Letters to the Editor
Alan Bennett
Published Letters: 251 Editor's Choice: 8
-
@ Reality Based Liberal 2
[Read the article: Moving beyond Obama and race]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I have no issue with you about even handed critiques of ALL candidates. But it not going to happen. Supporters rarely give the benefit of the doubt to the opponent. It seems to me that Sen Obama is very capable of explaining his position in language that is easily understood. We may quibble with the actual choice of some words but can understand the pressures under which he was dealing with a tough and complex subject. While you may not want to inject Clinton in this discussion you have set up a strawwoman argument. How does Sen Clinton's religious affiliation explain the Pastor's words? If I find a Pastor who has a close relationship these past 20 years saying the same type of stuff as Pastor Wright did I would ask Sen Clinton for an explanation. I am suspicious of articles that go in for the guilt by association stuff. Your reference suggested to me: Clinton does it too. That is gotcha however you want to explain it now.
-
@Reality Based Liberal 3
[Read the article: Moving beyond Obama and race]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]OK. Thanks for taking the time to make your arguments. I appreciate that and the tone of your response. I agree that the candidates should be held to their records and claims. Instead of piling on Joan I would be happy if we engaged one another and helped advance a Democratic candidate who will win in Nov. I will vote for the choice of the primary voters. I will do some work door to door to help. The country faces huge problems and we should take back all that is good about our country from those who have disgraced us these past 8 years by their irresponsible war in Iraq.
It is time for Democrats to look at what is best for all of us, and back off attacking the two candidates by using vitriolic language. Let us not wound our winner so badly that Bomber McCain slips in.
-
@Reality Based Liberal 4
[Read the article: Moving beyond Obama and race]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Another thank you for a great explanatory post. I was born in South Africa and was educated up to University level; know Archbishop Desmond Tutu personally because I was arrested while visiting him when he was Bishop of Johannesburg (did not have a permit to visit his township office). Let's just say I know race from the wrong side. So the kerfuffle over Pastor Wright distressed me but never made me judgemental.
Your remarks about Palestine made me recall two Jewish friend in Johannesburg getting razzed seriously by members of their faith because he asked them to think of Palestinians as made up of moderates and extremists. And this way way back in the 60s.
For now I am waiting this out, trying to remain calm and hoping to help oour candidate when the time comes. It is all I can do.
-
McCain's Helpers
[Read the article: Journalists, McCain and the false Iran/al-Qaida link]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You referred to Ana Marie Cox. Commenting on the rather testy exchange between the Saint and Elisabeth Bumiller of the NYT (this post the NYT smash at the Saint)on the candidate's plane AMC said that EB was not a regular. AMC, who is, swotted away EB's criticisms and questions by saying: Well OK? He's miffed at the NYT. And he has not had his fifth cup of Starbucks.
With that lame brained defence we next see AMC on Face the Nation.
These people have no shame, Glenn. They are beyond being embarrassed.
-
Patriotism and Iraq
[Read the article: The ongoing exclusion of war opponents from the Iraq debate]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In what is purported to be the bastion of free speech nothing sends a shiver up the spine than an attack on one lack of patriotism and lack of allegiance to the flag. A favourite attack mode of the righthas emasculated the Friedmanites and their ilk. Somewhere along the line Liberals felt the need to prove their hawkishness on foreign policy and their open support for war against Islamists. The Right was never going to be in a position to criticise the Serious Liberals on the fight Islamic Terror.
The Friedmanites, with their units, their temporising, their yes, but and their refusal to look at the carnage being wrought in the defence of American values are determined to show their toughness.
The MSM, afraid of the same accusations make sure that trenchant critics of Bush's war in Iraq don't get face time on TV. Having been boosters of the Drive to Iraq ( or Baghdad or Bust?) they have made some efforts to show the awful side of the war. It is too little too late. The enablers are still at it: witness Kyra Phillips (CNN) interviewing Gen Petreaus. The impression I came away with was Phillips the hawk and Petraeus the realist. That is how our discussions are distorted. Up is down, black is white...Oh Hell.
-
To Intelvet and GG
[Read the article: The ongoing exclusion of war opponents from the Iraq debate]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Intelvet: If you and those you know have views on the war make sure your voices/words are heard/read wherever you can post. Don't worry about the snark. It is part of blogistan. Just tell us what is happening on the right among those who are thinking seriously about the quagmire we call " the surge is a success". The Iraq issue is too important for all Americans for it to be a left/right issue; too important to be a subject for debate as opposed to discourse. I don't want to win an argument, I want to change minds.
GG: I note your comments about Charlie Rose. But I have been put off by the optics: one is given the impression that a serious discussion is taking place, but one often comes away thinking that a lot of words were used to say nothing of import. Facial expressions, looking serious and pursing lips are no substitute for content.