Letters to the Editor
Scientician
Published Letters: 525 Editor's Choice: 1
-
gttim:
[Read the article: Fred Thompson, "tough guy" and "folksy cultural conservative"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Not that such a trivial and facile reasoning for supporting a presidential candidate needs much response but since he asks:
How bad can a guy who likes busty blondes be?
http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/classes/33d/projects/naziwomen/eva.htm
She looks fairly busty in that photograph, though I confess it had never occurred to me before to wonder about her cup size.
-
kdwmson:
[Read the article: Fred Thompson, "tough guy" and "folksy cultural conservative"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]. is the sort of thing that sounds profound when you're about 16. And high. (Professional psychoanalysis is only about one step above the village witchdoctor in terms of intellectual credibility, but never mind that for now.)
No, please, let's "mind" that notion. Please, invalidate an entire field of medicine for us with your superior judgment!
I can't wait.
But those of you who found it interesting will no doubt fall about in abject leftish mirth after reading:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,485942,00.html
Am I supposed to find it amusing that Nazisim is rising in East Germany?
Or that men who have trouble getting laid turn into racist, right wing reactionaries?
-
Shooter:
[Read the article: Fred Thompson, "tough guy" and "folksy cultural conservative"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What you see as a dig at women is actually a dig at the Democrat "men". You folks are becoming the "Mommy" party.
It's a dig that reveals you, shooter are a sexist who sees women as weaker, and men who would follow a woman as weaklings.
So it is meant as a dig at Democratic men, but it is also, simultaneously a dig at women, as being unworthy of being held in high esteem or deemed "tough."
So in addition to your anti-Muslim bigotry, you are a misogynist.
-
LWM:
[Read the article: Fred Thompson, "tough guy" and "folksy cultural conservative"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Here's Bill O'Reilly chiming in, brother-in-arms to Shooter:
Bill O'Reilly: But do you understand what the New York Times wants, and the far-left want? They want to break down the white, Christian, male power structure, which you're a part, and so am I, and they want to bring in millions of foreign nationals to basically break down the structure that we have. In that regard, Pat Buchanan is right. So I say you've got to cap with a number.
This is a stunning moment of sincere honesty from O'Reilly, and I think it tops Limbaugh's water carrying admission in terms of exposing what the GOP is, and has been about since LBJ signed the Civil Rights act.
-
Glenn, re: credentialism
[Read the article: Fred Thompson, "tough guy" and "folksy cultural conservative"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thanks. It struck me as a glib dismissal of your essay rather than a meaningful engagement of it. Besides your psychological conclusions are many non-psychological factual points of Republican hypocrisy you raise in demonstrating how Thompson fails to meet the praise he is garnering in any substantive way.
Even if one makes a blanket dismissal of any lay assessment of the psychology behind the disconnect, this person must still come up with a better explanation for the hypocrisy.
To Sum: Glenn's rationale about what is fucked in the heads of conservatives who love Thompson is debatable, but he has factually demonstrated that something is definitely screwed up here.
-
El Cid's Rating System
[Read the article: Mike Allen, consummate Beltway "journalist"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The idea of a rating system for synctophantic and obsequious boot licking articles by supposed journalists is intriging.
Much as Atrios has popularized the "F.U." for "Friedman Unit" his perpetual moving goal post of when things will improve in Iraq: About 6 months.
I propose the rating system be modelled after how movies are rated and we name it after a suitable target. Perhaps the Broder? As in "Oh man, that article was such regurgitated administration talking points, I give it three and a half Broders out of five"
-
I'm not scared of "President" Cheney
[Read the article: Mike Allen, consummate Beltway "journalist"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]1) Almost all the reasons to impeach Bush apply to Cheney too. If ever congress summoned the willpower to impeach Bush, it is almost certain Cheney would have to be removed as well. Most of their crimes are joint.
2) In the event Cheney is not removed, and became president we would be talking about a post-impeachment and removal political landscape, where Executive power would be at low low low ebb. Cheney would be the ultimate neutered executive.
3) Arguing keeping Bush in office because Cheney would somehow be worse is really not a morally responsible argument anyway. If Bush deserves impeachment and removal, then it should be done. Enduring a few months of a Cheney Presidency would be a small price to pay for doing the right thing.
-
Another profound truth from Glenn
[Read the article: The great right-wing fraud to repudiate George W. Bush]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What the right is doing is quite predictable but needs to be stopped.
I know he was referring specifically to the issues in the article, but I think this should be adopted as a general proposition, needing no context to still remain true.
Perhaps there are exceptions, but I doubt it.
-
I like the Party Analogy
[Read the article: The great right-wing fraud to repudiate George W. Bush]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Conservatives brought Bush to the Party that is America, and for awhile he was the life of the party, and had a crowd gathered around him cheering, conservatives were going up to girls telling them "he's my friend!"
Later, when Bush had drank too much, vomitted on the rug, and was groping every woman in sight, conservatives are only too happy to melt into the crowd muttering "who brought that guy anyway?"
If they had any principles, they'd help us load him into a taxi by calling the Impeachment line. As it stands, they're too busy recruiting the next affiable drunk to parlay into more popularity.
Isn't that the whole point of the "guy you'd like to have a beer with" idea anyway?