Letters to the Editor
cabdriver
Published Letters: 312 Editor's Choice: 6
-
Why feed the fable of Limbaugh's Legions?
[Read the article: Limbaugh off the hook for voter fraud ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Is the Democratic Party really so fragile that it has to get worried about the effects of a handful of insincere crossover or independent voters? Don't the sincere ones count for more?
I think Leo Jennings summed this particular teapot tempest up fairly well.
barrister89 knows whereof he speaks. If Rush's grandstanding blowhard partisan advice isn't protected speech, then what would that portend for, say, publically airing views about methods of draft resistance?
The Republicans tried to pull the same "affidavit" nonsense in Virginia in order to discourage citizens from voting for Ron Paul, incidentally. Even though Va. has, for all intents and purposes, an open primary... http://tinyurl.com/2ghx4e
The time is long overdue to kick that "ooh, look out, it's big bad Rush Limbaugh, be very afraid" attitude to the curb. Mr. Free Speech, except if you want to post in the discussion forum on his website...that requires a membership fee.
What's he afraid of?
-
9/11 inquiry
[Read the article: Michael Mukasey's tearful lies]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There's a conundrum there, JulieAnna- exactly who are you going to "demand" to do a "truly independent and thorough investigation" into that abundance of unanswered questions concerning a full accounting of the events of September 11, 2001, and what led up to them?
The Bush administration? The Mukasey Justice Department? The local Federal prosecutors who have claim to jurisdiction? A re-visit by Congress?
Would you trust any official inquiry to do it properly?
Yet official inquiries by the government are the only investigations with the power to swear witnesses under oath, or subpoena them, or the ability to compel a wide (if no unlimited) range of evidence discovery from the records of various agencies.
In the absence of a trustworthy official investigation, I think the next best thing is to support the "unofficial" effort undertaken by the folks at this website, the Center for Cooperative Research- http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/
(Note: the Google search I just performed, simply using the terms "Cooperative Research", landed me at a 1st page of search listings for some place called the "Cooperative Research Network" at https://crn.cooperative.com, which is in no way affiliated with the Center for Cooperative Research at http://cooperativeresearch.org.
More ominously, the URL known as http://cooperative.com, with its front page table of contents that mirrors a few of the topics found on the homepage of the Center for Cooperative Research, resembles a fraud- a bogus, dummy website that is apparently intentionally designed to deflect and misdirect Web searches away from the investigative site.)
The Center for Cooperative Research has one of the most impressive chronological histories I've ever encountered, with a format akin to the well-respected library resource Facts On File- only much more comprehensive:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project
Furthermore, Facts On File charges a subscription fee for its various products (following an initial free trial). This fee can get hefty, depending on the volume of material accessed.
The Center for Cooperative Research is largely "freeware." They accept voluntary contributions- which is not to be confused with being "free."
They don't have much money. In fact, they've been operating on a shoestring as long as they've been around. The fact that they aren't carny barkers huckstering nonsense like the much more well-known "documentary" Loose Change appears to have worked against them- although undoubtedly, having the search phrase "Cooperative Research" "appropriated" by nearby websites- including one that has the appearance of promoting an intentional deception- hasn't helped.
But I think that perhaps the biggest problem related to the Center for Cooperative Research's financial problems is that all too few of the people who do know of them and access their content haven't given them a single dime.
That state of affairs speaks poorly for American democracy and the respect of Americans for authentic investigative inquiry, in my opinion.
Note: I have no affilliation, paid or unpaid, with the Center for Cooperative Research at http://cooperativeresearch.org/. (click on my live screen name for active link)
I have given them money. They do take Paypal.
-
re: typo
[Read the article: Michael Mukasey's tearful lies]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]correction- "all too few of the people who do know of them [the Center for Cooperative Research ] and access their content have given them a single dime."
begging your pardon, I feel that a fast revision to my earlier message is necessary.
-
correction #2
[Read the article: Michael Mukasey's tearful lies]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]yeah, another mistake in my earlier message- the URL for the site that appears to me to be a bogus mock-up of the Center for Cooperative Research home page is "cooperativeresearch.com", rather than "cooperative.com", as I first typed it.
The actual URL for the website of the Center for Cooperative Research remains http://cooperativeresearch.org, as I first typed it.
And with that, I'm taking a break from commenting for a while.
-
Jonathan Verson...
[Read the article: Limbaugh off the hook for voter fraud ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't know how you got this apprehension-
"...the fact that no one writing here seems bothered by the presumptive idea that encouraging people to vote tactically is NOT protected speech is frightening."
Out of the 29 letters preceding yours, approximately 3 of them indicated support for the Ohio AG attempting to pursue criminal charges against Rush Limbaugh.
Norbit: Now that's a libel suit I'd like to see: Rush Limbaugh suing someone for libel for calling him a liar.
Rush Limbaugh is a liar.
I could defend myself against that libel suit per se, if you follow me. And I don't even have a law degree. The discovery documentation for my defense would require a wheelbarrow- if not a dumptruck, LOL.
(click at my signature for link)
-
not another typo...
[Read the article: Limbaugh off the hook for voter fraud ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I meant to write pro se, not per se.
-
George W. Bush, dope
[Read the article: Is the Internet eroding America's Puritanism -- or making it worse?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"When George W. Bush, icon of the moralistic right, all but admitted he smoked dope and did a few lines in his "young and foolish" days, he probably did more to end America's drug hysteria than a thousand policy papers."
Give me a break. He dissembled. And America's "drug hysteria" remains in full effect- both pro and con, for what it's worth.