Letters to the Editor
orbitboy
Published Letters: 1203 Editor's Choice: 100
-
@Conservativeslayer
[Read the article: Accountability? Libby? Gonzales? Let me tell you about 9/11]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think the point is that Bush promised that his administration would bring back accountability in the sense that they would hold themselves to a higher standard than the typical, "if you can't prove I broke any laws, that means I haven't done anything wrong" way of thinking. Accountability in the sense of no more obfuscation, no more cronyism, no more spin, no more "that depends on what the definition of 'is' is" type of evasion. Only an idiot would believe they actually meant those things at the time, but that's precisely what got him "elected" the first time. "Compassionate conservatism," "a return to accountability and personal responsibility," "put the gown-ups back in power," and all that hokum. It's hard to think back that far, but that's the hog-wash the American people were sold, and after 9/11, it was all forgotten.
-
Back @Conservativeslayer
[Read the article: Accountability? Libby? Gonzales? Let me tell you about 9/11]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Don't get me wrong, I agree with you. But the point of the reporter's question on accountability is that we were promised better than, "None of us has been caught yet; therefore, we're not guilty of anything." There's a difference between "illegal" and "wrong."
Gonzalez hasn't been charged with perjury because of two reasons: It's the hardest thing to prove, and he's been SO evasive, that he hasn't really said anything--true OR a lie. He just babbles nonsense and never answers the questions. He would have to give a detail or a fact in order to perjure himself, and he refuses to to that. He's lied, but not in a chargeable way. What he's done is "wrong," but not necessarily "illegal." And that's not what we were promised.
And as far as Libby goes, they're arguing that what Libby did was "technically illegal," but not "wrong." THAT'S the sort of nonsense we are being fed.
-
@judyinnm
[Read the article: Accountability? Libby? Gonzales? Let me tell you about 9/11]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If someone has an ironclad perjury case against Gonzalez, I'd love to hear it.
But Bush would consider the simple fact that Gonzalez hasn't been charged yet as a "vote of confidence," so your characterization of the Democrats' "message" is your own interpretation, not necessarily everyones. The sort of accountability I happen to be looking for from this group of Republicans--in light of what they promised--would be for them to have replaced Gonzalez by now, just because of the "appearance" of impropriety alone. That is more than enough. Given what they promised.
-
His work is done, anyway...
[Read the article: Karl Rove to resign]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]but I'd rather him leave now, at this late date, than still be there another day. Good riddance. Anyone with a shred of perceptiveness will understand Rove's legacy. As I wrote in a post last week concerning Barry Bonds, the only thing Americans hate more than a cheater is a loser. And Rove is no loser, that's for sure.
-
On second thought
[Read the article: Karl Rove to resign]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I sure hope this doesn't mean he's going to be spending more time here in Austin. Hopefully he and his family are staying in DC with the rest of their ilk.
-
This is a little different
[Read the article: The Islamists are coming]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]than what my father, a staunch conservative and life-long Republican believes. He's convinced that Al Qaida is intent on wiping the U.S. from the face of the earth via nuclar weapons (just like the Soviets were, back in the day, I presume). Therefore, the War on Terror is a race against time--with us trying to wipe them from the face of the earth before they can try do the same to us. In his mind, it's as simple as that. He's not one of those crazy people who thinks they want to take over our country, oh no. He just thinks they want to obliterate us, that's all.
-
For what it's worth
[Read the article: The Islamists are coming]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yes, I am amused.
Carry on.
-
Wow!
[Read the article: The Islamists are coming]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I haven't had a stalker in years! And one who steals epithets from Rush Limbaugh t to boot! How.....creepy....
-
@Anonymous
[Read the article: Enforcing the community's foreign policy orthodoxy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The temptation is mighty hard to resist, huh? Especially when tiberius throws a hanging curve as juicy as his "speak softly" comment. On what planet does the policy of completely ignoring repeated warnings of the threat posed by al Qaida constitute "speaking softly"? And then, compound that after 9/11 with "bring 'em on" and "dead or alive" which was then followed with a horribly misguided war plan. Sheesh! What's a guy to do?
-
Oh, the irony
[Read the article: The Islamists are coming]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I haven't had time to follow and read every post in this online donnybrook, but has anyone pointed out to Golden Boy the irony of his hero's refusal to pay the slightest bit of attention to the threat posed by al Qaida prior to 9/11? That he, Condi, and the rest of that administration sat on their hands prior to 9/11, despite the previous administration's warnings and outright pleading? Incredibly ironic, if you ask me.
Or even the irony that he cares more about some College Republican group being accused of hate speach, as opposed to being upset that Bush really doesn't give a damn whether bin Laden is ever caught, or not. Really strange priorities. And Ironic. Hypocritical, even.
-
@Svensker
[Read the article: The Islamists are coming]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yeah, but the thing is, it's not racism, or hate-speech, or bigotry if a whole group of people like the Muslims, are always, "asking for it," if you know what I mean. You know, like those uppity colored people always did, back before all this "PC" business made it unfashionable to drag an outnumbered guy behind a pick-up truck anymore. Boy, those were the days to be a privileged white guy, weren't they? Practically all the fun's been taken away now by those liberal bastards!
-
@GoldenBoy
[Read the article: The Islamists are coming]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Point taken--to some degree--about any false assumptions I made. My apologies. However, what's up with all the "I post under such-and-such-name for this topic, but usually anonymous for everything else"? What's that all about? How is any reasonable person supposed to assume anything other than that you have something to hide, and that your tactics just make it easier for you to obfuscate and shade the truth? Not to mention that it allows you the freedom to contradict yourself without ever being called out or noticed. Whatever, dude. Sorry I wasted my time. I won't again.