Letters to the Editor
sunny miller
Published Letters: 107 Editor's Choice: 3
-
What nursing mother
[Read the article: Roundup: The incredible identical quadruplets and more!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]in her right mind would take codeine? I'm sorry, but when I nursed my babies, I would not have taken so much as an aspirin.
-
So right
[Read the article: Why is the Democratic Congress so unpopular?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here](3) numerous investigations, sometimes flashly(sic) but thus far inconsequential.
The failure to issue inherent contempt charges against those admin officials who arrogantly refuse to respond to Congressional subpoenas illustrates the rank "strategy" of the party. Dems have no intention of actually holding anyone accountable. They are simply hoping to keep the base from openly rebelling by pointing to the numerous hearings they are holding into executive abuses. But I ask you-what good are these hearings if Bushies are allowed to stonewall them out of existance?
These poll numbers are excellent, imo, and I'm happy Glenn sees fit to highligh them. Now who among Americans really live by moral values? Hypocrites who think immorality is ok as long as their side is doing it, or people who hold members of their own group accountable for their actions?
-
I am continually fascinated
[Read the article: Why is the Democratic Congress so unpopular?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]by Democratic partisans who think leftists are being "purists" for refusing to support the party, and for proffering that we should punish them by voting for third party candidates.
Here is the problem with this argument. What the partisans are implying is that left purism is an expression of individual moral values trumping the need to have Dem majorities. (After all, when lefties voted for Nader, what they were really saying is they did not want to be held culpable for the inevitable moral failures of the Democratic Party) Democratic partisans are therefore saying that we should surrender our own individual moral values for the good of the party.
Do you not see the horrific consequences of this kind of immoral groupthink?
-
"OMG! I'm not alone! Almost everyone feels the same way so let's get together everybody and DO SOMETHING!"
[Read the article: Why is the Democratic Congress so unpopular?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This is what propaganda is designed to prevent. Deliberately misinterpreting polls and lying about what "most Americans" think is a big part of that.
-
Update
[Read the article: Why is the Democratic Congress so unpopular?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]it is far more likely that more Democrats will be converted from an anti-war to a pro-war posture by "The-Surge-is-Working!"/Petraeus campaign
Leahy just proved that statement to be true.
-
Helloooooooooo Linear Chaos!
[Read the article: Carl Levin reveals the Democrats' Iraq "strategy"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If you want to blame a Jew blame Lieberman and not the Israeli's or a majority of the Jews because it should be noted that AIPAC represents Israeli public opinion about as well as American Foreign Policy represents American public opinion.
-- Linear Chaos
Umm yes, we know not to blame "the jews" for what AIPAC does. Hopefully, China or Russia or somebody will not blame us for Bush bombing Iran. The majority of us are against him and his bloody wars,justas the majority of Jews in this country are against the war. But I do not think you are correct about Israelis. I'll stand corrected if I am wrong, but I don't think I am.
-
WhoTF are these "Democrats" who love Clinton
[Read the article: Barack Obama's Republican edge]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't know any Demcrats personally, and most liberal blogs are ambivalent about her at best, including the commenters. It seems she's being shoved down our throats. I wouldn't vote for her if she were running against an old yeller dog. The following is very illustrative:
Is John Edwards 'Karl Rove's worst nightmare'?
Joe Trippi says Karl Rove most fears John Edwards.
WASHINGTON (CNN) — Many political watchers are wondering exactly why former top Bush aide Karl Rove has attacked New York Sen. Hillary Clinton so aggressively since he announced he was leaving the White House last week.
Well, Joe Trippi, one of former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards' top strategists, thinks he knows the answer: Rove "doesn't want John Edwards to win the Democratic nomination."
"Rove knows that Democrats will rally around whomever he attacks—so he attacks the candidate he thinks Republicans can most easily defeat," Trippi wrote to supporters in a fundraising e-mail. "It may seem backwards, but Rove and his cronies did the same thing last time around. In 2004, they were scared of John Edwards, so they attacked John Kerry."
"Rove is using his sneaky, underhanded tactics to try and trick Democrats into rallying around a candidate who won't be as strong as John in the general election," Trippi added.
Rove, who announced he is leaving his post at the White House at the end of the month, has repeatedly criticized Clinton, arguing her "high" disapproval numbers render her a "fatally flawed" candidate.
All good except one thing: I don't see a rally 'round Clinton, despite poll numbers. What I see is a Trojan Horse the neocon corporate fascists can live with.
Clinton Wins Coveted Bill Kristol Endorsement
http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/08/clinton_wins_coveted_bill_kris.php
-
It is almost as if
[Read the article: How our seedy, corrupt Washington establishment operates]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]these oh-so-Serious beltway pundits and journalists are being paid, or given some "other" type of compensation, to turn on a dime a spout whatever said lobbyists want them to. Would that be so shocking considering Armstrong Williams et al? It's the best explanation I can think of. After all, whoever heard of whores giving out free bj's?
Wouldn't it be great to find evidence of that kind of corruption? Not that they would be ashamed, but it would go a long way toward destroying their "credibility" once and for all.
-
THE most important point about Hillary:
[Read the article: Barack Obama's Republican edge]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]She IS NOT truly liberal or progressive, she is a right-winger. This is patently obvious to anyone who pays attention. She is a war-mongering corporatist. See my comment above for the link to an article about Bill Kristol praising her. PLEASE people, do not nominate HRC, she will only further the neocon agenda.