this current House Democrat support of that old fashioned concept, "rule of law" (and yes, that phrase will require quotes from now on, since it only exists as a popular spoken phrase and not as an actual phenomenon) will make as much material difference as a convict's Last Words before his execution by firing squad.
-
NOW TAKING BETS -- What Lie Will They Comes Up With?
[Read the article: Lee Hamilton denies Michael Mukasey's claim about 9/11]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You know Mukasey & the Bush Team will get out of this mess as clean as a whistle. But what lie will they dream up to do it? I propose we place bets in the comments section. Here are the possibilities:
(1) He was speaking hypothetically (Like, duh?!?)
(2) He mis-spoke and simply made an innocent McCainian gaff
(3) He was lying about the incident, because he is really a Democrat disguised as a Republican
(4) He was telling the truth. There really was such an incident and the FISA law really did prevent Bush from investigating it; and it was mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report (and then he will cite a vague sentence from the report allegedly referring to the call)
My bet is on (4). Anyone want to put down $100 on it?