Letters to the Editor
Paul Daniel Ash
Published Letters: 687 Editor's Choice: 2
-
If only they would try it with, like, pistols
[Read the article: Mike Allen, consummate Beltway "journalist"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What exactly is "complete genius" about "looking though the other end of the telescope?"
Wouldn't that better be described as "really fucking stupid?"
-
with ghosts like these...
[Read the article: The great right-wing fraud to repudiate George W. Bush]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]the Repubs have to suffer with their ghosts
Ghosts? Name one.
Reagan is now a National Airport and a national treasure. Bush I, in the rear-view mirror, is a far-seeing statesman. Even Nixon is lionised. How far back do you have to go to find a "ghost?" Taft?
Meanwhile, Democratic Presidents, regardless of their achievements, are only remembered for their flaws - Clinton for his "roving," Carter for Desert One and that rabbit. Byrd's KKK membership, no matter how often repudiated in word and deed, will last until Byrd is in his grave and the earth above is sown with salt.
Some "suffering."
-
wrong-o, Nietzsche Breath!
[Read the article: The Republican Party is the party of Bush]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Opinion is the EXPRESSION of self-interest.
Opinion is the expression of belief. We can hold many beliefs that are not in our immediate self-interest: that it is better to work for a living than to steal, that it is better to let the guy next to you merge into the lane rather than being a dick, etc.
In fact, if there is anything less in one's self-interest than "act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law," or, put more simply, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you," then I'd like to hear it.
Of course, if you were abstracting "self-interest" out of its original context (as, say "rational self-interest," or "long-term self-interest"), then that's a different matter.
But of course, you would never distort other posters' words to make your own point, would you?
-
"Anyone care to guess why?"
[Read the article: New disappearance revelations]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]At a time when we are supposedly focused on fighting an insurgency, both the commander in Iraq and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs are Naval officers. Air attacks from the carrier groups in the Gulf are increasing, and Chancellor Palpatine is threatening an aerial bombardment of Iran.
In answer to your question: not a clue, but it scares the living fuck out of me.
-
down the rabbit hole
[Read the article: New disappearance revelations]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]the hue and cry of injustices imagined do not measure up to reality.
Whoa. Just, whoa.
A lot of times, I use "they live in a different reality" as a sort of rhetorical shorthand for the gulf between Red and Blue America - and then something like shooter's comment comes along to remind me how bad things really are.
The existence of agents of my government doing obscene things in the shadows is actually less troublesome to me than even one citizen willing to say "Move along folks - nothing to see here!"
-
the last refuge of scoundrels
[Read the article: The al-Marri decision]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]tiberius, are you really so terrified that you think our only options are either to do nothing or else abrogate the Constitution? Or were you just thinking nobody would notice you pulled that false choice out of your ass?
Insert here the B. Franklin liberty/safety quote, for the umpteenth time...
-
Reichstag fire, anyone?
[Read the article: The al-Marri decision]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What I find particularly chilling about all the advocates of an unfettered unitary executive is that they seem to face the prospect of a similarly unfettered President Hillary Rodham Clinton with a remarkable degree of sang froid.
Unless they are fools, they must be absolute in their confidence that no Democrat could ever possibly vanquish any one of the sad sacks running for the Republican nomination. These people are many things, but not fools.
Where's the fun in being a unitary executive if some girl can do it too?
-
The Commonwealth of Independent States
[Read the article: The al-Marri decision]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't have a lot of hope that there is going to be a calm, rational denouement to the crisis that more and more people are recognising as Constitutional in nature. If my worst fears are realised, and the next election canceled, the only resolution I can see is a Soviet-style breakup.
And as much as I would like to see the end of ever more centralised power in Washington, I can't imagine that the dissolution of the United States would be anything but wrenching for all of us who live here, with unpredictable consequences for the rest of the world.
What cheery thoughts for your evenings. Sorry, all.
-
@LBS, a rspectful reply
[Read the article: Richard Cohen's brilliant (and unintentional) exposé of our media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Question: Even if someone does come to this site to be contrary or to provoke an argument, does it really do us any good to identify that person as a troll?
I am not sure where you came under the impression that a "troll" is "someone [who] come[s] to this site to be contrary or to provoke an argument." Arguments are good, and interesting, and helpful for understanding a point of view and/or sharpening your own. Even rank contrariness can be helpful for inspiring a good debate.
Trollery, as I have come to understand the term, is the hurling of invective for no purpose other than that of a boy with a stick, poking a hornet's nest. The outcome, generally, is the same: much noise and activity, resulting in the poker getting hurt and wailing about the unfairness of it all.
-
neoliberalism
[Read the article: Richard Cohen's brilliant (and unintentional) exposé of our media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I am not sure where Cohen heard the term, or in what circles has "fallen into disuse," but it is still fairly au courant in the international economic justice (corpspeak: "anti-globalisation") community. The term "liberal" here is used in reference to the so-called "liberal school of economics" most famously advanced by Adam Smith: no restrictions on manufacturing, no barriers to commerce, no tariffs, he said -- free trade was the best way for a nation's economy to develop. Such ideas were "liberal" in the sense of no controls. This application of individualism encouraged "free" enterprise," "free" competition -- which came to mean, of course, free for corporations to make as huge a profit as they wished.
The prefix "neo-" of course, means "new," as in "everything old is new again."
Ain't we got fun.