Letters to the Editor
Reality-based Liberal
Published Letters: 774 Editor's Choice: 100
-
What should we expect?
[Read the article: Quote of the Day, Iraq Edition]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Lying in the face of reality has done very little damage to this administration, which is still considered legitimate by a majority of Americans. If they can say and do anything without open rebellion from the opposition party and press, then why not make up whatever you want? It’s not like Tim “the journalist” Russert held Dick to the fire.
-
This administration does not respect us
[Read the article: Bonfire of the vagaries]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For goodness sakes - the FBI knew that the 9/11 hijackers were in the US. The 9/11 hijackers were using our flight schools. Was Bush in a relationship with the 9/11 hijackers?
The White House press corp should bring to press briefings rotten tomatoes they intend to use - or stop going. This White House has zero respect for the truth, journalism and the American public - it's plain to see. I have no idea why anyone thinks that protecting us is some kind of priority for the Bush clan.
-
It's not smarts - it's knowing how to be braze
[Read the article: Bush's brain found lacking]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Did the bully on the playground get everyone's lunch money because he was “a genius?” Karl Rove and the corporate-right machine he serves wins because they are brazen. They lie, openly and often. They contradict themselves all the time. The break promises more often than a junky lover. They get away with it because they owns most of the media, and what they don’t own they bully the shit out of – brandishing "liberal media" labels with abandon.
-
Agree with Greenwald...
[Read the article: Insult-laden diplomacy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Greenwald writes: "None of this is to suggest a substantive equivalency between the U.S. and North Korea or Iran."
That's true. Neither members of the "Axis of Evil" have launched preemptive war on nations in recent history and have never attacked the US. Also, both nations have been attacked by the US in their history, one directly (N. Korea) or the other indirectly (Iran, through our proxy government at the time: Iraq's Saddam Hussein).
-
Strategy is to stop even enlightened families
[Read the article: New hurdles for Texas teens]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The strategy here is not only to put up hurdles to teens who have parents that would freak out, but also to embarrass parents who would consent to their daughter's abortion. Can you imagine finding a notary and having your form published in the registry?
-
Agree with truthwithlogic and Edg Duveyoung
[Read the article: Why we are really in Iraq]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Keeping Iraqi oil off the market is as good as controlling it - even better as the oligarchs expect to control it someday and all the better that supply is down. Indeed, those who don't believe that war is part of a strategy to manipulate prices and delivery are hopelessly naive (do you think with literally hundreds of billions on the line elected officials are more influenced by notions of democracy – particularly in oil producing nations?). Don't confuse the stories news orgs choose to run with the real world.
Though I will agree in part with those who say these guys aren't smart enough to do this. Clinton and the first Bush were much better.
Take Bush #1 and Iraq: he left Hussein there so there would be an excuse for a decade or more of sanctions - which kept the oil off the market just as new supplies were coming online elsewhere and driving down the global price. One short, popular war and he got what he wanted. Obviously his son didn’t pull it off so cleanly. How deluded to believe that some Iraqis would sort out a democracy while we ignored rebuilding and tried to privatize their resources through provisional authority edicts.
Then again, while this current Bush administration would have been stupid to assume democracy would bloom, I’ve yet to find proof that they did – in fact not rhetoric – make that assumption. They still got what they wanted; maybe, unlike Bush #1, they don't care that they are destroying Iraq and America along the way.
-
cannonfodder is an Idiot
[Read the article: Insult-laden diplomacy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Cannonfodder proves how myopic Americans are, with his analysis suggesting Chavez's speech was designed only to manipulate American politics. Clearly he didn't read the speech Chavez gave - and neither did Salon, who gave his embarrassing entry a red star. The speech was a real speech (with the Satan part being a half-joke) and the audience was clearly - CLEARLY the globe. Indeed, to the extent the US was the audience Chavez was exhorting us to consider the threat to ourselves from Bush (and to recommend Chomsky's book).
But cannonfodder (and I guess Salon) think everybody only talks to and cares about Americans - we are the center of the world. In fact, cannonfodder (and starring Salon) group Chavez in with bin Laden - which shows just what stupid fucks we Americans are becoming. It's as though having Bush as president has turned us into drooling idiots.
Get a clue: not everyone outside the US who stands against Bush is evil (unless we think the whole world is evil); and not everything everybody does and says in the world is calculated to affect the US or is directed as us.
Stupid navel-gazers need to get out more often. Sheesh.
-
Yes - "Naive" is the right word
[Read the article: Great expectations]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]First off, there’s this: "articulating an alternative to Washington's dominant right-wing worldview -- and raising the prospect of a world where America can lead again." The irony is breathtaking.
Second, this article presents no ideas or agenda - just Bill Clinton, the not-progressive Democrat, raising billions from global corporations. Government isn't even brought up as part of the solution, but for vague "public-private partnerships" - whatever that means. The UN? Absent.
I'm a little disappointed that there is absolutely zero meat here. How is this different than a Bush PR campaign – an effort to imply progress to stave off real corporate sacrifice? I'm not saying that’s what this is, but at least don't ask readers to take on faith that a Bush-Clinton-GlobexCorp. production is a cure for what ails us.