Letters to the Editor
Taste of Death Publishing Company
Published Letters: 20
-
IN DEFENSE OF CALLING FEMALE POLITICIANS "F--KING WHORES"
[Read the article: Thank you, Rush Limbaugh!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]We absolutely should feel free to call female politicians "fucking whores", particularly when they ARE fucking whores.
Hillary Clinton supported the war in Iraq, which has killed and ruined the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians (she says, at the time she didn't know Bush/Cheney were lying. How come I knew but she didn't?). Her acting as accomplice to mass murder is far worse morally than a working girl giving guys head for $50 a pop. In fact, my main concern in using that phrase would be offending prostitutes by comparing them to murderous witches like Hillary and her fellow war pigs.
Maybe if Hillary Clinton and her daughter simultaneously give me head for free, I might stop calling her a "fucking whore" and switch to "fucking slut." Please feel free to pass that information along to her public relations team.
By the way, in case you're asking, I feel equally belligerent against male war pigs. The only difference is, I wouldn't want any of them to give me head, which is why Hillary's continued refusal to give me free head has caused the unnecessary preservation of her title as "fucking whore."
-
Good Post
[Read the article: John Yoo: Spearhead or scapegoat?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]GG: "But discussion of things like the 'Yoo Memos' has started to have the effect of obscuring the fact that those were really 'Bush Memos' and, ultimately 'American Memos'."
--This is one of the most poignant lines, and points, I've ever read on this post. Good writing, comrade!
-
Why Glenn Is Not Being Self-Contradictory
[Read the article: Is it "contradictory" to decry the right's tactics while insisting on their equal application?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The charge of contradiction should be replied to like this:
Glenn's only real point is that personality-based issues should not be the focus of the MSM's reports on the presidential race.
The MSM justifies its personality obsession by claiming the issue is vitally important to choosing a president, and also that it is extremely interesting to its audience.
Glenn brings up the torrid anti-family values personal lives of Republicans merely as a reply to the MSM's false justification. For if personality issues were truly important and interesting to the public, as the MSM claims, then the MSM would be constantly focusing on all the juicy personal lives of Republicans, which it is not.
-
ONE HUGE HOLE IN GLENN'S LOGIC
[Read the article: David Brooks' fictitious defense of his industry's behavior]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glenn - there is one huge, gaping hole in your argument:
George W. Bush was elected President of the United State TWICE.
This proves that the US journalists are right in their opinion of Americans as a nation of moronic redneck. America is the land of the pea-brained morons and GW Bush is their king. What about this don't you understand?
-
I Still Don't Get It
[Read the article: Howard Kurtz on why media outlets ignore the "military analyst" story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glenn, please explain to me again, why you were shocked to discover, that some elderly white man wearing a US military uniform speaking on American television during the lead-up to war, had a pro-war bias.
Do you also get shocked when the football announcers on ESPN are discovered to have a pro-sports bias with 'connections' to the National Football League?
-
Correction of Grammatical Error In Today's Article
[Read the article: What backroom conniving are Steny Hoyer and the Chris Carney Blue Dogs up to on FISA?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There is a grammatical mistake in this article, namely in the use of the word "weak" to describe spineless, capitulating House Democrats. This is an incorrect usage of that word. The word "weak", when applied to Washington DC politics, has one meaning and one meaning only: "Lack of Intense Desire To Bomb, Shoot, Kill and Destroy As Many Foreigners As Possible." Accordingly, these Bush-following House Democrats are the very opposite of "weak."
-
Update: why "Israel says" instead of "Neo-Cons in Israel say" ?
[Read the article: Neocons and the truth: Bitter enemies to the end]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That's a bit sweeping, to imply that ALL Israelis and ALL of Israel are a bunch of lying war-mongers, on the same level as the handful of neocon elites in the US.
Oh yeah, I forgot the golden rule of leftwing bloggers: No one is allowed to criticize the Bush Administration without also showing unbounded hatred for Israel.
This also happens to be the rule of rightwing talk radio. Whenever a leftwinger is on, he gives equal time to bashing Israel as he does to bashing Bush, with the inevitable follow-up from the rightwing host about Democrats' hostility toward Jews.
This is a great rule, by the way, as it keeps Republicans in office by playing their favorite tune: Bush's wars are not about making uber-profits for his friends in the oil and defense industries (Exxon, Haliburton, etc.), they are about protecting Israel due to Bush's overwhelming love of Jews (that Bush sure has a huge pro-Jew bias -- what a terrible person he is!).
Way to keep it going, Glenn!
-
Reply to Holly McLachlan
[Read the article: Neocons and the truth: Bitter enemies to the end]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That's exactly my point. The average listener does not cut and paste. I don't think Glenn's an anti-semite, but I'm a youngster. Elderly Jews in this country remember when antisemitism was rampant in the US. Glenn's careless, ambiguous comments about Israel, combined with right-winger's merciless pandering to Jews, assures Republicans get the older Jewish vote come November.
Secondly, Glenn's ambiguity IS a sign of his criticism of the collective Jewish state (perhaps valid, perhaps not). That criticism should not be combined with criticism of Bush/neocons simply because one group uses the other when convenient. They are separate groups with very different agendas. Glenn is carelessly lumping them together, which is overly harsh to Israel and overly generous to neocons.
The point is, calling Bush a "Jew-lover" is not helping the liberal cause!
-
It Was Only (Another) Hopeless Fancy
[Read the article: Was Karl Rove involved in the military analyst program?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Why bother?