Letters to the Editor
-
Why did Salon publish this cheap smear?
I've subscribed to premium since it was first offered, and while I'm not going to threaten to cancel my subscription, I honestly thought about whether this is what I'm paying for - as have others, apparently.
Others have pointed out that this article consists of baseless accusations and myopic opinions, and there's no need for me to repeat same here. I'm trying to find a justification for this being published here, and so far I'm coming up with none.
This, as with all of her pieces to date, verges on word salad. This piece is based on a very weird, paranoid assumption that Obama is behind an article in the NYP that says Sharpton doesn't like Obama.
Any evidence from Debra Dickerson? No? So how is this anything other than a smear piece? Anyone? I'm all ears - show me any merit in this.
I like reading pieces from a perspective that's not my own, but it has to be cogent to be worth the effort. It's why I don't follow the myriad of 9/11 conspiracy theories. I see a similar lack of merit in her "blackness vs the world" viewpoint.
Perhaps she expresses the view of an important group, of which I am unaware. Perhaps. She writes about a sort of inherited, historical "blackness" which I don't know anything about, and there's likely some insight in that. But I'm quite sure there are people who can write about this from this perspective better than she can. Hell, I'd rather you give Sharpton a column - I disagree with him about a lot of things, but he has indeed matured as a thinker.
If any one of the editors can explain to me how this isn't a cheap, baseless smear, I'm all ears. Otherwise, please stop wasting valuable electrons on this tripe.