Letters to the Editor
DevilDawg
Published Letters: 41 Editor's Choice: 2
-
Shoulda, woulda, coulda
[Read the article: It's not just Giuliani]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Wolf, I COULD get into a long explanation of percentages, but I'd prefer instead to use a more compelling argument: 9/11. If that doesn't explain away all of those things you pointed to, you know those "facts" and "evidence" (which I am incapable of disputing), I don't know what will.
Is it possible to win an election by putting your fingers in your ears and repeating 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11 over and over?
-
Immunity = Ability to keep quiet about the truth
[Read the article: Perino on Mukasey: Confirm now, question later]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Let's see, first we need to grant immunity to the telecoms. Then we need to grant immunity to the Blackwater officials. Now we need to grant immunity (in a roundabout way)to Mukasey.
Does anyone need to be held accountable anymore? Oops. I don't think the administration would answer that either.
-
Yet another apolitical military man
[Read the article: Petraeus named second most influential "conservative"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I would include Eisenhower as yet another great example of the apolitical military officer. Prior to his campaign and election as a Republican President, he was courted by both the Republican and Democratic parties to be the Presidential cadidate. Again, Patraeus' actions do not raise any ambuguity over his party loyalty.
-
How low is our bar?
[Read the article: A muted response from Bush]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Having said that ... President Musharraf has been a strong fighter against extremists and radicals ... he understands the dangers posed by radicals and extremists. After all, they tried to kill him three or four times. And our hope is that he will restore democracy as quickly as possible."
It never ceases to amaze me how low we set the bar for democracy for countries we consider our allies (Saudi arabia, Pakistan, etc), especially for one that is know to harbor terrorists. Pakistan has remained a known haven for terrorists and is now undermining democratic elections and restoring authoritarian measures, and our Administration doesn't even blink. Apparently, there isn't even a desire to conceal the empty lip service for democracy as anything other than lip service.
-
The intellectual conspiracy
[Read the article: WSJ Op-Ed page decries hatred of the president]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Another central point to Berkowitz's rant is that the Bush hatred is employed by intellectual liberals. He repeats it over and over to ensure the reader doesn't miss the fact that those intellectual, self-important, elite liberals, who think they are so smart and so great are the ones that hate Bush. Not the regualar, salt-of-the-earth American. I'm surprised that he didn't just throw out Kerry's to demonstrate how elite these Bush-haters must be.
-
Prunes
[Read the article: WSJ Op-Ed page decries hatred of the president]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yet, just a couple of nights ago, a questioner at a John McCain event asked how McCain was planning to “beat the bitch,” referring of course to Hillary Clinton.
To be fair, that could just as easily refer to Giuliani.
Giuliani is only called "bitch" when he is staying at the home of his gay friends.
-
Deferrment for Missions
[Read the article: Mitt Romney: Perfect tough guy for right-wing war cheerleaders]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I guess you can read this two ways - either for Romney, faith is paramount, there is literally nothing more important than being a good Mormon. Or he simply regarded his life's calling as too important to fit in a deployment to Vietnam as well as missionary work.
Why are the two mutually exclusive. I guess he couldn't spread the good Mormon word to Vietnam. Too many Mormons there back in the 60s and 70s?
-
The Obduscation of Marriage
[Read the article: Huckabee digs a little deeper]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There is a distinction of marriage that politicians continue to obfuscate for their own purposes. There is a difference in the government-recognized marriage - a union of two people recognized by the state to confer LEGAL rights to both members - and a church-recognized marriage - a union of two people recognized by God and witnesses to establish a religious bond between the two members. The two are disctinct. Instead, it has become a talking point to rile up different sides.
There is no slippery slope that Huckabee describes. The argument is whether the State (government) should recognize the legal rights of two homosexuals joined in mutual consent in legal marriage. There has not been nor there ever will be a law requiring a CHURCH to sanction a marriage it does not support, i.e. marriage of two men, marriage to an animal. This argument is a complete joke that continues to demonstrate the unwillingness of Presidential candidates to discuss meaningful issues rather that resort to some pointless emotional diatribe.
-
Capitulation
[Read the article: Jay Rockefeller's unintentionally revealing comments]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Great. Congressional Democrats are more similar to Republicans than they originally believed. Republican congressmen are ashamed by their attraction to men and try to hide by claiming family values and undermining rights for homosexuals. Democratic congressmen are ashamed of being Democrats and try to hide their disgrace by capitulating to the administration. What wonderful representation.
-
The farce of bipartisanship
[Read the article: What "bipartisanship" in Washington means]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I hate that word, but like everything else in our defunct political process, rhetoric is more valued than action. Saying "bipartisanship" is more important than actually practicing the method. The funniest use of bipartisanship is that of the same politicians (Bush) who rammed issues through congress when the Republicans were in the majority. To be able to say, with a straight face, that Congress needs to practice more bipartisanship (especially when Glenn points out that most of the time Reps are getting what they want anyway) is laughable at best since the administration and Republican party ensured that no bipartisanship occurred for the past six years.
I will add that Glenn should have included SCHIP reauthorization (Motion passed 67-32: Reps 17-32 against, Dems 48-0 for) in his list when numerous Republicans crossed the aisle to vote for the measure in spite of the Presidential threat of a veto.
-
Democratic Self-Loathing
[Read the article: Mukasey's radical worldview is now the norm]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The main difference in whether unchecked presidential authority continues under a Democratic President is not reliant on the decisions and actions of the president. Instead it lies with the fact that a now supplicant Congress will reverse course to ensure that a liberal President does not and cannot go unchecked. The same way that the Senate strictly enforces Republican holds on unwanted legislation but ignores the same requests of its own members, Congress will snidely reject any Democratic Presidential requests or authority, contrasting the past 8 years of absent protest. Why do congressional Dems appear so pathetic and self-loathing?