zizou#5
Published Letters: 117 Editor's Choice: 1
From the NYT:
"The suggestion (by the commandant) was raised in a session last week convened by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and regional war-fighting commanders.
On its face, it makes sense. The Corps has always been in conflict with the other branches of the armed services, especially the Army. In the Pacific War against the Japanese, the Army would come in after the Marines had taken an island, suffered the casualties, etc. That is, done all the dirty work and the Army would follow up and get all the "glory". I can't imagine what the Marines think of what's going on in Iraq but I'd wager that a large part of it is based on the historical enmity (or rivalry to put a kinder spin on it) they have against the Army. At this point I have to wonder how much it really matters.
"We're at war with coldblooded killers who despise freedom, reject tolerance, and kill the innocent in pursuit of their political vision.."
Bush who advocates "freedom"(tm) only for the wealthy; Bush who is never in danger or being perceived as tolerant-- Karla Faye Tucker anyone?; and Bush who in pursuing his political vision, has in fact been responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocents and who has metaphorically killed his opponents, say conservatively 51% of the population, in order to achieve his political vision of a Republican majority and unitary executive. Bush, who wouldn't know irony and hypocrisy if it kicked him in the balls with a steel-toed jack boot.
I recall reading a few years back about the father-son dynamic between 41 & 43. By all accounts, Poppy wasn't around much during the Boy King's childhood. Bar ran the roost with an iron fist. And the Boy King is really much more his mother's son: a viper and a harridan; witness Boy King's demeaning habit of still giving nicknames to everyone. It stands to reason this is the case. 41 shows all the signs of being hen-pecked and brow beaten. And then throw in the class dynamic. Bar is a Pierce, in some ways, her family is "classier" than the Bush family. And it wouldn't surprise me at all if the marriage was arranged by the Bush-Pierce families, as most aristocratic family marriages were back then. Absent, "wimpy" father; balls-the-size-of-bowling-balls mother; a coddled, spoiled beyond belief son, no conception of what an examined life is like. Is it any wonder we are here today?
How can anyone claim that there exists any "liberal" view point in the main stream media? Alan Colmes? FOX news is de facto an organ of the GOP; the major networks are all owned by multi-national conglomerates; the WaPo, WSJ, USA Today and the NYT are decidedly not liberal. I read a midwestern daily and they purport to give equal time to both "sides", which is really a fucking joke. One day, it will be Malkin and Broder (sic), the next day Krauthammer and Dowd (sic); then Will and Friedman (sic); Krugmann gets in once a week, E.J. Dionne never. Needless to say, Glenn G never appears. NPR is decidedly NOT liberal, they seem to have evolved into self-censorship so as not to offend the GOP. And PBS gets hammered by the wing nuts because of Bill Moyers. One voice. The only place to get a leftist view point is on the web. Do you think that explains, in part, the right wing's foaming at the mouth (pace celebrities like Chris Matthews and Tom Friedman) at the inchoate "blogosphere"? The Reagan administration emasculated the vaunted "liberal" press corps, perhaps in retribution for Watergate and Viet Nam, and they have been co-opted since. The "liberal media" is a canard and has become conventional wisdom for the masses.
Fluent in French, raised in Paris and a Mount Holyoke alumna. I'll bet she doesn't proclaim those factoids too loudly to her right-wing buddies.
Has anyone suggested that people like Klein (and Friedman and Dowd and Matthews et al.) be called "self-loathing liberals"?
http://www.siite.com/samples/time/about/biographies/senioreditorialstaff/painton.html
Eric Alterman's column today humbly points/links to Glenn:
I am unnecessary again today, and not because I'm lazy. It's because nothing I could write would justify you reading me instead of Glenn Greenwald.Just skim the below real quick -- OK, spend a little time with Boehlert -- and then get thee over to Salon and read all the way to the bottom, clicking on as many links for which you have the time and patience, including especially Jane Hamsher and Atrios. ... It's brilliant, brave, and tenacious reporting if you take your time and read all the way to the bottom, as far as I can discern. ... The evidence Glenn has amassed has many implications for the current state of affairs in American journalism and democracy, virtually all of them extremely, deeply disturbing. (And let's throw in this: Twenty rules of modern American journalism, here.)
Here's the link: http://mediamatters.org/altercation/
The following orgs in which 100 = highest ranking. From www.myrep.info
American Conservative Union: 100%
ACLU: 11%
Planned Parenthood: 0%
Alliance for Retired Americans: 0%
Children's Defense Fund: 0%
Council on American-Islamic Relations: 0%
Federation for American Immigration Reform: 86%
The Humane Society of the United States: 0%
Leadership Council on Civil Rights: 0%
National Journal-Composite Conservative Score: 79%
NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby: 0%
US Chamber of Commerce: 81%
Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council: 100%
American Road and Transportation Builders Association: 100%
Business-Industry Political Action Committee: 96%
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox