Letters to the Editor
Alan Bennett
Published Letters: 254 Editor's Choice: 8
-
Choosing a President
[Read the article: The Hillary and Bill show]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As one who has seen woman Prime Ministers and Presidents in action in 8 countries the world over since 1960s it comes as a shock to me that US politics is still so polarised. On both the left and the right the hatred is palpable. Does anyone think that the only effective President will be either an extreme Christian conservative or a left wing ideologue?
Politics is the art of the possible. As long as Americans promote the politics of exclusion, of division and of ideological purity the country will forfeit its once proud role as a leader of the world when it comes to accountable government.
I am amazed at the hatred for HRC. I shudder to think what will happen if Sen Obama becomes a candidate. I have so little faith in the US political system in its present form. Where is that generous impulse that permeated the body politic during the response to the Tsunami? I know what and whom you are against. There was a time when I knew what you were for.
-
Senators Dodd and Biden
[Read the article: Dodd is my copilot]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Good men, capable and articulate. But their clubbiness (A senatorial vice) is their undoing. Sen Lieberman has stabbed both these men in the back and they pretend it never happened. These guys are not tough or ruthless enough to get into a Presidential finals.
-
Vitter without
[Read the article: Sen. David Vitter, a leading Christian social conservative]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Will the good Senator lose his ding a ling? I read that Mrs Senator suggested as much: no compassionate conservative she!
-
Tucker and Glibness
[Read the article: Tucker Carlson, stalwart defender of sexual privacy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glenn: I don't like telling people what to do. But I am breaking that rule today. Do not go on this man's show. You give him credibility. You give him ratings. This man is shallow. He will twist your words, shout over you and generally make it impossible for you to make your points. I often wonder why people go on these type of shows just to get beaten up. You don't need the publicity. Unless you are prepared to shout, make misleading points and generally be as untruthful as he is you will come away diminished. Please resist the tempation.
-
Still confused
[Read the article: Elizabeth Edwards didn't call Hillary Clinton a man]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't let Drudge guide my thinking. But I am still confused. does Elizabeth Edwards want me to support her husband to show that I support her? Is she engaging is politics which is calculated to help her spouse. If so, what's new? President Clinton is donng as much and so is Michelle Obama. I get a whiff of the snide when I read you rendering of what Elizabeth said.
Drudge is going to put out his sludge no matter what, and there is a hard core right who will attack any Democrat nominee. That is a given. Among Democrats let us find the best candidate and give unstinting support to the one who wins the primaries. If you have a principled position that your nominee has to a pure progressive then none of the current field of Democrats will engage your interest.
-
Hillary-Obama and Foreign Policy
[Read the article: What Beltway media stars mean by "centrism" and "extremism"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glenn: I read your post several times and I agree that, as a general rule, the MSM gasbags are the last people to get it right. But on the Obama/Hillary response I think Hillary got it right, and Obama left himself open to attack because of a sloppy response. I just don't believe that a President Obama will be on AirForce 1 on 20 Jan 09 heading for Teheran. We need to resist the temptation to read too much into the exchange. Given Bush's awful record in diplomacy it is easy to go the whole hog the other way, which is one interpretation of Obama's simple response to a complex question. Just because the youtuber set conditions to his question does not mean a candidate has to buy into the wording and the implications.
Now all the fuss and bother was really a gift for the Matthews of this world who are salivating at the prospect of a Hillary -Obama fight. they want it, not the candidates.
Taking the opposite tack to Bush is as unrewarding as no talking with X or Y. I know from personal experience that arranging heads of governments is a complex task and no HoS wants to meet without knowing the outcomes. There is a lot more the question than soundbite driven answers.
On one other point. I notice that Matthews presses politicians who voted for the war and uses it as a cudgel to get at Hillary. Why is that the response is never:"Well look at how you pushed the war, how you worshipped the President for his maschismo ,etc"Don't you think it is time the MSM warmongers were called to account with specific references to their cheerleading?
-
Glenn and Jack Hughes
[Read the article: What Beltway media stars mean by "centrism" and "extremism"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glenn thanks for your rejoinder. Jack: noted. I think this is, at its root, a bogus confrontation about significant differences in approaches to Heads of Government meetings. As someone who participated in over 50 of these preparatory exercises (including 5 with the US) I can tell you that we really worked hard to make sure the boss was not going to get sandbagged, right down to having 5 drafts of the final communique prepared even before the trip began. These things are micromanaged (forget the no tie pressers, the casual style and all the other misleading stuff.) We worked 18 out of 24 hours for weeks preparing. So both Hillary and Obama will be protected by working groups from State to make sure they do not flub. This bogus conflict is a media confection by the usual suspects. That's all, Glenn.
-
Two Wankers
[Read the article: The really smart, serious, credible Iraq experts O'Hanlon and Pollack]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]With apologies to Atrios: Don't these men have any second thoughts about the rubbish they have served us time and again? or the fact that they are totally dependent on the DoD to get them to and from Iraq and around that country? Who takes anything they say or write seriously? Oh right: it's the other wankers in the MSM with the exception of Joe Klein (who has recently received several injections of scepticism).