Letters to the Editor
Well, that's all for now.
Published Letters: 92 Editor's Choice: 10
-
The Real Reason
[Read the article: A note to War Room readers]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Dear Tim (if I may),
Best of luck with the move East. I hope, in spite of the many fine suggestions here, that you and the family have already made your living arrangements in D.C. (If not, for goodness sake, please work on those parenting skills.)
I think I've figured out the real reason for your move to D.C., and it's quite admirable, journalistically speaking ... you simply want to be able to report on Congress without any perceived biases since you'll have no federal representation therein. Anyway, I hope you can champion the cause of Congressional representation for D.C. and I'm looking forward to all that your living there will add to your reporting which the rest of us will surely benefit from.
If you're driving, enjoy the trip and try to travel off of the interstates as much as possible (although that's hard to do in a moving truck or when traveling with your possessions) ... you won't regret it. And what a cultural experience it could be(!) ... I was recently in a truckstop and couldn't believe the right-wing Christian fundamentalist paraphenalia/propaganda prominently on sale there. Who knew?
Oh, and P.S. . . . if your family is traveling in more than one vehicle, a set of those rechargeable walkie-talkies will come in handy and help relieve the stress of out-of-zone separation anxiety.
-
Are questions vetted?
[Read the article: This time, Taylor answers]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]To follow on wysiwyg's point about the Vice President's office (the implication being that the questioning was too narrow), I'm wondering if the questions being asked have been vetted by skilled litigators? You can bet Taylor's answers were. Based solely upon the transcript reproduced here in War Room, the one fault that sprang to mind immediately which would render Taylor's answers true only due to faulty questioning, was the recurrence of the term "replacement" or variations thereof. What if her role was simply in the firing or vacating of the positions and not in re-filling them? Technically, her answers then would not be lies. To not expect that the Bushies will be parsing every word could only be described (charitably) as naive. The questions simply cannot allow for easy outs and must anticipate and cover all of the bases.
-
Bush's point ... translated.
[Read the article: Bush calls Libby commutation "fair and balanced"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm aware of the fact that perhaps somebody in the administration did disclose the name of that person.
In other words, at the very least, Bush knows that somebody in the White House committed treason.
And we're supposed to simply let that rest? You know these guys can feel the water in the pot getting hotter, which is why their "gut feelings" about heightened possibilities of an Al-Qaida attack are all the more disturbing.
-
Don't Despair Yet ...
[Read the article: Is the White House trying to force Congress' hand?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Don't despair just yet. As discussed on Air America's Randi Rhodes program yesterday by John Dean and others, there is another option available to the House investigatory committees besides "Contempt of Congress" citations. Just search on the phrase INHERENT CONTEMPT or check out the various sites like democraticunderground.com where it's being discussed.
This could get interesting.
-
Speaking of Smoking 'Em Out . . .
[Read the article: Hyping the intelligence again?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The thing that scares me about the report(s) on al-Qaida is not the conflicting signals, nor the double-speak both of which are simply hallmarks of this administration's lying, but rather the idea that the Bush Gang is setting itself up to be right about a heightened risk of attack on U.S. soil by allowing it to happen (at the very least) again. I think they've proven themselves capable of stooping as low as they need to go to enrich themselves and grab power. Since their "political capital" account is running pretty low, it's not beyond reason that they're looking to have U.S. citizens make a deposit.
But, what I'm more interested in at the moment is an update on the Congressional subpoenas' progress in smoking out the truth from those on-the-run cave dwellers of the RNC and the White House.
-
What I Imagine Condi Had to Say
[Read the article: Republicans block vote on Levin-Reed amendment]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Yeah, 'Hi' Senator. No time for small talk. Remember when we said someday we'd ask you for a favor? Well, look, we need our troops to stay in Iraq so they'll be there when we need them for Iran. Oh, and to protect the oil. I know I can let the gang know we definitely have your vote. Gotta run!"
-
I agree, it's not who, but what.
[Read the article: Building the stonewall]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I may be misremembering something here, but I believe that the few documents which were released or ferreted out regarding Cheney's Energy Task Force included maps of Iraq's oil fields. And, it's been reported that shortly after taking (emphasis on taking) office, Bush's representatives were in Afghanistan laying down the law on a proposed gas pipeline to be run through that country by the company that would turn out to be the former employer of their future, U.S.-imposed president. I don't discount the California energy crisis' role in why Cheney invoked executive privilege, but I'd bet there's a lot shadier dealings being hidden than that. It's quite possible that the Bush Administration's response to 9-11 was mapped out well before it happened, by Cheney's task force. (There's even something martial in the expression "Task Force" isn't there?) I've certainly never bought the idea floated by the Bushies that good advice can only be provided to our government in secret.
-
Egads, I'm Aghast!!
[Read the article: Poor kids don't vote]
[Read more letters about this article: Here][Sen. Charles] Grassley and [Sen. Orrin] Hatch, in a joint statement this week, implored the president to rescind his veto threat. They warned that Democrats might seek an expansion of $50 billion or more if there is no compromise.
To think that healthcare for poor kids could end up costing us 2.5% of the projected $2 trillion pricetag (minimum) for the Iraq War/Occupation! What a ghastly threat to our nation's very liberty that these Republican senators have so helpfully pointed out to our exalted Resident. It would be a world gone mad if not for such fearless, ethical Republicans!