Letters to the Editor
Jkalos
Published Letters: 474 Editor's Choice: 3
-
I try to think about
[Read the article: Dianne Feinstein -- Bush's key ally in the Senate -- to support telecom amnesty]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]what is different about now. Really. First if you were African American or native American the united states was not good for you. Slavery. Trail of Tears. And women couldn't vote. Now women can vote. Native Americans find themselves in little remnants ripped off left with their little bits of land and not many treaties kept. (Native Americans are to United States what Tibetans are to China, I think). In WWII Japanees Americans to internement camps, etc. Up till civil rights era real bad for African Americans, then a burst of hope. But with Reagan begins the long decline, the chipping away of hope of gains made with minority rights, women's rights, worker's rights, etc. Now the Bush nightmare: is it that a priveleged class is now threatened by bush? or that the expansion of the priveleged classes that occured with unions and so forth is being rolled back? African Americans, women, Native Americans, minorities of all stripes have had very little constitutional help that I can see for years and years with only a few bursts of hope. Were the bursts of hope real or a lie? What is different about now? Is it that even middle class americans have reason to fear now, like all these others had reason to fear all along? What good was the constitution if you were native american, african american, etc? I've talked to Native Americans who live on Pine Ridge reservation and they might as well be in a third world country: what do constitutional rollbacks mean to them? Was the constituion not only good for propertied landowners in the beginning? Are we just returning to our roots? Back to Freedom for the elite? And the elite class is shrinking and that bites? The deal about what the founding fathers wrote can have meaning I think because we can take them at their word about everyone being equal even when so clearly they meant only their equals were equal as it were: I remember doing that in the Army. I would be ordered to do something wrong and I would say I can't because I took an oath as an officer to uphold what is right. And what are they gonna tell you? Report you for upholding your oath? (Of course they find other ways to get you, but I always loved being honest as an Army officer: I thought of it a pulling a Forrest Gump, because when you are honest and follow the rules the higher ups invariably think you are mad or retarded). I will never forget the shock I felt as I really began to study history and found out how much I had been lied to. And I do love all the hopeful people here who try to believe in what the constitution can mean for everyone. But what is so different about now? Hasn't it always been this way for somebody? And now it comes down to us.
-
@RMP
[Read the article: Dianne Feinstein -- Bush's key ally in the Senate -- to support telecom amnesty]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]ha ha I can remember doing the same thing: fine, lets go see the general, lets all be honest and lay it all out. Once a commander threatened to court martial me for refusing some order of his I was sure was wrong (nothing serious, he just wanted me to fake the training records before an inspection, but I wouldn't do it)and I told him fine let's do it! Let's have a court martial. And the first sergeant had to take him aside and tell him privately it wouldn't look good for the captain if he tried to bring the lt. up on charges for refusing to lie and cheat on the records!
I am retired myself now from all that too (or rather I was in the reserves for eighteen years until I couldn't deal with it anymore and left: went from private e-1 to captain); and its weird, but I think I met the best and the worst people I've ever known in the military. The very best and the very worst. And the worst were always a stinking small group out of the whole!I think I would have liked to have met you, RMP.
-
I think
[Read the article: Jonah Goldberg's deeply "conflicted" thoughts on war and torture]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I met Jonah G. once, or those just like them, way back during the Iran hostage crisis. I was on the LSU campus, a sgt. in the reserves on the way to lt. via rotc, and all the frat boys were out demonstrating for us to go to war with Iran, like: NOW! SEND IN THE TROOPS! Chanting ugly war chants about killing Iranians, etc. So I went and changed into my uniform and went down with a clipboard and told them I was a recruiter and was willing to sign them up, now, so we could send them with the troops they wanted to send. And no one would. We appreciate what you are doing, but I need to finish my college. I have a health condition. I have to run my father's business. I'm an only child. etc. No one would sign up. I will never forget the rage I felt at those children of elites who wanted to send me and my friends in now, but were not willing to join me. They are always the same and they never go away and they fill me with contempt. Thanks for speaking up against them, Glenn.
-
Another daily
[Read the article: Ron Paul distortions and smears]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]read through the article and all the posts. My thanks to all. My political education continues. And if you are still here, bebop-p: good night. Sleep tight.