Letters to the Editor
GlennGreenwald
Published Letters: 2095 Editor's Choice: 18
-
Adnoto
[Read the article: Confrontational investigations, subpoenas, and hearings are the priority]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]They will keep hoping against all evidence that the "opposition" is simply keeping their powder dry. It is delusional thinking but it is all they are willing to invest in because they don't have the stomach for what truly needs to be done - what should have been done long ago.
Just like the tough-guy neocons who love to belt out militant-sounding phrases without ever having the courage to specify what they are advocating ("American needs to do what needs to be done - time to take the gloves off - those who undermine troop morale should be held accountable," etc. etc.), all the tough-guy revolutionaries like you love to come and strut around with all your pretty more-radical -than-thou chic feathers spread out for all to see, condeming everyone for not having the real hard-core willingness to get their hands dirty with The Real Fight, without ever making a single specific point.
Do tell, adnoto - what does this mean: "it is all they are willing to invest in because they don't have the stomach for what truly needs to be done - what should have been done long ago."
What specifically are the things we "don't have the stomach for"? What "truly needs to be done - what should have been done long ago"?
Be specific. Fist-pumping marches? Guns in the street? Storming the White House? And what are you doing to bring about all the revolutionary glory?
-
C.O.:
[Read the article: Confrontational investigations, subpoenas, and hearings are the priority]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]But, getting Congress to convene very aggressive hearings will be imo very difficult, due to current state of congressional dysfunction.
The reason hearings are infintely more feasible than meaningful legislative changes is because you don't need to cobble together huge majorities. You just need the right Committee Chair with the right Committee, and there are plenty of those. A Pat Leahy or Henry Waxman or John Conyers, etc. have huge amounts more latitude to issue supboeans and hold hearings than Harry Reid does get legislation enacted. Hearings are not only more effective at this point, but far easier to engineer.
-
Rollotomasi/Che Pasa/Adnoto
[Read the article: Confrontational investigations, subpoenas, and hearings are the priority]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I became a regular reader during the time of the NSA warrantless wiretapping revelations in late 2005-early 2006, and at first wondered why, with Glenn’s obvious legal talents, why he began spending so much time with the reactionary pundits. I used to think you just ignore them and they will go away - that it was a waste of time, and certainly not worthy of Glenn’s time, to debunk obviously unreasoned and unreasonable views, but soon realized that taking on the massive right wing propaganda machine is a necessary and extraordinarily difficult part of separating these dangerous ideologues from the powers they continue to seek.
Exactly. It would be nice if our political conflicts were resolved by high-minded and rational debates over ideas and substance. But that is just not reality, and the luxury of "remaining above the fray" and other such cliches is simply not one that anyone can really afford to indulge, at least if having an impact or facilitating some sort of meaningful change is the objective.
One can't extricate issues of executive power abuses or wars from the the political battles. The reason our country is plagued with those afflictions is because there is a twisted, extremist and deeply dishonest political movement behind them, as well as a fundamentally dysfunctional press that both permits and enables it. One cannot do anything about the former without engaging the latter.
Whenever someone comes and says things like: "I wish you would go back to focusing on all of those interesting and high-minded legal issues you used to blog about and stop constantly focusing on the right-wing noise machine and political pundits," I can, in one sense, understand the sentiment. Part of me wishes I could do that, too.
But the reality is that one cannot accomplish anything unless one is willing to identify and battle against the real causes of our political sicknesses. The reason that the Bush administration has been able to implement lawlessness and a subversion of our political system is because their followers demand it, they have distorted our political discourse, and the media has been an active ally. One has no choice but to engage those topics -- and to do so tenaciously and without cessation -- if one has to accomplish anything at all.
Finally, as to the issues raised by Che and Adnoto, I am obviously well aware of the deep flaws in the Democratic Party. I am hardly one who believes that our country's problems will be solved if we just elect a few more Democrats. But I can only analogize the situation to administering medical care to a patient who is bleeding profusely. The first order of business is to use all instruments (which is how I see Democrats) to stop the bleeding to prevent death. Only after that does it make sense to start thinking about longer-term and broader heatlh considerations, like changing the diet and exercise routine of the patient, etc.
I believe in the basic political system created by the American founders, believe that it's endangered, and think that it can be restored. I guess if someone doesn't believe that -- if they think it's not worth saving or irrevocably destroyed -- then it makes sense that there is unlikely to be common ground strategically, but I don't really believe that people who claim to think that really do believe it, or else they wouldn't be signing onto their computers and reading and participating in blogs. Usually, it's just frustration talking -- an anger that things have been allowed to fall so far and a desire to declare it all dead as a result. I understand the sentiment, but I don't share it.
-
Randron:
[Read the article: Neoconservative Eliot Cohen's new position at the State Department]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Let me guess: Eliot Cohen has never served in the U.S. Armed Forces in any capacity.
True or False?
I believe that is true, though in fairness, one should note that his son is an Army Ranger who was deployed (and still may be - I don't know) in Iraq.