Letters to the Editor
Alan Bennett
Published Letters: 254 Editor's Choice: 8
-
Birds of a Feather
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I find the posts in the segment very instructive. I concede that the Democrats have a Lieberman problem and I would add that there are other Democratic Senators who cannot be counted upon to toe a line when an issue comes up for a vote. But that aside I think that Senators, from 2001 to 2004 were too timid and found it easier to swim with the Anti-Iraq currents. Battling against that was no job for the faint hearted. Most Democratic Senators, like their Republican counterparts care more for their careers, perks, status and collegiality that for principle and integrity. The Senate is the world's least deliberative body and the most self satisfied.
-
Awful
[Read the article: Last Iowa debate helps Huckabee]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The debate was as lame as the moderator who was boring. What was Alan Keyes doing there? He is a nutcase. They have left out Kuchnich for the Dems debate. And you are going to be discussing this with Chris Matthews? Another nutcase! Really, Joan, is Hardball a venue for serious discussions about this election?
-
The most exclusive club in the world
[Read the article: Harry Reid -- compare and contrast]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That is how these cats describe themselves. With a few exceptions Their Imperial Senatorialnesses have a view of themselves and their self importance to the American body politic that has always been out of sync with the real world. Reid and McConnell belong to that tribe. Both are shifty and look the part. And they have a loyal cast of enablers. This Senate is not Republican or Democrat. They belong to an old party called We Serve Ourselves.
-
Holy Joe!
[Read the article: No Democrat wanted Joe Lieberman's endorsement]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I stopped watching Hardball and Tucker 3 months ago. The world is still turning; I read more and obtain a better grasp of politics watching the BBC and CBC Newsworld and going to the net. My friends say the same thing: Matthews is an unprincipled suck up artist with no class. Lieberman is an unprincipled politician with no class. They deserve each other.
-
The Washington Press Corpse
[Read the article: Favorite quotes of 2007]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thanks Glenn. Russert, Matthews and Murray are at the centre of a dozen or more of the worst examples of journo-propagandists for the powerful political elites.They play to a chorus of adoring buffoons whose nudge and a wink is an additional features of ther act. A list of the vacuous statements of Kristol, Kagan, Krauthammar et al on the Riiiiigggght might also be useful. Perhaps readers can send you some.
-
Pakistan and Iraq
[Read the article: The Bhutto test]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Bhutto influence on Pakistani politics began when her father became Prime Minister back in the 70s. It has nothing to do with Iraq: the hatreds and rivalries among the ruling elites and the generals goes back to 1947. So all this stuff about current American presidential candidates and their commentary can have no effect on Pakistan's politics. That Axelrod chose to inject Iraq may thrill Obama's supporters. But his was a stupid statement meant to push his candidate. It has nothing to do with any sorrow for the Bhutto family. When we write about this business we should spare a thought for the husband and children who, believe it or not, read American blogs. Is it a wonder that so many abroad are sick of us because of our pre-occupation with advancing our national interests at the expense of others?
-
Lisa K
[Read the article: The Bhutto test]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You made my point. Only Americans think that their foreign policy goals and security give them the right to interfere in Paskistan. Of course Bhutto went back because the US pushed Musharraf. And Bhutto has a US network of supporters. But that does not mean that the vast majority of Pakistani's give a damn what Presidential candidates say or think. They want the US to stay out of their affairs. You may not like it. But we are not talking about ruling elites.
-
Depressing but no surprises
[Read the article: 9/11 Commission: Our investigation was "obstructed"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]One can imagine the baying MSM dogs if all this happened under Bill. Lookit: Bush did not want to talk to the Commission without Cheney being present. That says it all. This WH has no shame. Congress did not exercise oversight it exercised overlook. Don't wait for the Democrats to do much. The margins are too thin for brave and defiant acts. What's more important? To give Bush a hard time or to secure a earmark? These people have their priorities in self serving mode. And the MSM: they find it more fragrant to sniff Hill's panties and get a whiff of Thompson's manliness that do the hard slog of getting out and doing some investigative work.
-
We need to FeelGood
[Read the article: No makeover for Hillary -- yet]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Clintons are easy to mock. The Republicans eased the way to much of the automatic reflex now shown by our side. With Carter we felt good, with Bush we wanted a beer and a simple friendly fellow. Now we yearn for hope. Bama may fit that bill but he is not tried and tested. Our political discourse is so juvenile that we wonder why we regularly elect some of the most useless people to office nationwide.
The only twist is that now the misogynists will be coming out of their closets asking to have their shirts ironed.
Even bellitling Edwards became all about his haircut.
-
Editor's Choice
[Read the article: The witch ain't dead, and Chris Matthews is a ding-dong]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Your four choices(editor's pick) say something about you. Three are hostile towards Hillary. Well you haven't learned anything, have you. This choice is a joke.
-
Why I don't care who you vote for
[Read the article: Why I'm still not for Hillary Clinton]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]We live in a democracy. We get to vote for a candidate of our choice. We support our candidate in various ways. Why do women feel the need to tell us why they won't vote for a woman. Can someone point to an articulate where a male academic tells us why he can't vote for a man? Thanks