Letters to the Editor
-
standing
Glenn has standing, does he not?
-
Kovie -
There was much wisdom in your comment, particularly this -
But most of all, like a huge ship that has been steaming steadily in one direction, given the nature of our political process and reality, the problems that have beset our country, simply do not lend themselves to a quick turnaround, and to have expected serious improvements by now was, at best, a very long and unrealistic shot, and the fact that this hasn't happened should not cause people to lose hope and give up. I'm not guaranteeing that things WILL improve as much as we'd like them to, of course. What I'm saying is that if they can improve--and I personally believe that they can--it won't happen overnight, but rather take months, years and likely decades.
I wrote a post last year entitled "Long, Hard Slog" that tried to focus on that point -
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/02/long-hard-slog_17.html
-
Pure Puke
SNYG
If shooter ever thought about what he was saying then he wouldn't be shooter. He'd be a rational being then and would not be recognizable as the shooter that we know and love.
-- Frankly, my dear, ...
I know you're being sarcastic, Frankly my dear, but speak for yourself. Sh**ter is like dog shit tracked all over the carpet. Nothing to "love" about that stench and stain and mess. Pure puke.
-
Glenn
Off-topic, but I'm just wondering why we don't see more of you in the establishment media, as opposed to here, Air America, etc., and very rarely CSPAN (where they invariably put you against some professional dissembler and neofascist like David Rivkin)? I realize how much you despise this portion of the media, but it still happens to be where most Americans get their news and opinions, and your presence on it would only help elevate the dialogue, I would think, just as the appearance of VoteVets members like John Stoltz and Brandon Friedman has. People who are opposed to the right's policies--especially progressives--are still not adequately represented in the establishment media, and I think that every additional voice of reason, intelligence, honesty and sanity can only help.
I'm not talking about going on Fox News, which I think would be a waste of time, but, say, op-eds in the NY Times or WaPo, appearances on Countdown (or even Hardball), or, at the very least, the Daily Show and the Colbert Report (where I imagine that the interplay between you and the O'Reillyesque character that he plays could get rather interesting). But the point is to have more exposure for the points of view and analyses that you regularly express here and in other progressive venues, in outlets that a wider segment of the populace--and ruling elite--is likely to be exposed to, and hopefully influenced by, in a more positive way than it currently is by the various voices of inanity, distortion, delusion and deception that currently make up most of today's punditocracy. I.e. more Greenwald, less Brooks, Carlson and Limbaugh.
-
Poll: Majority of Public Believe Torture Sometimes Justified (as long as it's not too often)
http://harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/?PID=621
The Harris Poll®, December 21, 2005
Majorities of Public Believe that Torture, "Rendition" and the Use of Secret Prison Camps Outside U.S. are Sometimes Justified
Large majorities believe that the U.S. sometimes uses all three when interrogating suspected terroristsMajorities of all adults believe that the use of torture, secret prison camps outside the U.S., and "rendition" (defined in the survey as "sending prisoners to be interrogated in countries where torture is common") are all justified "sometimes" or "often", according to a new Harris Poll. Specifically:
- 55 percent of all adults believe that rendition (as explained above) is justified either often (14%) or sometimes (41%), when interrogating suspected terrorists.
- 60 percent of adults believe that the use of "secret prison camps in Europe or elsewhere" is justified either often (14%) or sometimes (46%).
- 52 percent of all adults believe that the use of torture is justified either often (12%) or sometimes (40%).
Much larger majorities – more than 80 percent of all adults – believe that the U.S. uses these methods when interrogating suspected terrorists sometimes or often. Specifically:- 82 percent of all adults believe that the U.S. uses rendition, as defined above, often (25%) or sometimes (58%).
- 81 percent believes that the U.S. uses secret prison camps outside the country often (23 %) or sometimes (58%).
- 83 percent believe that the U.S. uses torture often (17%) or sometimes (66%).
-- The Harris Poll®, December 21, 2005
http://harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/?PID=621There are other ways to interpret the poll. I suspect that a different poll, asking the American public whether it's sometimes okay for the CIA to break laws, would find that many people think, yes, it's sometimes okay. For instance, they may think that it's sometimes okay for the CIA to commit burglaries. That wouldn't logically imply that the American public wants the USDOJ issuing a legal memo to the CIA that amounts to a blank check to commit unlimited burglaries.
In general, it's quite possible for people to support keeping burglary illegal, and to allow that sometimes there might be extenuating circumstances for breaking the law and doing a bag job.
Similarly, the fact that the American public thinks that torture may sometimes be justifiable doesn't necessarily imply that they want unlimited torturing made legal, nor that they want the Bush-Cheney Administration to have carte blanche to ignore anti-torture laws.
. . . Or am I just in denial about these poll results? . . .
Public opinion is mixed, muddled, and self-contradictory on these questions. Some different political leaders and some different national media could sway a lot of weakly pro-torture people into the weakly anti-torture category. But the White House and their allies in the press corps and among a large portion of the elected Democrats on Capitol Hill may be correct in betting that the American public, for now, doesn't mind a "moderate" amount of torture -- provided, of course, that the icky details are kept off TV and out of mind.
Scott Horton has written about the slow and gradual movement against torture in Britain in the 1500s and 1600s. Then as now, the anti-torture movement should be thinking in terms of decades of struggle (or centuries, or, realistically, never-ending struggle), not in terms of giving up the struggle because last year's elections didn't fix everything.
"Right Action, alone, is yours.
Leave results severely alone.
- - Daniel Berrigan