Letters to the Editor
What Difference Does It Make?
Published Letters: 35
-
Traister and Walsh audition for cush MSM jobs post-election
[Read the article: Attention, pundits. It ain't over]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Walsh seems to feel sympathy for Traister; they're both taking beatings in the letters on irrefutable grounds from hundreds of different writers. Their response has been to increase the intensity of their pro-Hillary punditry, the willful belligerence of the noble last stand. Remember the Alamo. Damn the torpedoes. Once more into the breach, dear Clintonistas, once more into the breach. Forward the Walsh brigade!
If there's anything I can do, any letter I can write, to help you follow some of your colleagues, into a more reputable job -- away from the MoveOn fanatics you must decry, as your leader does -- in the MSM, I'd be happy to help. I can vouch that you have placed a white, middle class, liberal version of feminism above all else, that if you can't control the village, you're happy to raze it to the ground.
Imagine all the credibility you'll bring with you. You'll be able to tell your new audiences and Serious Journalist colleagues that you once worked at salon.com, and you know firsthand just how unreasonable and shrill progressive liberals are. You'll be able to say that you once knew Greenwald, knew him for the nut that he was, and that he's not a Serious Journalist like each of you is. Walsh, you'll be able to look concerned, as though it pains you that no one can see the truth as clearly as do you. Traister, you'll be able to write words like "Pleistocene" to show your new bosses, that, unlike, Greenwald, you have a sense of humour and a certain flair. In any milieu that values style above substance, you will surely excel. You'll be able to equate "fake Bosnian bullets" with "flag pins," thereby conflating an intentional lie by one candidate with a smearist attack on another, as if one candidate lying is the same as one candidate being groundlessly attacked. And, at the end of the day, when Walsh rewards you, Traister, with another three-feature week for (wo)manning the barricades, you'll have succeeded in launching your career on the backs of the "Obamaboys" you coined, perhaps never wondering how you and Walsh would have taken umbrage at being called "Clinton girls."
Good luck with the job search.
-
The 2008 Jake Tapper award goes to...
[Read the article: Hillary Clinton's bionic quest continues]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Dear Ms. Traister,
I'm sorry, this is a five-feature week for you since your Obamaboying, isn't it? I'd like to nominate you for the 2008 Jake Tapper award. Since your sexist remarks, you've been rewarded amply by Joan Walsh, and I can only hope someone at ABC or another MSM outlet recognizes that you do not belong amongst the shrill progressives and liberals that dominate the Salon letters. You have accumulated enough intellectual dishonesty and Serious Journalist acumen to get you away from this mid-career Salon.com pitstop. I doubt if you can recall the last time you thought you might be wrong about any of your assumptions.
I wonder if you, Jake and Joan sit around wondering how big of a hit Salon would take if you turfed Greenwald and the naive, unpragmatic ilk with which he has infested this site. You do not want the readership you have. Nothing has been more evident over the past two months.
-
Bye War Room
[Read the article: Passing back the baton]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Koppelman lacks insight, lacks background knowledge, lacks resourcefulness, lacks intellectual curiosity and any but the most rudimentary sort of analytical ability.
To be fair, it wasn't fair to him to be replaced by Benen. Never fun to get schooled by the substitute teacher. The kids never do think of you the same way again.
No surprise, though, that Walsh ignored the steady please of her readers to keep Benen around. Koppleman is a perfect fit on the team Walsh has assembled.
-
pleas please
[Read the article: Passing back the baton]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Where'd that 'e' come from?
-
the U.S. government is broken
[Read the article: Looking past Pennsylvania]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"If you think our process is corrupt and broken, he's your man. If you're either fine with the process, or too busy to think about it (filling out your FAFSA, trying to save your house from foreclosure; breaking up your kids' latest fight), he might lose you."
I think this is what non-American commenters, like me, don't understand: you have a fundamentally corrupt governmental process and, for the first time in a long time, a candidate who aspires to make serious changes to it, thereby putting your democracy in line with the democracies of the rest of the civilized world, and possibly preventing the United States from initiating global conflict. You have a candidate who understands the problem is the system itself. How is anyone reasonable American even NOT considering voting for Obama? Obama's strengths are that he isn't business as usual, and that he's not of your chattering class. He IS your great hope. Not because he's black. But because he's as revolted by your system as is every other thinking person anywhere else on the planet.
Hillary Clinton still talks about nuclear intervention. She sat on the board of WalMart, for heaven's sakes. These are not asides to be brushed away. These speak to core ideological deficiences. What difference does it make if you elect a Democract who still wants to use war as diplomacy and supports the global capitalism from which we all suffer?
-
Obamaboys
[Read the article: Feminism is the new funny]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The rewards keep coming don't they Ms. Traister?
-
John Edwards
[Read the article: Clyburn hits Clintons on tactics]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Continuing off topic.
I sometimes forget that I wasn't even for Obama until Clinton made any other choice unconscionable. Edwards on the ticket would allieviate a lot of the concern that behind the glorious Obama rhetoric no substance resides. Edwards is substance. He would have been the better president, but he'll do fine as VP.
Also, post-Benen Koppelman seems a changed man and War Room seems the better for the diversity of voices. I'm a carpetbagger convert, but I'm not prepared to abandon War Room just yet. In short, I apologize Mr. Koppleman.
-
Joan Walsh
[Read the article: Feminism is the new funny]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]is the funniest feminist going right now. Have you seen her stuff on getting Obama off his pedestal? I thought I was reading Eddie (non-feminist) freaking Murphy.
You're pretty funny yourself, Traister. Six features in a week? You must be laughing.