Letters to the Editor
Renegade Iconoclast
Published Letters: 669 Editor's Choice: 11
-
Wow. Just wow.
[Read the article: More on Kucinich and impeachment]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sorry to be such a letter hog, but I just got to your letter, Alex.
Alex, when you added the link to the articles, and admitted that you didn't know of one available at the time you posted originally, do you even realize what you admitted?
I'll tell you, in case you haven't figured it out yet. You admitted that you decided they weren't news before you'd even read them. And now you mischaracterize why we were upset, and leave out the main reason (laughingstock).
Steven Colbert was widely panned by journalists for his performance at the White House Correspondent's dinner. They said he wasn't funny, whereas everyone I talked to who saw it thought it was hilarious. They didn't think it was funny because they didn't get the joke, probably because it was about them. You don't get the joke either, and your non-apology just further cements this obvious fact.
-
Go for it Joe
[Read the article: A McCain-Lieberman ticket?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]We don't want you any more. You or the horse you rode in on.
-
Oh yeah, gender studies
[Read the article: Bareheaded in the park]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Seriously?
I wonder what a graduate course in gender studies would look like in Iran?
What would the title be? "The inherent submission to Allah and your husband which is encoded in your too shameful to show hair?," or "Stoning, a community's right to rid the world of loose women, and a father's duty?"
Not that I'm a huge fan of women's studies in general, any more than I'd be a fan of "men's studies."
It just sounds stupid, sorry, and it's a pretty worthless degree unless you want to be a women's studies professor.
-
Obama is already publicly financed
[Read the article: McCain counsel disputes Obama camp's account]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The vast majority of Obama's warchest has come from small donations online. What is that, if not a publicly financed campaign? Does he need to spend tax dollars to prove he's legit?
I really don't see how that would help the situation. Obama is the first presidential candidate that owes his success to everyday working people, and it's my hope and belief he will remember us when he takes office. You dance with them that brung ya, as the saying goes here in Texas. We brung 'im, and he'll be dancing with us!
-
Alex, you've gone beyond clueless to GOP hack now
[Read the article: Obama opts out of public funding]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Exactly what promise did Obama break? You assert a broken promise, but you give no corroborating evidence to support your nonsense. In the quote you cited, he agreed to "aggressively pursue" a publicly financed campaign. He didn't agree to take public financing, no matter what. Is your argument that he wasn't aggressive enough?
Once McCain threw up his hands, and said he couldn't control the 527s, that was the end of any possible agreement. Not only is it possible to control the 527s, Obama is actively doing so. McCain is like Hamas and the PLO, saying they can't control what their own members do. It's nonsense, and it's why no agreement has been reached, not because Obama broke some promise that you fail to document.
Obama's funds are 99% from grass roots. In a very real sense, we own him. He will not forget who brought him to the dance. That's a good thing. You're the one spinning.
-
Ugh
[Read the article: Obama, telecoms and the Beltway system]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Well, I suspect you're in for it now Glenn. This Obama supporter remains as committed as ever, but I can't really argue with you. He's a politician. I knew that going in.
-
@Glenn
[Read the article: Obama, telecoms and the Beltway system]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I read your letters on the first page, and, man, I have to say, I consider myself a pretty good debater, but I sure wouldn't want to be on your bad side.
-
Has anyone else noticed?
[Read the article: Obama, telecoms and the Beltway system]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Obama supporters in this thread are mostly saying, "Hey Glenn, you have a point."
Why? Because, unlike Koppelman, and Walsh, Glenn actually researches everything he writes, and applies his critical thinking skills in a manner which the other two are incapable of.
He is, in fact, so thorough, that rarely have I read anything of his and felt that I had something further to contribute, other than, right on! Well, and also, why didn't Mr. Constitution, Ron Paul, vote for impeachment? But let's table that for now.
My point is that we strong Obama supporters get called all kinds of names like Obamabot, kool-aid drinker, etcetera, etcetera. Most of us aren't, we just don't like sloppy writing and Republican talking points dressed up as edgy left wing analysis.
-
I contributed
[Read the article: George Bush's latest powers, courtesy of the Democratic Congress]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm down for $100. The total is over $225k now! I'm amazed, and happy, and proud of all of us! Use the money wisely, Blue America!
I wonder if this will get even a tiny bit of press coverage. Probably not. Maybe we should go after the media next! But how the hell do we do that?
-
@Glenn
[Read the article: George Bush's latest powers, courtesy of the Democratic Congress]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That last remark of yours was a little over the top, I think. I'll answer your question, though: Obama was just not looking where he was walking, and since he's so tall, he didn't notice the baby there, and kicked it in the face by accident.