Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 1824
-
Some eedjit wrote:
[Read the article: Brit Hume and the Bush administration take propaganda to a new level]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Shooter, can you please elaborate? I can't figure out what you're trying to say. Who's being immature? Greenwald? The commenters? And this somehow leads to Petraeus' decision not to take blogs seriously?"-- Jordan Orlando
Not all blogs, just anti-war, attack blogs like this one.
I'm referring to an earlier post of Glenn's during the O'Hanlon kerfluffle, where Glenn tries to get an interview with Petraeus. The military PR person makes it fairly clear that Glenn isn't considered a worthwhile expenditure of effort on their part, ...
Not quite what happened. Sh**ter's lying. What they said was that Glenn (unlike, say, Hewitt) would have to travel to Iraq to even be considered <*wink-wink*>
for an interview. If Glenn could get there, no guarantees, but maybe if a moment opened up in Petraeus's busy schedule....
... and shortly thereafter, grant an interview to Alan Colmes. On his radio show I believe. For some reason Glenn expects people to bend over and grab the ankles like O'Hanlon did, and say "please sir, can I have another?"...
Nope. Glenn never said anything like that. Such a lie by Sh**ter, if unretracted, should really be sufficient reason for a banning under Glenn's standard rules for such.
... Ah, here's the cite...
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/07/24/centcomm/index.html
Then we have Glenn's characterization of the Hume interview today...
"The whole production was such transparent propaganda that one doubts that Pravda would have been shameless enough to present it. Even the title of the program was creepy. Fox did not even bother to call it an "interview," but rather hailed it as a "Briefing for America."
And Glenn et.al. wonder why Petraeus goes to Fox for a friendly interview? ...
No. Glenn doesn't "wonder". I think he's rather clear on he concept.
... If Hillary wants a sympathetic audience she goes to Oprah, who would expect anything different?...
For the severely brain-damaged, Hillary's a political candidate. Petraeus is a general.
... It's one of the exhibits of "unseriousness" here that Glenn and company expect to bash someone with no consequences. It's juvenile aka immature.
-- shooter24
Nonsense, of course. Glenn has never said anything about "no consequences".
Can we talk instead about rampant stoopidity? Oh, yeah, I just did. [Litellaesque] "Nevermind...."
Cheers,
-
@ Paul Rosenburg
[Read the article: Brit Hume and the Bush administration take propaganda to a new level]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In it, Faludi takes us back to America's earliest experience of homeland terror--King Phillips War (aka Metacom's Rebellion) and the captivity narratives that grew out of them, first and foremost "A Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson".
For more on King Philip's War, try Nathaniel Philbrick's "Mayflower: A Story of Courage, Community, and War".
I just read it a couple months ago. Very interesting. The person who seems to have presaged the mythologised "cowboys" was Clark. Clark had much better ideas for fighting the "insurgents" than did the Pilgrims in Plymouth or the Boston Puritans. And FWIW, it was perhaps Philip's failure to get the Mohawks on his side that sealed his fate, else the result may well have been quite different....
Cheers,
-
@ Paul Rosenberg
[Read the article: Brit Hume and the Bush administration take propaganda to a new level]
[Read more letters about this article: Here](sorry about the mispelling of your name last time)
Good one. :-) FWIW, I'm not fond of Hillary (and not even Clinton/Clark). Wish to hell Gore would run again.
Cheers,
-
@ nabbleblather
[Read the article: Brit Hume and the Bush administration take propaganda to a new level]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Here's a brief synopsis of the ensuing scenario. Hillary (or Obama or whoever) follow through on their election promises and orders a precipitous withdrawal. Scenes of unbridled chaos as our demoralized troops make a humiliating retreat which turns into an utter rout. Thousands of American hostages are taken prisoner and our Iraqi allies get slaughtered in an epic massacre which makes Cambodia and Ruanda look mild by comparison. Osama bin Laden and Ahmedinijad ride triumphantly into Baghdad.....
Good, good, good. You've got some talent. But still not quite up to the standards set by Hal Lindsey's and Timothy LaHaye's hallucinatory fiction. Matter of fact, you don't even hold a candle to the pedestrian Tom Clancy. So I recommend either better drugs or more practise.
Cheers,
-
@ anonymous
[Read the article: Limitless wrongness]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I HOPE Moveon keeps doing the Ads!
I really do...because they more ads they put up, the more people are seeing that the people at moveon do NOT support the troops....
You misspelled "support getting the troops killed".
Cheers,
-
@ anonymous
[Read the article: Limitless wrongness]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Seems to me we need to train the Iraqis to take over ....
Ahhh, yes. Seems lots of people agree that this is just the ticket to an independent and freestanding (but standing with whom? <*wink-wink*>) Iraq. Someone ought to do that. Oh. Right. Someone was tasked with this job. Who was it now? Ummmm .... oh, yeah, some guy David Petraeus or something ... back in 2004!!!
Your move.
Cheers,