Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 1824
-
Game, set and match...
[Read the article: Our right-wing arbiters of masculinity]
[Read more letters about this article: Here][Glenn, to Elephantman]:
[Elephantman]: No, Mr. Grenwald. I did not falsely accuse you of anything. I asked a question, ("Did you later-add the hyper link?") and made a true statement ("I did not see the embedded link earlier").
[Glenn]: Oh, well than it must have been a different "Elephantman" who left this accusatory comment:
[Elephantman]: I noticed that Glenn Greenwald didn't link to it, apparently. It seems Greenwald wanted only to paraphrase it and lift quotes out of context.
[Glenn]: Why compound one false statement ("I noticed that Glenn Greenwald didn't link to it") with a false denial that you said it ("I did not falsely accuse you of anything. I asked a question")?
[Glenn]: Why not just say: "I was wrong when I said you failed to link to the Taranto post, and I apologize for my error." What is so hard about that?
He's a Republican, Glenn. HTH.
Cheers,
-
@ "shooter242"
[Read the article: Our right-wing arbiters of masculinity]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Re: Why is being like a woman degrading?
It's not. Perhaps you can explain, because since I'm not a RW foamer, I don't have the requisite background: "Why does the Republican fomaer contingient think it's degrading?"
Thanks in advance.
Cheers,
-
@ daleyrocks
[Read the article: Our right-wing arbiters of masculinity]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Seems like some reading comprehension promlems on your part tonight. Most liberal women I know seem pretty high maintenance, unserious, and want to be taken care of by someone else. You know, typical liberal attitudes.
I'm not in the market anyway, but if I were, I doubt if I would turn that direction.
Sheep are lower maintenance.
Cheers,
-
@ kitt
[Read the article: Our right-wing arbiters of masculinity]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Dixie Chicks are the biggest selling female musical group in any genre. They have been that since before Ready to Make Nice was a thought in their heads....
" NOt Ready To Make Nice".
FWIW, I'd seen the Dixie Chicks long before probably 95% of the people here had ever heard of them; they were a perennial favourite at the Walnut Valley Festical for years (pre Natalie Maines, even) before they got to be real popular. At the time they were more bluegrass really than "country". And now they're rock's biggest names. Great act and incredible musicians.
Cheers,
-
@ debonair
[Read the article: Our right-wing arbiters of masculinity]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The bitch [Coulter] is crazy everbody knows it.
Perhaps. Then would you care to explan why she's a perennial favourite at the CPAC convention, and pals with all the big names in the conservative movement (not to mention being defended by all the other RW "luminarie" whenever she lets her jaws flap)?
Cheers,
-
@ manyctnj
[Read the article: Our right-wing arbiters of masculinity]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What would work to silence them is...well....silence. So please turn off the mike.
Did you read Glenn's article?!? See "swiftboating"....
Cheers,
-
@ "daleyrocks"
[Read the article: Our right-wing arbiters of masculinity]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Arne - Your kung fu is still weak.
Translation from Republican into English: "I'm too stoopid to know when people are laughing at me and that it's time to slink away...."
But that's a good thing: With folks like "daleyrocks" around, Glenn's posts just gain credence.
Cheers,
-
@ Desert Son
[Read the article: The Justice Department's false statements]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I guess being an authoritarian means never having to say you're sorry,...
"Bart" was champion of this. He could be dead wrong on verifiable facts (see, e.g., "http://balkin.blogspot.com/2007/01/bill-russell-constitutional.html#116780357270404242", but just ignore it and never issue a retraction. (this is far from the only example of such).
Cheers,
-
@ mjfgates
[Read the article: Howard Kurtz and the royal Kagans]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Incentivized?" Aaargh, ow, wince! Maybe, "has an incentive" would be better? Please?
Hey, it's now acceptable practise to go around verbilating nouns (as long as they've been consentivized). After all, the Deciderator-In-Chief does it, and he's Gawd Incarnivorate.
Cheers,
-
@ William Timberman
[Read the article: Howard Kurtz and the royal Kagans]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Okay, I'm done. Apologies for the OT diatribe.
Or was it a polemic? ("http://imdb.com/title/tt0088111/")
Great movie, irregardful. ;-)
Cheers,
-
@ KSC
[Read the article: Howard Kurtz and the royal Kagans]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"New verbs in -ize. A feature of the second Elizabethan age, as of the first, is that new words proliferate. One way of making them is to add the suffix -ize to a noun or adjective, and so increase our stock of verbs. . . .Most verbs in -ize are inelegant. Sir Alan Herbert has compared them to lavatory fittings, useful in their proper place but not to be multiplied beyond what is necessary for practical purposes....
That's why we need a new paradigm. Rather than subsuming the proliferatization of such clunky neologisms to expediency, we need to strike forth boldly in a new direction. Which is why, early on here in this thread, I proffered my suggestion about "verbilating". It flows off the tongue in calm, resonant waves, rather than the hymenopterized buzzing of the more common "verbization", which makes you duck your head and wonder which direction the next assault is coming from.
Cheers,
-
@ Sweet Polly Purebred
[Read the article: Nixon Foundation deletes Coulter column]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]OK, hear me out. When the right masses and organizes to remove people or articles they disagree with (e.g., the Edwards’ bloggers), we call that hateful and a base mob mentality. When we do it, it’s seen a good and righteous correction of course.
Now…
I know the difference.
Just to emphasise, there's a difference between allowing commentators to work on a campaign and still have their personal lives and opinions (and styles) on their own time, and puttting the most hateful and slanderous stuff front and centre within your very ow organisation (such as Coulter's addresses to the CPAC convention and reprinting her columns on your web site).
That being said, I think that Marcotte's columns are far from the hateful spews of Coulter.
Cheers,
-
Envision this....
[Read the article: Dick Cheney's warped vision of the world]
[Read more letters about this article: Here][Cheney]: "An enemy that operates in the shadows and views the entire world as a battlefield is not one we can fight with strategies used in other wars. An enemy with fantasies of martyrdom is not going to sit down at a table for negotiations. Nor can we fight to a standoff -- (applause). Nor can we fight to a standoff, hoping that some form of containment or deterrence will protect our people. The only option for our security and survival is to go on the offensive, facing the threat directly, patiently and systematically, until the enemy is destroyed. (Applause.)"
Have James Earl Jones do those lines, run it through an electronic synth module, and provide the appropriate visuals, and I think you have it....
Cheers,