Letters to the Editor
Geogre
Published Letters: 63 Editor's Choice: 6
-
Satiram scribere non est
[Read the article: It was a joke (we think)]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The stand-by of the satirist, the reductio ad absurdum, has been removed. This administration is parody-proof and satire-proof, but only because they not only will make every single parody come true, but that they will do so and then shamelessly suggest that decency is treason, horror is justice, and that their own interests are the nation's. I have no doubt that President Vice President Cheney and Bush have considered a higher call, a divine appointment, as Protector General of the United States, but I also think that Bush would, indeed, trigger war if he staid a day beyond.
-
Holy Bull!
[Read the article: "Where are what?"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Aren't we weary of this, by now? The rhetorical dodges wouldn't work for an eight year old, but they're attempted again by the WH spokesdrones.
1. "Give me a specific e-mail you want, in writing, with details on from and to whom it was, and I will search for it." is similar to the "Governor of Louisiana didn't ask for help in the right way, on the right letterhead, with an official declaration of need for a specific thing."
2. "There is no evidence of what is not there." is the opposite of lines they have taken in the past, when Saddam was to show the absence of weapons of mass destruction or be invaded. Here, it is, "The lack of any e-mails means there is no proof that they were lost."
Even the most dishonest would have trouble believing that the WH simply went 4 mo. with no e-mails being sent. I have a feeling the "big lie" folks aren't even trying any more.
-
Slippery Slopes
[Read the article: Huckabee digs a little deeper]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I wish I could share the belief in American voters to reject the slippery slope of "gay marriage = bestiality." Santorum did many other creepy things, and the story of his corpse cuddling with his stillborn child certainly stood out. Unfortunately, Americans have been happy to accept slippery slope arguments in the past (domino theory, Monroe Doctrine, manifest destiny) and argument by analogy ("X% were Nazis, and there are more Communists in America now," "Sputnik means the Soviets will drop bombs on us from space"). Huckabee will be and is being dislodged by the plutocratic wing of the Republican party. They have gotten in bed with the dazzle-eyed to win elections, but they don't want 'those people' in charge.
-
Convictions vs. Convicts
[Read the article: Barack Obama: "Committed Christian -- Called to Bring Change"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For a long time, we on the left have held out our convictions, while the right has shown pictures of convicts -- hope from us, fear from them. The right has moved this game to a darker level by saying, not suggesting, what Falwell said in 1980, "You can't be a good liberal and a good Christian." Well, you can. In fact, most of the progressive values derive from Christian churches and the teaching of Jesus. One of these values is not acting as the judge of others, and another is being pluralist.
When Obama not only counters the whispering campaign but makes a positive assertion of religious faith and we on the left wring our hands, I think we're seeing the same crisis of values that we are when feminists have to accept that feminism means being able to choose to stay home, have babies, and be "traditional." Being a progressive should mean being unafraid of faith. Only dunderheads think that religion is intolerance, and only the worst knaves of all use religion to gild their intolerance.
I hope that Obama proclaims his Christian faith more loudly yet, that he takes away the repellent idea that "Christian" and fearful/hateful are aligned and that this discussion lead us to point out again how unChristian it is to use Christ's church to propagate fear and superstition.
-
Vote Edwards... or... uh?
[Read the article: Undecided '08: Should I vote for Clinton or Obama?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I have been for Edwards, and not merely afraid of the alternatives. As a social progressive, he was not only resonating with my views, but he was doing so in a credible, intelligent way, and he was no longer a smile and a suit. He had depth. I can only imagine that Elizabeth's health has played a part in his suspension of campaigning, but that's speculation. Now, though, I face three choices: a vote for Edwards anyway, or a vote for Obama.
There is darkness, as Ms. Traister hints, in this choice. For me, I have a memory of working on liberal Bill Clinton's campaign in 1992 and then watching moderate Bill Clinton for four years and DINO Bill Clinton sign "Welfare Reform" and other horrors. I know that Hillary begins where Bill left off, already "triangulating" and working for that Republican-lite angle. My disappointment with Clinton's second term makes me unhappy thinking about a second Clinton's first term.
However, there is a darker fear here. Barack Obama is magic. He is fantastic and has campaigned and spoken beautifully. However, I remember working for Harvey Gantt's senatorial campaign in North Carolina. The night before the election, pollsters showed him five points ahead of Jesse Helms, and yet he lost by two. The lesson there was that many, many Americans will say that they like the intelligent and charismatic candidate, but, when the booth swings shut, they will vote their native racism. My choice for Obama would be predicated not on my beliefs about myself or the Senator, but on whether I think that America is over its prejudice. If I think that Americans will be honest about race, if I think that they will vote their conscience when no one is looking, then my second choice to Edwards has never been in doubt.
Our hesitation, I fear, is not about the candidate we'd choose, but about whether we believe that our countrymen are finally mature and adult enough to do what is right, to not fall for a Harold Ford-style "Swift boating," to not fall for a whispering campaign, to not vote skin color, and that is a quandary that we cannot solve satisfactorily.