Letters to the Editor
sajwan
Published Letters: 487 Editor's Choice: 13
-
Tyranny for Dummies
[Read the article: Only America-hating traitors believe in due process for journalists]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...or another short-cut to tyranny.
Even women who have been raped have to face who they are accusing, even though I imagine for most women, next to the actual rape, it has to be the worst experience of their lives to once again re-experence the rape with public testimony in front of the man that brutalized them. We force women to go thru this because the Constitution demands over everything else, the right of the accused to face their accuser.
Imagine a person accused of rape, being held in custody but never tried because the state does not want to further hurt those they believe to have been raped. This is a valid concern emotionally, but then this means the accused have been sentenced without being tried.
Which is what we do with "non-combatants". ("non-combatants" - nice term which has no meaning outside of what Bush says it means at any given point in time.) The state makes an accusation, and then declares we cannot prove our case because it would hurt the state. Nice. And I say so what. Figure it out and take the pain as necessary. For those who have been raped, they know justice is messy and painful, and a fuk of a large burden is placed on them and the state in order to convict. But that is the price of living in a free society under the Constitution of the U.S.A. Those blind to this, are nothing more than petty wanna be tyrants.
On the behalf of national security, we do not want justice and the Constitution melting into a puddle of... I don't know what, but it's something pretty goddamn smelly.
-
That damn stinkin' oversight
[Read the article: Judiciary Committee approves Mukasey]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]We now have an AG who wouldn't recognize torture even if a pole was stuck up his butt and used to dip him in and out of the water so he could get the cool effect of being murdered by drowning.
But in a twofer kind of day, the AG also believes the president is within his rights to ignore laws passed by congress when it comes to national security. You know the national security secret stuff that no one can know about except the president.
And the demons presiding over this administration chant "Over sight? Balance of powers? We don't need no stinkin oversight or balance of powers." Over and over into the blackness.
-
We're No. 1
[Read the article: He's No. 1!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...and the 15% percent boosters in the peanut gallery, cheered enthusiastically, "We're No. 1, We're No. 1, We're No. 1, hooray!".
-
Looking at the picture of Pat and Rudy
[Read the article: Welcome to the 700 Club, Rudy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Dear God, politics is ugly.
-
Labels
[Read the article: Congress to Bush: We're relevant, too]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The labels attributed to Bush are completed disconnected from his actions in office, as many comments here point out. Labels like "born again" - would the dear baby Jesus ever claim Bush a disciple? I don't know. He may forgive him, and again I don't know, but when somone is dropping turds all over the planet in his Name... well Jesus may just frown upon that.
The label "compassionate conservative", was dropped soon after becoming a "war president". But even before, he was neither compassionate nor conservative for that matter. He was, to be as specific as possible, an incompetent a-hole. Now after becoming a "war president" he has evolved into a simpleton sociopath. Such is progress for George W.
-
Motivations
[Read the article: Democrats in big, big trouble because of the Great Iraq War -- again]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What the commentary ignores about the last couple of months of reduced violence is that 2007, with still two months to go, already is the most violent year since the war began.
Which makes me re-think the possible motivations for the surge. Could it be it was due to the violence spiraling out of control forcing the chimp to acknowledge without more troops, something already a disaster could of devolved into a further catastrophic state, where continued occupation was no longer debatable?
-
No Credibility
[Read the article: The fact that wasn't a fact on Clinton]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Russert went off the deep end a while ago, probably about the time he started thinking about himself as relevant. This example shows this as well as the loaded question he asked recently (paraphrased) "Isn't Hillary responsible for all people who do not have health care today since she failed at healthcare reform when she was first lady?" Can a question be anymore vapid, stupid, and partisan?
Journalist my ass.
-
Question Answer
[Read the article: The fact that wasn't a fact on Clinton]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Is there really such a big difference between asking the National Archives to withhold documents and asking them to consider each document for withholding in the presence of a Clinton representative?
The question is not quite right. Here's the question.
Is there really such a big difference between asking the National Archives to withhold documents until 2012 and asking them to consider each document for withholding in the presence of a Clinton representative?
Yes.
Does anyone doubt that the documents could be released much more quickly if Hillary wanted it to be so?
Goofily worded question. Here it's clearer.
Could the documents be released much more quickly if Hillary wanted it to be so?
No.
Embracing Hillary Clinton will mean, in the long run, embracing relatively high degrees of secrecy, scripting, and equivocation.
Secrecy relative to what? Relative to the Cheney/Bush administration Hillary is running thru the streets naked.
-
defeatist
[Read the article: What happened to the Senate's "60-vote requirement"?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"it’s not like we could have done any better.”
“we really do need someone running the Justice Department.”
-
Nazis proved that torture works
[Read the article: Jonah Goldberg's deeply "conflicted" thoughts on war and torture]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"To recap his argument: I, Alan Dershowitz am advocating that Democrats follow the policy of the Nazi government which proved that torture (which I am against) works."
-- mattrhames
Ouch. Damn if that doesn't expose the weasel Dershowitz in the town square naked.
I can't help but pile on though and add to the shame and idiocy of Dershowitz remarks by noting the Nazis (along with their torture policies) lost the war.
Let me imagine Dershowitzs response, "ze problem wit lozing de war waz not ze torchure, but dat zey did not torchure enufff!"
Where's colonel Klink when you need him.