Letters to the Editor
-
@willbhuman
In spite of the mention earlier of having marched on Washington in '69 and was chilled to the bone seeing troops with M16's (or whatever they were) on all the rooftops watching over us, I'd guess by using the above description of yourself that you have some picture of me that isn't entirely accurate. Trust me, the same people who'd use those words to describe you in a derogatory way, would call me the same thing, possibly worse.
We don't have any real "picture" of you or your ideas. You have been rather vague about your politics.
-
Thanks, El Cid
Same page in a the same book, I think.
-
A Broken Record
That's what Gwool is.
And, unlike a broken clock, a broken record is not right twice a day.
Gwool:
Gee, data shows 37% of self identified democrats approve of a democratic congress, 27% of Republicans do, and only 19% of independents.
How in do you extrapolate these figures to conclude the problem is that the leadership is too conservative?
Look at that independent mix. There is your disaffected voter. It is not the angry activist clamoring for more in-your-face confrontational political grandstanding. It is the quasi engaged voter tired of being hit by a blast furnance whenever they engage politically.
That's your propaganda line which you've repeated over and over again, just like a Karl Rovebot. But endless assertion doesn't make it true. We've already seen that independents are hardly more supportive of Bush's Iraq policy than Dems are (17% v. 5%).
Unfortunately, I don't have time-series on independents' views at my fingertips. But the overall view of Congress (approval minus disapproval) clearly went up dramatically when the Democrats took over, and it has faded as they have failed to have any measurable effect on Bush Administration policy:
November . . -35.0
December . . -37.7
January . . . -16.9
February . . -19.1
March . . . . . -24.8
April . . . . . . -18.6
May . . . . . . -23.5
June . . . . . -38.0
Gwool can delude himself all he wants that this is due to Democrats being too strident. But, here in the reality-based community, we're quite aware that this hasn't been so.
All Gwool has going on is endless repetition of endless assetion.
Bored now.
-
The polls you cite- are they relevant
Glenn,
I don't disagree with the thrust of your column, but I think the numbers you site in your update aren't especially useful. It's no surprise that Repblicans still approve of Bush, and that rank and file Dems are pissed at Congress for not pulling out of Iraq faster. But party members on both sides combined make up less than 50% of the voting public at last count. It's the other 50% that are going to drive the debate coming into the election year, and the ones the Dems are paying more mind to. (perhaps at their peril)
-
You Callin' Me A Minority?
"For the first time in American history, men in authority are tallking about an 'emergency' without forseeable end. Such men as these are crackpot realists; in the name of realism they have created a paranoid reality all their own."
C. Wright Mills, a motorcycling sociologist from Texas, wrote that over fifty years ago in his book, 'The Power Elite'.
At the time, well before Vietnam, Mills himself was called a crackpot by the left and right for his work.
All he did though was wonder, with some trepidation, about the ties between big guys in the military, corporations, and government; about the revolving doors of influence between boardrooms and various branches of government, including the intelliegence services; and about the possible emergence of a permanent national security state.
Another crackpot, Dwight Eisenhower, warned about this as he was leaving the presidency. But y'know, by then Ike was ready for his slippers and a rocker by the fire.
Of course, Vietnam didn't go as well as planned.
The Sixties happened, with all its perversions of the right and true.
And grumps like John Mitchell, Nixon's attorney general, practically swallowed his pipe as he predicted the country would soon go so far right no one would recognize it.
Well ... ?
-
re: Can you please explain why you feel this way?
bucky1...Yes, I believe that you are correct 100% in that statement. I would only add that Clinton's actions in Yugoslavia were also a moral outrage.
Which part, the statement or the addition? Or both?
-
Your assumptions?
The polls you cite- are they relevant
Glenn,
I don't disagree with the thrust of your column, but I think the numbers you site in your update aren't especially useful. It's no surprise that Repblicans still approve of Bush, and that rank and file Dems are pissed at Congress for not pulling out of Iraq faster. But party members on both sides combined make up less than 50% of the voting public at last count. It's the other 50% that are going to drive the debate coming into the election year, and the ones the Dems are paying more mind to. (perhaps at their peril)
The number of registered voters by party affiliations R, D, I, are available on line. Have you checked?
-
Explain why "Clinton's actions in Yugoslavia" were a "moral outrage"
I would only add that Clinton's actions in Yugoslavia were also a moral outrage.
-
Democratic House just voted
to remove U.S. troops from Iraq by April 2008.
Better?
-
Gwool
In order for Gwool's interpretation of the numbers to be valid, there would actually to have to be very few liberals -- or even left-leaning centrists -- among Democrats and independents. We know this isn't the case, because on issue after issue the majority of the American public disagrees with the right wing position. The independents, in particular, spoke loudly in November that the nation is headed in the wrong direction and change was needed -- and had to vest their hopes in Congress to effect it, since the White House wasn't up for grabs. Since Congress failed to seize firm control of the situation, its luster faded -- although not as much as that of the Bush Administration.
What Glenn does correctly, and Gwool fails to do, is to consider one set of data in light of another. It's not simply enough to say voters disapprove of the job being done by Bush or Congress, and form interpretations for the reason(s), without knowing where the public stands on the issues which are in play. When we know what Americans want done, or want not to have done, then we can account for the reasons for the disaffection with one or more of the parties involved.