Letters to the Editor
-
Perception
This is one of the fundamental problems with "letters" sections in general, whether herein Salon, or any other forum where political issues are discussed.
There are many people who are passionate about their causes and candidates, and that's a good thing. But often that passion is blinding. Too many times, readers see something positive written about another candidate, and perceive it as an attack on "their" candidate. They're then forced to assign all sorts of nefarious motives to the writer.
It's particularly ironic for the progressive crowd that makes up a large chunk of Salon readers, as it smacks so much of the bunker mentality encouraged by the Right. It has way too much of a "you're either with us or against us" vibe for my taste. It shouldn't be necessary to point out that you can be less than enthusiastic about a particular person or cause without being diametrically opposed to that person/cause. Likewise, noting positive aspects of a particular person/position does not certify you as a zealot for that person/position.
I've always thought that one of the hallmarks of liberal thought is a recognition that there is little that is black or white, that the world has an awful lot of grey. I know that's one of the things that infuriates the authoritarians who make up a large portion of today's GOP, who take great comfort in believing that there is ONE RIGHT WAY in the world (and that, of course, their leader is marching steadfastly towards that WAY).
I commend Mr. Conason for trying, but just the first few posts here in response suggest that he's pissing into the wind. Alas.