Letters to the Editor
The Reality Kid
Published Letters: 358
-
It may depend on what you mean by "hacked"
[Read the article: What does Sarah Palin have to hide in her Yahoo e-mails?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]While the term "hacked" is being used, which denotes (I think) remote access/interception, is it clear whether or not this could have been an "inside job" and a "leak"? That is, if the Governor's computer was set to "remember" password/account details or, perhaps more likely, if she failed to log out after accessing her account (using Yahoo, don't you remain "logged in" for up to two weeks?), isn't it possible that the e-mails were obtained by someone using her computer and "leaked", so to speak, by sending the information elsewhere? Maybe I've missed seeing an explanation as to why this was a case of "hacking", but it seems to me that some manner of "inside job" - either at the governor's office or Yahoo's - presents a more likely scenario.
Perhaps the more technically-minded can set me straight.
-
This sounds familiar...
[Read the article: Growing right-wing opposition to the Paulson plan]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Reuters is reporting :
"Failure to act would have broad consequences far beyond Wall Street. It would threaten small business owners and homeowners on Main Street," Bush said in a statement.
Also from the same article:
Bush warned against adding unrelated provisions onto the measure and said the world was watching to see whether the United States can act quickly to shore up markets.
"Working together, I am confident we can enact the legislation necessary to prevent lasting damage to our economy and meet the unique challenge facing us today," he said.
Now, where have I heard that rhetoric before...?
-
I agree. And don't give them paddles, either.
[Read the article: Portugal starts distributing laptops to young schoolchildren]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]No bridges to nowhere. Next thing you know, they'll be putting the internets on those computers. Then how will we keep 'em on the other side of the digital divide? Why, those dirty Portuguese might hack into something.
-
Crazy debate gambit (sic)?
[Read the article: McCain's crazy debate gambit]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In actual fact, McCain has suspended his campaign. He is also calling on the President to convene a meeting with the Congressional leadership. The President is speaking tonight.
Unless one hand doesn't know what the other is doing (and one can't rule out that possibility, of course), it will be interesting to see who looks foolish come Monday morning.
-
A brief shining moment
[Read the article: The simultaneous rejection of the bailout and a corrupt ruling class]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Totally agree.
However, isn't it ironic (well, "ironic" isn't the right word, "tragic" is...) that an expenditure of 600-odd billion was just approved (in furtherance of the war in Iraq) without a peep from anyone?
-
Snakebit, yes
[Read the article: The simultaneous rejection of the bailout and a corrupt ruling class]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Swallow the poison, no.
-
But George Bush gets the last laugh
[Read the article: The death of GOP electoral tactics on the war]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Say what you want about Obama's so-called "withdrawal" plan, the agreement recently reached with the Iraqi government, and it's far-from-publicized last minute change in time frame, would seem to mean that US troops won't be leaving Iraq during the next president's term of office - or certainly not before 2011, but by then, "conditions on the ground" may have changed dramatically (expect violence to rise now that the Iraqi government is taking over responsibility for the Sunni groups previously paid off by the Americans not to fight).
The crime against humanity continues, unabated.
-
But we already know how Americans are reacting to the next war!
[Read the article: The death of GOP electoral tactics on the war]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Obama has made clear that the US should be fighting in Pakistan and, indeed, the attacks there began quite some time ago. How are Americans reacting? Last time I checked, Obama is leading in the polls...
And how are Americans reacting to the war in Somalia? Oh yeah. What war? What reaction?
Americans react to war the way the rest of the world reacts to taxes.
-
A distinction without a difference
[Read the article: Sarah Palin's museum of trite right-wing tactics: 1980-2008]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]While I wholeheartedly agree that Sarah Palin's son presence in Iraq has absolutely nothing to do with any American's freedom to protest (although I'm not convinced that such freedom actually exists anymore...), I fail to see how her comment is any less nonsensical or more mock-able than Obama's comments regarding Afghanistan and Pakistan. From where I sit, both tickets support needless war, their only disagreement being over which nationalities should be murdered.
It's been said before, and in more eloquent terms, but watching Americans argue over war is like watching unrepentant wife-beaters discuss domestic violence.
You're all in denial.
-
@AI
[Read the article: Sarah Palin's museum of trite right-wing tactics: 1980-2008]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I read both GG's columns and the comments section (all the way through, too!) regularly. And while you're right to call me on my generalization (I'm prone to it), I have to stand by my basic point: By supporting any candidate/party that, in turn, supports the illegitimate "war" on "terror", you're not only supporting war crimes and war criminals, but failing to act in your own best interests. (That's the royal "you", by the way.)
I hate that I let myself get so riled up so as to paint everyone with the same broad brush stroke (and, speaking of "unrepentant", it's not the first time that I've done it), but I fail to see any point in drawing attention to Sarah Palin's absurd comment when (often in the same breath) one is supportive of Obama/the Democratic Party (and his/its pro-war agenda).
The war on terror and your democracy cannot co-exist. Unless and until it is denounced, in no uncertain terms, I'm afraid there will be no more freedom for Sarah Palin's son to pretend to fight for.
And that would make me very, very sad.
-
So many lines have been crossed, but without real consequences
[Read the article: Major shock: Eavesdropping powers abused without oversight]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So many lines have been crossed, in a comparatively short period of time, but without any consequences or accountability.
This begs the question: How much is too much?
Even a random clicking through the archives of this blog reveal a steadfast chronicling of corruption and abuse at the highest levels of government, a horrifying record of breaches of law and trust, many previously unthinkable (at least to casual observers).
But what is the cumulative effect? How many lines must be crossed before a paradigm shift occurs?
I am becoming increasingly concerned that concepts such as 'crime' and 'scandal' and 'corruption' have lost all functional meaning.
Is anybody really shocked or outraged anymore? Or have we entered into a new era of numbness and acceptance?
-
Are you seriously challenging Adnoto's choice because of where (andn on whom) the bombs will be dropped on?
[Read the article: Major shock: Eavesdropping powers abused without oversight]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Maybe Adnote hates the Iraqis whom McCain prefers to kill more than the Pakistanis and Afghanis that Obama prefers to kill. Ever think of that?