Letters to the Editor
Fraud Guy
Published Letters: 337
-
Hushed tones
[Read the article: Answers for Joe Klein]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]When asked questions about someone (whether or not in authority), our first response is to not say anything bad about that person, and it takes an effort of will to state what is wrong. It is a conversational reflex, just like saying "fine" when a stranger asks how you are doing. You don't want to come across as negative.
I've participated in feedback for organizations, officially and unofficially. When I have pointed out deficiencies during reviews, the questioners almost always were startled at a negative response. I've had to go through extra background checks on job interviews because I honestly spoke about my reasons for departing a previous job. However, my qualifications were strong, so they did the research which backed up my statements, and I was hired.It may take longer to go through the search, but I have found that the truth is worth it.
As an aside, I wonder if, to follow up on Paul R.'s point, Mr. Broder spoke to someone who told him that they opposed the Beltway/Bush cabal/neocon clan, would he hold it up as an example of how the blogs are poisoning the country against the leadership? It seems that not only are there lies, damned lies, and statistics, but that they are just skipping the statistics and going to the lies.
-
Jeanette D.
[Read the article: Answers for Joe Klein]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That's what Colbert told them last year. Think of the savings for the media/news conglomerates if they could just cut the WH News reporter's salaries and replace them with actual stenographers. The transcription would also be more accurate.
-
Excellent
[Read the article: A beautiful mosaic of anti-blogger hatred]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]To answer your last paragraph:
"Those they fear, they hate."
-
Analogy
[Read the article: PBS's "Frontline: Spying on the Home Front"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I was moving some paving stones this weekend, and was surprised by the sheer amount of bloated, crawling things I found underneath, all of which scuttled away when exposed to the light.
-
The track record so far
[Read the article: PBS's "Frontline: Spying on the Home Front"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If all of these spying programs had any effect on counter-terrorism, we should have heard something by now.
Instead, the NJ arrests came after detective work based on a tip.
The FL arrests came after investigative work based on a tip.
Informants, investigation, and legal means work.
Would one of the pro-police state apologists provide one example of a terrorist cell IN THE UNITED STATES which was found and stopped by the illegal domestic spying programs?
Shooter042,545,178,935? Jakewannabe007?
This is an administration that makes wildly expansive claims of effectiveness to promote their new programs, but all of the successes come from tried and true methods.
And Jake, most historians now say that the nuclear bombs on Japan were unneccessary; the net effect was that it prevented Soviet Russia from claiming some of the norther islands in the Japanese chain. The Japanese government was about to reorganize and sue for peace before the bombs dropped. No million man invasion force would have been needed.
-
Operation Unthinkable
[Read the article: PBS's "Frontline: Spying on the Home Front"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Assumptions:
"a) The undertaking has the full support of public opinion in both the British Empire and the United States and consequently, the morale of British and American troops continues high.
b) Great Britain and the United states have full assistance from the Polish armed forces and can count upon the use of German manpower and what remains of German industrial capacity.
[...]
d) Russia allies herself with Japan.
[...]"
It also states that we would have to commit to total war with the Soviets, conquer their industrial centers, and bring about their political collapse.
That, plus the idea of using the Abomb to hit their leadership, which, ensconced in Moscow would be well beyond our bomber range (as was much of their industrial base, which had been moved beyond the Urals) makes Jake's concepts not just contra-factual, but contra-rational, as well. The reason the Germans lost WWII was that they overstretched their material and manpower resources, and found themselves between two forces that outnumbered and outpowered them over time. Had we decided to go against the Soviets then, we would have been pushing against a power with a huge defensive advantage, as well as the manpower resources to withstand an extended offensive and the ability to strike out against Allied resources in the Middle East and Asia. We could have won with a handful of Abombs and good intentions. Sure. We would not have had a Cold War, but a recurring Hot War.
As a wise man once said: "You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia..."