Letters to the Editor
ajbuckle
Published Letters: 117 Editor's Choice: 9
-
He is only transparent when he lies.
[Read the article: The passion of George W. Bush]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]On Monday, Bush appeared before the Orange County (Calif.) Business Council to justify the origins of the Iraq war and his foreign policy in general. "I also wanted to let you know that it's before you commit troops that you must do everything you can to solve the problem diplomatically. And I can look you in the eye and tell you I feel I've tried to solve the problem diplomatically to the max," he said.
It is rare to see such qualifications placed on a statement that turned out to be true.
1. "...I feel I've tried..." = I didn't try at all, but you can't tell me what I feel.
2. "...to the max." = I didn't try at all, but "to the max" is a colloquial and somewhat vague measure of effort, so you can't disprove anything.
-
So what have we learned today?
[Read the article: Making Colbert go away]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Today we learned that nobody likes to be made fun of. Even at a roast, the audience wants you to be in their side. To say nothing for the fact that Mr. Colbert was the paid entertainment for the evening, a dancing monkey, not a fellow nobleman. So, they pretend it never happened. They talk about everything else EXCEPT the media being skewered on live television. "That's not funny... You're and asshole!" they say if cornered on the issue.
Basic human nature. Nobody likes to be made fun of. Responding with "your wrong, it is funny!" will result in a childish trap (is too! Is not! Is too! Is not!), and the country will stop paying attention.
So fellow comrades! Next time you are on O'Reilly, don't take issue with it being funny or not. Talk about the truths (and the truthiness) that Stephen Colbert spoke to power. Discuss Stephen Colbert's enormous balls (clean shaven and polished). Discuss the facts behind the accusations. Discuss the failings of the Bush media.
-
If their dicks got hard, this won't be a problem.
[Read the article: "Booth babes" fight back!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I was sickened to read this article about E3 fining game companies who use sex to promote their violent games. Sex is the act of creation, and violence is the act of destruction. However, we encourage our media to depict violence in a myriad of ways and discourage any depiction of sex or even sexiness. It is perhaps the most obvious example of the hypocracy embodied in the "culture of life" that you hear so much about. Sex is good "for the children" and in fact it is the root cause of children. Sex is fun, and promotes bonding between individuals. Violence destroys families. Violence ends life. Violence is the act of unleashing evil onto the world.
Unfortunately, sex is scary to the impotent old men of the ruling class, and even scarier to the frigid old women who rule us. They can't have sex, and so they don't want anybody to get some. At the same time, they are old and therefore death is a very real and present part of their lives. Death is so real to them that they want to share it with the rest of us.
If the forces of Satan exist on this earth, they are anti-sex and pro-violence.
-
The editorial agenda
[Read the article: Third Duke player indicted]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The editors seem to have made up their minds already. Take note that only the letters that say the boys are guilty get red stars, and the letters that say they are innocent don't get stars.
This is a left leaning site, so I expect the editorial agenda to be liberal. But, where does "innocent until proven guilty" fall in the liberal/conservative divide?
Have we regressed back to the pre-civil rights notion that skin color and gender are determining factors in guilt?
-
Editorial Agenda II
[Read the article: Details on the third Duke indictment]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The editors seem to have made up their minds already. Take note that only the letters that say the boys are guilty get red stars, and the letters that say they are innocent don't get stars.
This is a left leaning site, so I expect the editorial agenda to be liberal. But, where does "innocent until proven guilty" fall in the liberal/conservative divide?
Have we regressed back to the pre-civil rights notion that skin color and gender are determining factors in guilt?
-
Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss
[Read the article: The GOP begins to implode]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The problem with the American practice of goverment is that elected officials usually don't face competitive races. Your local congressman was selected by the party, and will either win or lose based on your district's demographics, not his/her views or competance. The result is a bunch of corrupt, lazy, and largely imcompetant people in congress who are fiercly loyal to the party. I believe that this set of traits is the root cause of the current implosion of the Republican party.
Now, the Democrats are going get their chance to waltz into power without really trying. The Republicans are so bad that most voters seem willing to vote for ANYBODY else. In this 2 party system, "anybody else" means a Democrat.
The new batch of leaders will proudly wear [D] instead of [R], and just the same they will value party loyalty over the national interest.
-
To Keep it in the Media?
[Read the article: Impeach Alberto Gonzales? Stranger things have happened]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It is clearly in the best interest of the GOP to keep Rep. Jefferson in the news for as long as possible. That way, every time you hear a Democrat talking about the GOP Culture of Corruption (TM), the Republicans will have something to respond with. So how to keep it in the press? Have a bunch of Republicans defend him (hey the GOP is a bunch of good guys after all!). Have the president seal the evidence for 45 days (45 days later the story gets a new set of legs). Keep in in the media at all costs.
If the Democrats were wise, they would force Jeffferson out as soon as possible in order to end the story and distance the crime and criminal from the party. Predictably, the CBC is defending Jefferson, and the party is also playing their role by not dumping him. They are just playing into Rove's hands (again).