Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

Jeffrey P. Harrison

Published Letters: 464     Editor's Choice: 44

  • So what you're saying is...

    [Read the article: Warnings to Russia from Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    If McCain wins, we'll be staring down, what, three quarters of the world's population? Russia, China, most of the Middle East, bits of SE Asia, and South and Central America. Brilliant.

    Of course, we still haven't seen Russia's response to American missiles on their borders. Fortunately for world peace, it probably won't include putting missiles back into Cuba to protect the US from the chance of an attack from a rogue nation like, say, Brazil.

  • Pfui

    [Read the article: Quote of the day]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    Until the rest of you lot catch up with those who are beyond gender - who view people as people and not men and women -, you won't have a female president. Because - THIS JUST IN - gender is not an issue, everybody has one. Women neither have special insight or capabilities nor do they lack the requisite insight and capabilities to deal with just about anything.

    I must admit, I love the tagline for your post ...the inequalities symbolized by Hillary Clinton's defeat. What bullshit! Three Names is the first person of the female persuasion who both worked her way into the political elite and decided to run for president. She ran a decent campaign and came close to defeating her rival. Good for her. But... the inequalities symbolized by Hillary Clinton's defeat? You sound like a bunch of spoiled brats whining about not having your way. Let me introduce you to the ghosts of Adlai Stephenson, Nelson Rockefeller, William Jennings Bryant and a whole host of other presidential aspirants who were all good candidates and ran good campaigns ... and yet lost - in my examples multiple times. Let me also introduce you to another concept most clearly summarized by the Pakistani on "The soundtrack of the Trailer of the Film of Monty Python and the Holy Grail": "'A' propositions may only be partially converted. While all of Alma Coogan is dead, only some of the class of dead people are Alma Coogan." Or, all sexism is bias but only some of the class of bias is sexism. The inner workings of formal logic and A, E, I, and O propositions is left as an exercise for the reader. Men are on the receiving end of biases as well, not that anyone mentions that very much because the biases aren't usually sex based.

    But, since there were probably more sexist women voting for Three Names because she was a woman than sexist men voting against her because she was a woman, I think you guys need to just get over it.

  • Power is a drug

    [Read the article: What's missing from the Democratic convention?]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    more potent and addictive than crack cocaine or meth. Politicians crave it just as any other addict craves their addiction. The hallmark of the Shrub regime is that through all their failures, incompetent actions, and outrages against core American values they have accrued power for the Federal Government. The Democrats are just politicians. And, especially now, they are feeling a real need to mainline that power. So they're not going to rail against the radicalism of the last 8 years. Nor will they do anything to reverse it. They'll just be more paternalistic in the exercise of the power.

    Personal attacks on John McCain? Without provocation, I would hope not - that would merely lower them to the level of the Republicans in the primordial ooze. They have been provoked and their response needs to be swift, viscous, and uncompromising - not really appropriate for the milieu of a convention. But they shouldn't be initiating things. There's a difference between punishing bad behavior and being the instigator.

  • Driven by commodity exports

    [Read the article: A booming economy?]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    Farmers aren't going to be hiring more hands and industrial exports were flat. They'll probably stay that way thanks to government regulation that allows the government to tell you if and to whom you may export if you have what they have determined to be "dual use" technology even though it's your product and they had no involvement in its development. Sounds like England in the 18th century.

    Hooray! Our government has made us a third world country. Why aren't we planting pineapples in the everglades?

  • The data is fairly disingenuous.

    [Read the article: Alaska (and Wasilla, especially) on the teat]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    As it adds the federal deficit (but not debt) to the givings to the states and, in fact, massive amounts of the deficit hasn't gone anywhere near any of the states and/or is not uniformly distributed. California, for example, is probably the biggest single recipient of military spending which is probably the biggest contributor to the deficit.

    I would like to also point out that, while The Current Occupant has run up a spectacular credit card bill, every administration as far back as I can cognitively remember (that'd be the 60s) has run a deficit with one exception: Slick Willie. There were four reasons Slick Willie ran a surplus: (1) The Republican Congress wouldn't pass his big spending plans; (2) He wouldn't sign their big spending plans; (3) he reduced the size of the military and the spending thereunto appertaining; (4) the internet bubble pumped lots of money into the treasury.

    Therein lies the basis for how to fix the financial mess we're in. 1. Cut military spending by about 2/3 2. Stop coming up with grand and glorious "plans" for the country at the federal level and let the states do what they feel is appropriate 3. Make the US more business friendly.

  • Well, I've always said

    [Read the article: More Palin-tological finds]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    That both the Democrats (paternalistic liberals) and the Republicans (authoritarian liberals) were just a bunch of tax and spenders. What's the difference between a politician and a woman? The woman will usually ask if there's any money in the account before writing the check. A politician doesn't bother.