Letters to the Editor
-
W.T.
I dreamed I saw that dude. Just last night.
-
Substance vs. Soundbite: The Dilemna of Political Discourse
Excellent interview. Astute, commentary-framed questions from Glenn Greenwald & surprisingly thoughtful answers from Senator Dodd, within the cautious parameters of candidacy & the sometimes rambling nature of the dialogue. Some posters have criticized the length & complexity of GGs questions, while others have felt Senator Dodd didn't actually answer what he was asked. I disagree with both criticisms & think they reflect a central problem in the nature of American political discourse - the desire to have complex issues reduced to gotcha questions & bumper sticker replies. However, while the sound-biting of politics might produce quicker gratification infotainment, it impoverishes the critical thinking & policy formulation that are essential to rigorous debate, an informed electorate & good governance. Nonetheless, for the benefit of those who prefer their Q&A short & sweet, here's the highly condensed gist of what I took from the interview:
GG: You regret your Iraq vote. What did you do wrong?
CD: I wasn't sceptical enough. I believed the President. I shouldn't have.
GG: Do you know what the DoJ, Mueller & Ashcroft found so unconscionable about the earlier version of the TSP?
CD: No, & if I did I couldn't even talk about its' publicly acknowledged aspects. That's why I've stayed off the Intelligence Committee.
GG: Did you consider filibustering the habeas-eliminating MCA?
CD: Yes. We had 34 votes, I think we could've got 40.
GG: Afraid of being called obstructionist, Dems didn't filibuster, but the GOP used it against them anyway. Now with a Dem majority, the GOP filibuster everything & nobody calls them obstructionist. When are Dems gonna grow a pair?
CD: We should. I never understand why people make the same mistake again & again.
GG: What makes this Admin's Constitutional assault fundamentally different to earlier assaults like Reagan/Iran/Contra?
CD: Its' sheer pervasiveness: Domestic. Foreign. Prosecutorial. Judicial. This shouldn't be partisan & many conservatives agree.
Glenn's questions were obviously far more complex & the Senator's replies more considered but I think when reduced to Sunday-soundbite-lite, Chris Dodd essentially answered what he was asked.
-
Majority Whips
It sounds like the Majority Whips aren't doing their jobs. Maybe that would be a productive avenue to apply pressure along the lines of the DNC Chairmanship. Majority whip positions shouldn't be a piece of candy given out for tenure.
-
Animated and seemingly sincere
These are peculiar rules for making a value judgment on a persons intentions.
King George is most animated and very sincere in his desire to destroy the American form of a constitutional republic.
Would it not be more prudent on your part Glenn to judge by the fruit that he has been a part of producing, such as the current police state we now are living within?
And your previous commenter's were correct about Dodd not answering questions, I came away confused by the interview and also gained nothing new and or insightful about the current problems this country is in or any way in which to proceed to recover from the problems we face. The one thing I came away knowing is that politicians are liars and you cannot believe anything they say. I would have liked to have seen you force the issue about him not answering the questions you put to him. Be more aggressive by demanding answers. Why does it seem that so many people are so scared to confront these gangsters which is what Dood is by association and by the fruit he has produced.
-
The Fool is sad ...
Chris, you weren't skeptical enough? Good lord, man! You're old enough to have lived through the McCarthy Era, Kennedy's lies about a missile gap, Johnson's lies about the Tonkin Gulf and Vietnam in general, Nixon, Reagan and Iran-Contra, Bush I's pardoning of the Iran-Contra criminals, the Republicans' attempts at partisan impeachment, Bush II's theft of a presidential election and fully documented pre-war lies.
Great points. I know you would have expanded your list if time and space allowed.
The central problem is that federal politicians are continually being fed lies by the CIA, pentagon, and others with 'secret' knowledge that is too dangerous to tell the general public. Fed fear mongering on an enormous scale and charged with the safety of the country, these politicians come to believe the nonsense.
A new book called Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA details the fact that we live in a very dirty empire; I wonder if our leaders believe half of the propaganda we put out.
I wonder if everyone remembers that the old USSR was always seen by the CIA as much stronger in all aspects than they really were during the entire cold war. How could they be so wrong for so long? Perhaps they wanted to be wrong.
-
Margalis
critical thinking skills ...
Most people don't have them. It's that simple. Look at the number of people who can't follow simple A->B->C logical statements. (For example nearly every journalist who responds to Glenn's posts)
I hate to disagree, especially since I have said similar things for decades.
Most people do not realise how limited their access to the truth is. All news requires reading between the lines like the Russians had to do in the Pravda days in the USSR; and that is when the information even gets on the news. It is hard to look logical when your axioms are all wrong.
I also notice that men of the right, and men of the left, call those who disagree with them illogical or disingenuous simply for disagreeing. The first time I saw a 'new' (back then) program on cable TV called 'Cross Fire', I knew we were in deep trouble as a nation. That program began the tradition of yelling, interrupting, spinning the truth, and just plain arguing rather than debating. Many are worse now, a fellow name 'Tucker' is the biggest fool on TV and never lets anyone answer a question - it is all about him.
The central problem was mentioned here a few weeks ago. Everyone in America thinks they are fans of some 'team' like the NFL or other sport. We have reached the sorry state that many look to see what 'team' you belong to and decide to agree or disagree based on that. We see this behavior everywhere today.
The problem is American tribalism.