Letters to the Editor
Jeffrey P. Harrison
Published Letters: 380 Editor's Choice: 40
-
Would you kindly explain
[Read the article: Scott McClellan on the "liberal media"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What the labels Liberal or Conservative have to do with the news? I understand these labels (maybe) when they are attached to opinion pieces but isn't the news, as Joe Friday would be wont to say, just the facts ma'am? How can someone hold an opinion when they don't know what the hell they're talking about?
The only conclusion to which I can come is that most people apparently don't form their own opinions, they borrow somebody else's. Did that somebody else form their own opinions, or did they, too, borrow somebody else's? So exactly who is the source of these opinions that everybody else parrots but who couldn't defend them if their lives depended on it?
When will the (slanted adjective of your choice) media start reporting facts and do their reporting in a factual way? I present a simple, recent example in support of the reasonableness of my question. Recent events in Lebanon have resulted in the following phrase in many "news" reports: "The US backed Lebanese government". What, you ask, is not factual about that statement? Well, the US isn't backing the Lebanese government; we are backing one of their political parties (but, since this is a lesser government than the governments of our allies, it's called a faction instead of a political party). They have more seats in the Lebanese parliament than their main (but not only) rival party Hezbollah (whom we are not backing). Does this make the political party we favor "the government"? No. Especially in the kind of parliamentary system that Lebanon has. In a parliamentary system, the ascendant party in the parliament forms the executive branch except when the ascendant party doesn't have an absolute majority in the legislature as is the case in Lebanon. Lebanon has been going through a protracted process of selecting a consensus candidate for the position of Head of State. But, since we don't want to confer any political legitimacy to Hezbollah (a terrorist organization), we (i.e. the US government and their parasite, the media) don't acknowledge that Hezbollah is part of the government. So, instead of "the US backed Lebanese government", it should be "the US backed (I forget their name) Lebanese political faction (or party, if you were choosing to be accurate)". Of course, that would make it sound as if we were meddling in Lebanese internal politics which... we are.
-
You have the smoking gun....
[Read the article: CNN/MSNBC reporter: Corporate executives forced pro-Bush, pro-war narrative]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What happens to it now? Unfortunately, I think that the answer is directly nothing. The suits running the infotainment business aren't going to change. I suspect the rise of the blogosphere reflects the failure of the establishment news outlets to actually present news. But until their profits get hurt because people are getting their news primarily from other sources, nothing will change.
-
Excellante!
[Read the article: Why gas is so expensive]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You and I disagree on many things but the essence of your article is that the current price of gasoline is a result of manifold pressures and focusing on any one of them will not help. I would offer only two comments.
1. The lack of new refineries is substantively more important than you imply. The reality is that the US does not produce all the gasoline we consume because, yes, we import gasoline as well as oil. The same laws that caused refiners to expand existing refining capacity because there was less environmental bullshit than building a new one makes us more vulnerable to disruptions because we lack excess capacity.
2. Consumer attitudes are of crucial import and hopefully the current prices will result in a sea change in consumer attitudes, not some temporary shift. To illustrate what I mean, I purchased in 1972 (40 cent a gallon gas) a 1966 VW fastback which got, like most VWs of the time, ~25 mpg - an impressive number at the time. I was not satisfied. A high energy coil and a racing distributor along with careful valve adjustment later and voila 48 mpg. Clearly, economics wasn't my prime motivator with gas @ 40 cents a gallon. My motivation was to use the fewest resources possible to obtain my desired outcome. This mindset (and without the #@!%$#@ governmental mandates and regulation which always screw things up) will be a necessary to weather future pressures on resources.
-
So help me here, please
[Read the article: The new math in Florida and Michigan]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Not really being a political junkie, could I get a snapshot of where the Democrats stand now? How many Obama delegates, how many Three Names delegates, how many delegates in the remaining three primaries, and how many uncommitted super delegates?