Letters to the Editor
Samson141
Published Letters: 107 Editor's Choice: 7
-
Al-Qaida's Re-Strengthening
[Read the article: Heck of a job, Chertoff!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Shouldn't this lead us to conclude that we are not winning the war on terror? And that the war in Iraq is not keeping us safe by "fighting them over there, so that can't attack us here?" I mean these were absurd propositions to begin with (as if one can wage war on a tactic; as if Al Qaida is a finite group of individuals, etc.), but doesn't Al Qaida's regrouping success suggests the gung ho tough on terror republicans are not actually achieving meaningful success in protecting us? Perhaps the war in Iraq is draining our resources and distracting us from taking steps that might actually have weakened Al Qaida???
-
One question put to Comey
[Read the article: Perjury investigation for Gonzales?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]would resolve this, no?
"Was the disagreement asbout the TSP or something else?"
-
faith and reason
[Read the article: War, chaos and Bush's faith]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"One CANNOT have faith and reason at the same time. Sorry."
Why do you beleive the two mutually exclusive? I suppose it's a matter of how you define "faith," eh?
For example, what if my faith was that beyond the singularity from which the universe sprang there was a creator? Is that faith incompatible with reason? We don't know how something came from nothing. Is my reason savaged and destroyed if I choose to answer this potentially unanswerable question with faith? In all other things I may concede to reason and science. Would this faith be incompatible with reason then?
-
Sustain until 2008
[Read the article: A new low of mindlessness for our media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Here's a coincidence to note - maybe:
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Pentagon_to_announce_massive_continuation_of_0731.html
-
@ Seaberry
[Read the article: A new low of mindlessness for our media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"The surge has clearly worked ..."
Please defined "worked." What has the surge accomplished?
-
@Seaberry
[Read the article: A new low of mindlessness for our media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"America is winning in Iraq"
Seaberry, you just keep spouting conclusions: "it's working" "we're winning." You have yet to say what you mean by these terms. What are the aims and what are the results you see that amount to "working" or "winning."
What meaningful longterm good are we achieving through the efforts, cost, and blood?
-
If it burrns when
[Read the article: This Modern World]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]you urinate, you might need some pennicilin or something.
-
Falafel and Loofah
[Read the article: This Modern World]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]LAUGH OUT LOUD. Dodd should have used that line the other night.
-
Really, Glenn, come on
[Read the article: The foreign policy community]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]there are only so many hours in the day, and these people have important things to think about and accomplish. It's all they can do to keep up their trivial debates with one another, much less have to take precious time out to address laypeople like yourself and your quaint thoughts about very very serious and difficult issues that you can likely only barely comprehend, if at all.
It's like when sophomores in college think they are smarter than their tenured professors. I mean you are a precocious chap, and no doubt your peers (like the sophomore's) might be impressed with your "insights" (which only goes to show how naive they are), but really ... that doesn't mean the professor must debate you before the whole school. The professors have nothing to gain from such a exchange. Indeed, they only risk losing face when you make some naive argument the audience, in its ignorance, buys, and which the professor cannot set right because the audience is too stupid to understand the subtle and difficult points that ultimately show the professor to be correct.
-
What changed?
[Read the article: Enforcing the community's foreign policy orthodoxy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As Cheney's 1994 comments on avoiding a quagmire in Iraq have made the rounds, it has led me to wonder what has changed that has turned the baseline conventional wisdom on its head? One might say back then there was a baseline of "pragmatism" that was been replaced with this new hawkish (seriously unpragmatic) baseline of "never met a war I didn't like."
Even as late as 2000, Bush was all about avoiding nation building etc.
I don't believe it's all 9/11, because Bush was determined to attack Iraq even before then. So is this all about the idiot neo-conservative pipedreams? Have they instilled this new baseline where acts of US aggression are a given? Where are the pragmatists?
-
It depends on what your definition of "gay" is ...
[Read the article: Craig: The press made me plead guilty]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]He appears to be saying that he has never self-identified as a member of the gay community. Homosexual acts... well that may be a different story. Rather like Clinton's claim that receiving fellatio is not really "sex" -- which everyone knows only occurs when a penis penetrates a vagina. Yeah, right.
-
Uh ...
[Read the article: Larry Craig and the double standards]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm no fan of either Libby or Craig, but I'm pretty sure that one cannot appeal a plea of guilt, while one can appeal a conviction as erroneous on the law or facts etc.
-
kippah
[Read the article: I've had three miscarriages and my husband won't wear a yarmulke]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Your husband is being a jerk. He apparently feels the need to make an in your face statement to those worshipping around him that HE doesn't this shit. Why? Conceit perhaps, or passive aggression towards you? I dunno, but perhaps you do.
There is no valid "principle" here. What is the skin off an atheist's nose to respectfully don a kippah out of respect to those he is with who are worshipping. What, is it going to ruin his atheist cred in his atheist hang out - "Dude, I saw you wearing a yarmulke; that means you believe - nah nah na nah nah." He's not living up to his premarital commitment to you by standing on a phony "principle." That's how I see it, for what little it may be worth.
Been there on the infertility thing. Finally lucked out and now have a 6 year old daughter. I wish you the same blessing. Hang in there.
-
edit
[Read the article: I've had three miscarriages and my husband won't wear a yarmulke]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]in the first sentence:
doesn't BELIEVE this shit
funny how even rereading a post before submitting your eyes and mind can skip right over those things.