Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
The same newspaper that speculated on Vince Foster's murder and Bill Clinton's drug running and homicides today protests "Bush hatred."
The letters thread is now closed.
  • Bush Derangement Syndrome

    Criticized for defending the indefensible? The poor dear.

    There does appear to be a psychiatric condition commonly known as Bush Derangement Syndrome, but it seems to afflict only Bush's dwindling supporters.

  • Snakes on an Editorial Page

    Some people hate snakes. Some people kill snakes. They aren't necessarily the same people.

  • Oh My

    There's anonymous with his own personal story to contradict the one he just heard. His about all the left wingers in the south in 1963.

  • Note to Peter Berkowitz

    "When you lay down with dogs, you wake up with fleas."

  • I Remember it, Too

    The Notorious W.E.S. observes that "There Was A Sizable Chunk Of The Right Wing that was joyous when JFK was shot. I was a child in Alabama but I remember it."

    I was in 5th grade in Wisconsin, and I remember it, too. I returned to school after lunch and a group of mostly boys was laughing and singing about how "he got shot in the head and now he's dead."

    Back in the classroom, a black & white television was brought in and tuned to the news coverage. Everyone just sat there, and the teachers were mostly crying. That shut up the young Republicans.

    Dallas was plastered with "Wanted: Dead or Alive" posters in the days before Kennedy's visit. Apparently, everyone politically in the know realized the level of hatred for him, particularly in the South, for his defense of Negro rights.

    That, to me, makes it even more impressive that Texan Lyndon Johnson went ahead with Kennedy's civil rights agenda, after Johnson became President. The extreme right wing (aka the Republican Party) was just coming out of the McCarthy years, when they ruled the nation by fear and intimidation, destroying people's careers and lives with impunity. Now, they approved of (might they have been involved in?) an assassination of a democratically-elected President.

    Johnson would have to see himself as literally in the cross-hairs.

  • Berkowitz is a Guiliani Campaign Advisor

    That's right. In fact, he's a member of the infamous team of foreign policy advisors to Guiliani:

    http://www.law.gmu.edu/currnews/story.php?ID=781

    Did the WSJ mention this? Just curious. Regardless, this fellow Berkowitz is obviously a neocon of the first order, and of a mind with Podhoretz and the rest of the neocon infested Guiliani campaign.

  • Oh, no they di'n't!

    Faux News just ran a story about the US women's bridge team that won a tournament in Shanghai. One of the smiling five is holding up a large trophy, and another a cardboard sign that reads:

    We did not vote for Bush.

    Shades of the Dixie Chicks.

    -- Propagandee

    Can't wait to see the foamers turning themselves inside-out trying to figure out a way to boycott bridge players.

  • Who doesn't take the WSJ seriously?

    Everyone I know who reads it does. And most of them are wealthy, upper-class businessmen - that is, the people who run this country.

    That the WSJ Op-Ed prints ridiculous drivel on a regular basis really isn't the story here. The story is that this ridiculous drivel is what these people want to read, what they want to believe.

    And they do.

  • WSJ can't even find space for Kerik story & Giuliani link.

    Other papers are carrying it today. It's big news.

    Murdock is really bringing the paper downhill.

  • A Rose By Any Other Name

    If Mr. Berkowitz deplores this "hatred" of Geo. Bush, he might consider substituting the biblically flavored "righteous indignation." This is a better descriptor of public response regarding this seven year plague poured out upon us. And if that somehow offends or hurts him (and the Journal), how about "contempt." This is certainly the most accurate as a response to the policies, tactics and behaviors of the Republicans and their minions such as the WSJ.

  • You can't hit what you can't see

    Brilliant Glenn. And the Ron Paul post was also an exhibition in virtuosity. Were only political discourse as decisive as boxing...

  • This is a new wingnut talking point...

    ...I've read this recently on boards not even related to politics...to the effect, describing vehement, intense hatred as "the type blinding hatred liberals feel for Bush."

    Of course, that type blinding hatred conservatives feel for Hillary Clinton is a whole other thing. HillaryHate is patriotic hatred I assume. The type hatred embraced by straight-and-narrow church-going folk.

  • To engage the intellectually dishonest...

    ...is a fool's errand. The WSJ editorials may rankle, but they are unworthy of engagement on any level by a serious citizen.

  • Lordy...

    This from Berkowitz is astonishing:

    "But from the common progressive denunciations you would never know that the Bush administration has rejected torture as illegal."

    Indeed, after they had found successive lawyers to redefine torture to fit the administrations' predelictions.

    Three Gonzo memos and counting, and evidently Berkowitz is not aware of any of them.

  • Hunting of the President

    Joe Conason and Gene Lyon's book was a major turning point in my life as far as political outlook goes. Prior to reading it I had voted for Perot twice on the general premise that Clinton was "slimy." Thanks to Conason/Lyons I quickly came to realize just how manipulated I had been -- too busy with work for any deep political reading I was susceptible to the background noise being crafted by Limbaugh and Fox News and the army of clones. However, it took much less time than I had thought to find out who the real slimy ones were.

    I can give myself credit for not falling outright into Limbaugh's loamy arms but it him, Hannity, Gigot, Bartley and the rest of the reeking zombie masters that filled the swamp with muck that it is nearly impossible to walk out of.

    Just one small example of how well it works: try to find someone liberal or conservative or particularly someone apolitical and ask them if Clinton was guilty of perjury. Two to one you will find someone who thinks he did. The trope has been repeated and amplified so often that even Clinton himself doesn't bother to try and defend against it even to the point of unjustly surrendering his law license.

    Well thanks, Mr. Greenwald, for putting on record what I would if only I could.

  • for lack of a better phrase, "ditto" W.E.S.

    My father has recounted to me more than once the reaction of his "staunch republican" stepmother to JFK's assasination......"the SOB had it coming". I still can't believe it.

  • Sigh.

    The WSJ merges with Murdoch. "True love wills out." "A marriage made in heaven." Makes your heart just go pitty-pay, pitty-pat.