Letters to the Editor
Anonymust
Published Letters: 1982 Editor's Choice: 74
-
for greysky
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]about doing as well as blogging and commenting...
I watched a video last night of Marcy Wheeler (of Last Hurrah and FDL) and 3 other Michigan bloggers (2 left, 2 "right") in a panel on "Off the Record."
It was notable for how well all of the bloggers got on together, making their case for the importance of blogging as a complement to journalism to the moderator.
And your question about finding the line between blogging/commenting and actually doing came up. (I think it was) Marcy who had a good response... about having an impact on the influencers of a community. That certainly happens here, too, as you are proof yourself. It is easy to discount simple words, but you never know when you say or write something that will have an impact on someone else who is one of those on-the-stree activists. It is all to the good.
Here's a link to the program:
http://wkar.org/offtherecord/program.php?num=2007-43
-
Paul R.: There is no downside
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]to holding Rush accountable.
wrt your comment: http://letters.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/04/28/sea_change/permalink/bfc4ce810e367779bd5f85c45e76c5cc.html
Perhaps the seed of it is in his complaints after the last election... about the burden of carrying the water for the administration/party when they were so incompetent.
The meme: He's determined to support these incompetent losers for whom he has no respect, no matter the cost.
No matter what he does/says could be labeled as his way of helping BushCo and the GOP. Even (especially) his racist and misogynistic remarks. He says them because they can't, and so they won't have to.
Or is that being too much like the other side? I'm inclined to say no, because in his case, I'm not sure that it isn't the truth.
-
A lot of heady discussion on Libertarianism while I've been out
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The little bit of value I could have added has already been better said by Paul R. So there!
I'm still thinking, though, about his suggestion re: Rush (i.e., holding him accountable for his words & thinking), and how much the blogosphere has already changed things. As Susan Mc noted, we have been able to know much more about so many campaigns, what they were doing, not to mention being able to contribute to them.
The tipping point? By definition, I don't think we're supposed to be able to recognize one until after the fact, but I do think some people have enough foresight to recognize the inexorable.
Remember that little girl in 2004 who knew that a tsunami was coming, even though she couldn't see the tidal wave, because she had learned in school about the immense backwash that occurs first?
-
I just read it, WT
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]and it's interesting that you also responded to the same money quote that Paul R responded to, and that I might have, as well.
Wrt: "I'd [also] like to weigh in on the side of liberalism and the democratic left..."
The discussions I've read here have helped me clarify why I react so differently to various people, even though we are supposedly near one another on the political continuum.
The distinctions between Liberalism and Libertarianism are really key, and like Paul R, I, too, see many "results" of falsely conflating the two parties all around me. Like, e.g., the "constitution" of our new SCOTUS. Couldn't have happened without Nader, even with the voting irregularities.
Tony Auth had a great cartoon last week... all nine justices, 5 of them, the Catholic ones, all wearing papish headgear.
-
"How much can it matter?"
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It is only Star Trek, after all, and I don't have nearly the depth of knowledge that you two do.
However, I have to agree that no one else can compare to Jean-Luc Picard. Before NG, I never even really cared for Star Trek. Shatner just was not my cup of tea back then. Patrick Stewart is another story.
-
IntrovertGirl... you could have fooled me ;~)
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You might enjoy this link to one of my favorite bloggers:
http://blogs.salon.com/0003522/2005/06/06.html#a576
I've thought about going back and watching the old episodes with Shatner after reading in another post that Birdie had rented them for her sons via Netflix, and how much they had learned about ethics, etc., discussing them later. I have a grandson about the same age as her sons, but I don't know if he'd like them as well. I finally signed up for Netflix last month during March Madness (cable-less, I couldn't take it any more!).
I still haven't added any Star Trek episodes to my queue, yet, but this eddy in the sea change thread reminds me that I need to do that.
-
Bebop-o... please don't change
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I agree with IntrovertGirl.
If anything, you help the rest of us to remember what is important and to keep centered. Otherwise, these threads really could become vortices.
-
speaking of Paul Fussell
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I read another of Fussell's books in a class years ago, one that is actually timely right now, Thank God for the Atom Bomb, and other Essays.
He writes from first-hand experience in WWII... and not from what is now the more accepted perspective, either, but it's still very relevant. If anything, he makes an indirect case for better, i.e., more graphic, coverage of war.
In the same collection of essays, I remember one about the NRA leaving off the first clause of the 2nd amendment inscribed on the front of their building.
The title essay can be found here: http://www.ux1.eiu.edu/~cfib/courses/Fussell.pdf
And an interview conducted by Sheldon Hackney here: http://www.neh.gov/news/humanities/1996-11/fussell.html
-
I'm skeptical, too
[Read the article: Thanks but no thanks]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]After all, it must be one of Maureen Dowd's favorte shindigs, no?
-
What about stealing Gail Shister from the Philadelphia Inquirer?
[Read the article: Goodbye to the Fix, for now]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Apparently, they've just changed her beat, and no one is happy about it, not Gail, and not anyone in the industry.
Her focus is slightly different (come to think of it, maybe Heather and Stephanie wouldn't like having her at Salon), but she's good.
http://www.philadelphiaweekly.com/view.php?id=14432