Letters to the Editor
Ben Alpers
Published Letters: 75 Editor's Choice: 2
-
Kennedy and Catholicism
[Read the article: "A vote for Romney is a vote for Satan"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]John Kennedy famously told an interviewer in 1960 that being a Roman Catholic wouldn't make an iota of difference in how he'd approach his job as President.
Actually, that's not quite what Kennedy said.
Kennedy's most famous defense against anti-Catholic attacks was actually an address to Southern Baptist leaders in September 1960. You can find it by following the link in my signature on this comment.
What Kennedy said was that the government of the US should never be put in the service of any particular religion, that he would never let the Church dictate any position to him, that he'd always follow his conscience and his understanding of the national interest, and that "if the time should ever come -- and I do not concede any conflict to be remotely possible -- when my office would require me to either violate my conscience, or violate the national interest, then I would resign the office, and I hope any other conscientious public servant would do likewise." Kennedy strongly argued that there should be no religious test for national office and that membership in any particular denomination or religion should not bar one from consideration. But he never said that his Catholicism was utterly irrelevant. JFK emphasized the importance of his conscience, and he never denied that Catholicism was an important wellspring of his moral sense.
-
What To Do About DiFi
[Read the article: Dianne Feinstein -- Bush's key ally in the Senate -- to support telecom amnesty]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In a sensible world, Californians would mount a recall campaign against Feinstein (California law allows for the recall of Senators). Of course this won't happen. The only chance of getting her out of the Senate before the end of her term (short of death) would be if she were placed on the national ticket. Sad to say, that's not entirely outside the realm of possibility.
But there's a larger issue here. Progressives need to give up the "few bad apples" theory of the Democratic Party. First they focused on Zell Miller. Then when Zell left the Senate (and the Party), it was Joe Lieberman. Then Lieberman (sorta) left the Party. Now it's DiFi.
The problem isn't a few, isolated "Bush Dogs." The problem is the party itself, which didn't even try to filibuster Mukasey, when they supposedly had at least forty "no" votes.
The Democratic Party either needs to be replaced or needs to undergo the kind of fundamental ideological revolution that the GOP experienced between 1960 and 1980. So far, at least, progressive Democratic voters haven't shown the stomach for either of these paths.
-
"Others say..."
[Read the article: Self-satire scales new heights]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm so sick of the President's "others/some say" trope, which he uses--or rather his speechwriters and handlers use--to avoid arguing against actual opponents of his policies in favor of straw men of his own creation. Like this defense of the Iraq War (from a February 2003 interview with Margaret Warner): "There was a time when many said that the cultures of Japan and Germany were incapable of sustaining democratic values. Well, they were wrong. Some say the same of Iraq today."
-
Is Walter Shapiro actually suggesting...
[Read the article: The Democrats' foreign (policy) wars]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...that Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel have more or less the same foreign policy views as Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden?
And before someone points out that Gravel and Kucinich have no chance at the nomination (they don't, of course), why then all the space given over to Richardson and Biden, who also have no shot at the nomination?
This...
Even as they search for an issue to differentiate themselves from their rivals, members of the Democratic presidential class of '08 will admit, when pressed, that they are all singing from the same hymn book on foreign policy.
...is only true if you ignore two of the members of that class. And the apparent (if unstated) criterion for ignoring them is not whether or not they might actually win, but whether or not they're "serious," i.e. whether or not they sing from the same hymn book as beltway insiders.
The real story here is that the foreign policy establishment refuses to even recognize dissent.
We might hope, however, that our journalists not assist them in looking the other way.
-
Wrong Question
[Read the article: Did Bush ask Scott McClellan to lie -- or didn't he?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So when will the rest of the Democrats -- and honest Republicans -- speak up?
That's easy. Never.
But the more important question to ask is: in the face of the unwillingness of either major party to deal with the crimes of this administration, what can the American people do?
-
So What Do You Make of Saletan?
[Read the article: Is race dying? ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Count me among those who think that this article is almost laughably off-base.
I wonder what Kamiya makes of the fact that the oh-so-respectable online magazine Slate's self-consciously "moderate" national correspondent William Saletan just published an utterly racist series, based on long-discredited pseudo-science, arguing that blacks are genetically fated to be less intelligent than whites (see link in my signature, in case you missed these outrageous columns).
Unfortunately, racism is alive and well in this country. And the first step towards doing something about it is admitting we have a problem. Needless to say, Kamiya's Panglossian column is a big step in the wrong direction.
-
"Liberal Media" Meme a Lot Older than Rush Limbaugh
[Read the article: Bad stenographers]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As Eric Alterman documented before most people were pointing it out, the greatest myth in our political culture is the Rush-Limbaugh-generated complaint about the "liberal media."
The myth of the liberal media goes back at least to the late 1960s and early 1970s, when it was a favorite theme of Spiro Agnew (and his speechwriter, William Safire). Follow the link in my signature to story about the infamous November 13, 1969 speech in which VP Agnew inaugurated the liberal media meme.