Letters to the Editor
-
Unnamed Sources
Shapiro writes:
"Typical was my lunch discussion earlier this week with a ranking Democratic Party official. Midway through the meal, I innocently asked how the "Big Brother is listening" issue would play in November. Judging from his pained reaction, I might as well have announced that Barack Obama was resigning from the Senate to sell vacuum cleaners door-to-door. With exasperation dripping from his voice, my companion said, "The whole thing plays to the Republican caricature of Democrats -- that we're weak on defense and weak on security." To underscore his concerns about shrill attacks on Bush, the Democratic operative forwarded to me later that afternoon an e-mail petition from MoveOn.org, which had been inspired by Al Gore's fire-breathing Martin Luther King Day speech excoriating the president's contempt for legal procedures."
Your readers would be able to make judgements of the legitimacy of such a reaction if you named the source of this...er...crapola. When one lunches with ranking Democratic officials, who picks up the tab?
It would seem that Mr. Shapiro should be more forthcoming with regard to who he is lunching with. Especially when clearly his sources don't seem to be in touch with the party base.
If Salon is going to hire a "Washington Bureau Chief" the editor in chief should insist that such provocative statements should not go unsourced.
-
Plenty to talk about!
The majority of Americans don't understand what Big Brother means, and so they don't care. There is a happy assumption that the wire tapping, etc., is only for "bad guys" and that of course no good guys need worry. Pursuing that line of discussion is a losing game, despite the fact that it is a hideous erosion of the principles on which the Union was founded.
The Democrats need to roar about more tangible issues in the upcoming campaigns: corruption, cronyism, and the cruelty and folly of the tax cuts for the rich, and so on. They need to do more than moan and complain: they need to offer the American public a vision of the future that includes both our traditional values (free speech, fair taxation, etc.) and prudent security.
-
You said it, Walter...
"But politics sooner or later becomes a test of character and not merely a paint-by-numbers exercise in low-risk electioneering."
Oh, let it be so. Because what this country needs more than anything is a leader who speaks the truth. Who has a spine. Who isn't in it for his own self-aggrandizement. Who understands that unchecked power in the executive branch is infinitely dangerous, and is exactly what this country was founded to prevent. Who has a sense of history. Who recognizes that he works for the people. Who understands that our nation was meant to be a light in the darkness of the world order, and not the dark power that dictates to the world.
This is a really tall order. Politics in our country is a field that attracts unprincipled, power-hungry bottom-feeders, and naturally repels most honest men. And those few honest men who make it through the vile and corrupting requirements of electioneering to make it to the highest levels of our government are almost always led astray by opportunistic, unimaginative advisors who insist that the only way to win is to never commit to anything. To avoid controversy and never risk speaking the truth. To always react, and never attack. To toe the line in the middle of the road so assiduously that one appears to believe in nothing at all. To show no sign of passion, righteous anger, or everyday human weakness.
Do I want to be safe from terrorism? Yes I do, and I live in a very high-risk city. Would I risk dying if it meant that my country as a whole could be still the shining light in the world that it has been for centuries? Yes, I would. Any soldier would say as much, and our risks as civilians are so much less than theirs. How can we send young men and women to die in our names, but be unwilling to take on the slightest risk ourselves in the name of preserving the principles for which they fight? We need to be vigilant to ensure that the country we believe we live in remains one in which equality, justice, liberty and government by the rule of law and by the consent of the governed continue to prevail, so that our soldiers have something worth coming back to, and our children still have something worth fighting for in the future.
Strength is better than weakness. It may not win every election, but weakness will win none, and we'll feel better getting there if we speak truth to power on the way.
-
Democratic Party Stategists
Now we know why the Democratic Party always seems so irresolute and aimless in the face of a threaterning, patently unethical, illegal move by the Repunblican Party. Here all along we thought it was because members of the Party don't know who they want to be. So now we learn that their stragtegists are the chicken livered weenies who run frightened when some on the other side says "BOO!". Tell you what, Howard: FIRE THE STRATEGISTS - get someone who's not afraid to give you intelligent, bold advice. Enough of the spineless wonders. Out with 'em. After all, you've been losing the battle of wits and guts anyway, You've got nothing to lose.
-
Anonymous Sources
As Salon's new Washington bureau chief and the author of this story, I want to say a few words about the use of anonymous sources in political stories. In an ideal world, I wish everyone would speak on the record and I repeatedly encourage the people I interview to do so. But often, as in this story, the only way to convey what is actually being said in political circles is to mask the identity of the speaker. I find this approach to be far more honest and helpful to readers than merely repeating the kind of on-the-record partisan soundbites that you hear constantly on cable TV. Some may disagree with my journalistic philosophy in this area, which is why I probably will say more on this topic in the months ahead.