Letters to the Editor
-
The "Defining Beliefs" of the "Conservative" "Movement" --
have always been fringe. And traditionally called "lunatic fringe".
How did they manage to get out of the sewer under the rock where they are traditionally kept by knowledge of what they are, and into the mainstream media, in order to claim to be mainstream? Ignornace of history by those who sucked down their poison -- which includes many of those who today repudiate them, and claim to have repudiated them all along.
How many of the current crop of "I've been against Buhsit all along" "Liberals" in fact -- to the contrary -- actually engaged in debate of the fake "conservative" views as if they had merit. The majority. Why? Because they want to hear what they want to hear, exactly like the tiny percentage who actually believe those views.
FOX is a "success" because most of its viewers where "Liberals" who, presuming themselves to be broadminded and intellectual, watched that trash circus seriously. At worst, they viewed that which is actually poison as "entertainment". Today they pretend they'd never watch such trash, and pretend they never believed any of it.
Had they actuually done they now claim, there is no way the tiny percentage that is the lunatic fringe -- as traditionallly called -- could never have got into the positions it holds in the mainstream.
That poisonous anti-Americanism needs to be driven -- by the constant practice of reason and intellectual honesty -- back to the lunatic fringe where it belongs. That means one takes the "trolls" on, as well, and routinely and consistently expose their lies and sheer poppycock for what it is: false propaganda. Lies. (The alternative, with "trolls," is to ignore them, which is ineffective because "Silence is assent." They must be directly confronted and continuously refuted until they finally turn and run back into the several cesspools from which they crawled.)
Finally, as the polls reflect, most of the citizenry seems to have woken up against the lies. They are not yet at the next step: ostracism of the luntic fringe from among them by learning and exercising reason and intellectual honesty, those being garlic to the lunatic fringe. The majority must, that is, exercise the essence of democracy in their behaviors, without making excuses for the enemies of it.
-
Political Illiterate --
"Arrest and Detain Harriet Miers
"Until the Majority Party in Congress starts getting serious with witnesses at its "hearings" there's no reason to believe they (hearings) are anything but swill for the voters."
Because you are ignorant of the processes of democratic due process of law, it's Congress fault, because they don't act like asses?
"Congress should issue a contempt citation and request that the Justice Department arrest and detain Miers until such time as she either decides to obey the law or that the Supreme Court rules that our Constitution is bunk."
Yeah, that should do it: Have Congress vote Miers in contempt, then order the DOJ -- which backs Miers -- to detain Miers.
When you fail to get the facts before popping off, you legitimize that stupidity, which is exactly the same stupidity as that acted on by lunatic fringe and trolls.
"Grow some balls, Nancy."
Get some brains, political illiterate. Third in line for the presidency is the Speaker of the House. Pelosi is the Speaker of the House -- and the _LAST_ person to be initiating impeachment or like actions. Why? It is spelled E-T-H-I-C-S, and the applicable term is spelled C-O-N-F-L-I-C-T O-F I-N-T-E-R-E-S-T.
This is not a football game, or "American Idle" or a jocks-only keg party.
-- Jebbie Thursday, July 12, 2007 08:06 AM
We the people are the ultimate check on gov't. Legitimate impeachment originates with We the people, not with Congress. Get off your ass and communicate your demands to your Senator/s and Representative, instead of sitting their whining, "Entertain me so I don't have to do anything!"
-
When the rhetoric and definitions are idiosyncratic, beware --
"The political fringe you mention has been split over the war in Iraq, which is symbolic of the new Progressive Activism of George Bush. Congressional Democrats haven't reined in Bush. They would rather influence his decisions, and work with the President, because there is no fundamental political difference between the world view of the Congress, and the President."
Bullshit.
In addition to which, Bushit isn't president.
If you knew anything about politics not got off the back of ceral boxes, you'd know the political view your assert is twisted nonsense. And would know the Constitutional requirements as to resolving election disputes such as that in 2000. Clue: the Constitution stipulates which branch of gov't is to resolve such disputes -- and it isn't the Supreme Court. Unconstitutional oppointment to the presidency does not a president make.
"Defending core Conservatism is a viable strategy."
Except for the fact -- learn the history -- that your "core Conservatism" is not "Conservatism"; it is traditional lunatic fringe, which is way to the right of "Conservative". Even Goldwater made that point.
--Anonymous Thursday, July 12, 2007 08:22 AM
-
And if you think
I just want the killing to stop.
-- willbhuman
Electing Ron Paul or Jesus Christ himself will stop "the killing" you are a more of a naive fool than I gave you credit for.
-
Waste of Time
This writer spends an inordinate amount of time (and print) obsessing about the Bush administration. Blaming the gutless media offers no solution. Most Americans are fully aware of what is going on in Iraq, with Bush & Cheney, and in Congress.
If a garden is full of weeds, writing articles and making speeches, will not eradicate weeds. You need weed killer, or pull them out physically. I am sick of reading about these issues. Salon.com needs George Carlin.
-
Never ceases to amaze
Once again I get amazed (but not amused) by how easily and thoroughly "pundits" (I guess Greenswald's class makes pronouncements in an authoritative fashion (per the dictionary definition), notwithstanding their lack of accuracy, cogency or applicability so I happily withdraw my quotation marks) get "IT" (there, they're back) wrong.
McCain's was, and always has been, an insurgency campaign. As such it has relied on cross over support and contributions. For these reasons, Huffington (anomalously, for her class)got it right.
McCain could not have acted more irrationally and unintelligently. The Iraq fiasco was the perfect cover for him to run against the party line and stay within the Party. He would have rekindled the support of independents (like me) and waivering Dems (and Republicans), but for some unaccountable reason he decided to turn into the wind instead of soaring on its back.
No wonder everything is so F'd up in this country, with our deeply flawed leaders and their tortorously miscalibrated echo chamber.