Letters to the Editor
Nita Martin
Published Letters: 271 Editor's Choice: 62
-
They're bluffing
[Read the article: Finally: Senate votes to debate Iraq]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The measure calls for the withdrawl of troops:
"except for a limited number that are essential for the following purposes: (1) Protecting United States and coalition personnel and infrastructure; (2) Training and equipping Iraqi forces; (3) Conducting targeted counter-terrorism operations. "
That's what the troops are doing now. More or less.
First it was imposssible to understand why there could be any rational argument for NOT EVEN "debating" the state of our involvement in Iraq. Now we have a measure that more-or-less pretends to do something without actually doing something. The provision leaving a "limited" number of troops for such hugely open-ended purposes is a loophole to leaving that is big enough to drive a platoon of Humvees through. That is, if we had them.
Thanks for nothing, Congress. Let's see some real cards on the table. The chips have been down for five years.
-
A couple of facts to reconcile
[Read the article: Fact checking the president on the prosecutor purge]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]George W. and "Al" Gonzalez have gone on record saying what a fabulous job the justice department has done with THIS staff. "Heckuva job, Al". And yet...and yet...they wanted to jettison all 93 members of this well-oiled machine that Gonzalez says has protected us from all manner of child-molesters and other such depraved envoys of the devil. Trash a winning team? That depends on whether you feel they are YOUR team. Bush is all about team ownership.
As Glenn Greenwald points out, Clinton didn't fire the whole staff of prosecutors mid-term. He brought in his own team at the beginning of his presidency. It IS unheard of, and NOT standard practice to kick out your own draft picks in the middle of the game. (to coin another unfortunate sports analogy)
So....they've done a good job, and we want them gone, anyway.
Or...they haven't done a good job, and we're lying about our performance.
And the president didn't have anything to do with their firings.
Or they serve "at the pleasure of the president", who is the one who has the ultimate say in whether they do, or do not serve.
So many lies, so little time. How many "on-the-other-hands" could there possibly be in this rapidly imploding circus of prosecutorial persecution?
-
How about a better label....
[Read the article: Billy the Greek]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Bill Richardson is experienced, intelligent, charismatic, realistic, and above all...unselfish.
At the recent Democratic Winter Meeting, the speeches of the candidates were mostly about who they were. "I'm Hillary Rodham Clinton, and I'm in it to win it!" Barack Obama, with superlative rhetorical content and delivery, but very little down-to-earthiness. And Tom (thank god he had the sense to withdraw) Vilsak's pity party over his adoptive childhood. John Edwards was a stand-out with his grasp of the problems facing most Americans, and his readiness to support concrete solutions.
The most significant moment, however, was when Bill Richardson took the podium and spent about half of his precious time allotment, not speaking about himself, but promoting the need to elect a Democrat. Pick one. In order to put an end to this reign of terror.
My hat is off to a true gentleman politician who deserves better than to be shoved into the column of ethnic surrogates. Richardson has shown himself to be a leader who is willing to consider the proposition of "what is best for America". And that trumps having a Mexican mother any day of the week. Give the man more credit. His resume, and his character demand it.
-
In moderate defense
[Read the article: Rove, proven liar]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Times, they ARE a changin'. For so long, the press has given Bush and his lying Bush-ophants a free pass on ommissions, little white lies, half-truths, head scratchers,whoppers and all manner of falsehoods from the totally unneccessary (why tell the truth when a lie will do just as well?) to the high crimes and misdemeanors variety.
Well, judging by Bushes sputtering and blustering during his most recent "cram it down America's throat...I have spoken" press-athon, the press corp is starting to poke sticks at him. He IS being asked and prodded. So is Tony Snow.
Just not nearly enough. Then they all retreat to the liar-friendly cover of Fox news, MSNBC, et al. for a little one-sided open exchange.
If every single outraged writer to Salon who is sick and tired of the antics of these criminals took similar time to write lettters to the editor of their hometown papers, big or small, that's press. The silly asses who put these "folks" in office, or not, in Karl's case, don't read us here. We all need to make certain we are bringing our thoughts to the numbskulls as well. Ask your local paper...."why would anyone with nothing to hide refuse to speak under oath?" Then include the answer along with the question, just in case.