Letters to the Editor
Baldie McEagle
Published Letters: 992 Editor's Choice: 3
-
I knew it!
[Read the article: Karl Rove: Honest political genius]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glenn supports Howard Dean:
I ... think ... I have ... been ... secretly supporting... Howard Dean....
All you Obamists and Clintonites can shake hands now.
-
Hmm ...
[Read the article: Karl Rove: Honest political genius]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm pretty sure she has made noises to the effect that she tries to treat them equally critically, but I'm not sure of the relevance of this to the discussion.
-
Semiodd, dude
[Read the article: Karl Rove: Honest political genius]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I have indeed been keeping up.
(1) I don't see how your comments relate to GG's post, and (2) I don't see how the request for evidence relates to the "discussion" about Joan.
You need to realize you're trying to goad a lawyer. Be more precise with your fishing expedition, or be prepared to find you've wasted your time. Do you even know what it is you're trying to prove?
-
Was that sugarman?
[Read the article: Karl Rove: Honest political genius]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"I know you romans like to spill the blood of the true followers of christ, but ...".
-
I'll try to help, just once
[Read the article: Karl Rove: Honest political genius]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The challenge: "Joan regularly insists that she is not endorsing, supporting, or otherwise favoring Hillary Clinton in any way."
The quest: "Who can be the first one to back up AncientAssyrian, and find where Joan claimed that she did not support either candidate?
I remember her specifically stating that she liked them both and was equally critical of both, and was not supporting one or the other..."
Have you heard of apples and oranges? Those statements are not the same. They are not related. They are different.
Cheers.
-
So then ...
[Read the article: Howard Kurtz on why media outlets ignore the "military analyst" story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Trusting either the government or corporate monopolies to do the job for us is a recipe for disaster.
We reject both options? Why?
Right now, we have a corporate monopoly, or a set of them, technically oligarchy. And this oligarchy is the cause of the very problem we face. Not corporations, but allowing corporations free rein---allowing them to grow without let or hindrance.
What happened to the concept of the state as a tool of the people? How bizarre it is that so many intelligent people disdain the idea that writing and following rules dictating how the state handles public property might improve the end result. Again, I remind everyone that government is an instrument---by and for the people.
Or is that just too naive? Is the Declaration of Independence just another myth, like Winston Churchill?
-
To put it another way
[Read the article: Howard Kurtz on why media outlets ignore the "military analyst" story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If you ignore your government and it bites you in the ass, perhaps you should blame yourself.
I say this to no one in particular, and of course it's not even a fair thing to say. But I think it's true.
-
Anyone who is terrified of the (pre-Bush Admin) US government
[Read the article: Howard Kurtz on why media outlets ignore the "military analyst" story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]read this:
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/28/8560/
The media ARE their own little nationalist government.
-
Thanks for the great posts
[Read the article: Howard Kurtz on why media outlets ignore the "military analyst" story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Cocktailhag and Frankly.
-
Correction
[Read the article: Howard Kurtz on why media outlets ignore the "military analyst" story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ah, libertarians. Their unstinting faith in the ability of people to govern themselves without government ... is always inspiring.
-
Just one question, bucky
[Read the article: Howard Kurtz on why media outlets ignore the "military analyst" story]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]And people still insist we need the state because the alternative is worse!
Was the security guard working for the state?
-
I hate to gossip, but
[Read the article: Brian Williams nominates Peggy Noonan for a Pulitzer Prize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Has Noonan been seen staggering around town with a bottle in her hand? I can't believe that piece (as far as what was quoted) wasn't written by a drunk, or a college newspaper editor. It's nothing but disconnected half-thoughts and buzzwords and cheap metaphors.
I'm going to write an article about how McCain has America in his swinging ball sack, and how the little people out in the desolate heartlands write letters to me asking where they can find America in Hillary. If they stuck their hands down her pants, would they find America there?
It's a legitimate question.
-
shorter scooter
[Read the article: Brian Williams nominates Peggy Noonan for a Pulitzer Prize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]OBAMA IS BLACK, PEOPLE!
-
@avetter
[Read the article: Brian Williams nominates Peggy Noonan for a Pulitzer Prize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Calm down. Kitt knows what you're saying. Your anger appears to be blinding you.
-
@rather not say
[Read the article: Brian Williams nominates Peggy Noonan for a Pulitzer Prize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think the "thinking" goes partly like this:
We know what women are going to think and say. They are either for equality or for a better environment for their babies, or both. OK, we're done, let's move on.
The average male voter, as described, on the other hand, is free to think, want, say anything. Including, just maybe, what "we" tell him to say, especially if it involves aggression against the enemy of the day. Because when he's down at the diner, he's apparently not thinking much at all. An empty vessel, so to speak. Much more useful and interesting than those women.
-
This is a great observation
[Read the article: Brian Williams nominates Peggy Noonan for a Pulitzer Prize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]... the thing confusing hell out of me is the comment trail to Williams' piece. The first ten or so praise him, praise Noonan, then proceed to bash Bush, the GOP, and the general state of things. One mentions she can't wait for Williams' upcoming segment on the 'depilated' (sic) infrastructure. She then wonders why the government didn't start a new WPA, rather than send rebate checks. Another person mentions that the only time the Correspondent's Dinner was worth watching was when Colbert was on.
While I'm no fan of Brian Williams, and think Peggy Noonan is freaking insane, surely this speaks to the larger picture?
For me, this is a key to the puzzle of why Americans respond to polls like liberals and vote like moderate conservatives, if I may frame it like that. The above commenter may not be typical, but how revealing it is that she doesn't know the difference between Reaganism and the New Deal.
That degree of naivete and plain ignorance must account for a huge part of the disconnect between what Americans want from their government and what they get.