Letters to the Editor
-
David Broder - too old?
Someone claimed David Broder was not too old to do his job, that Broder was as energetic as ever and was still able to put in the needed number of hours of effort each day.
Problem is, that evaluation completely misses the point that Greenwald brings up here, that commentators can get stuck in a time warp and can obsessively come back time and again to nonexistent problems.
A perfect example is Broder's conviction that there is a "controlling group" of moderate, centrist people who occupy the mid-section of American politics. One wins this group and one wins elections. Broder then went on to describe this moderate, sensible group in great detail.
Problem: There is no such group. There has not been any such group for at least a decade. Broder is stuck in a time warp.
We need "term limits" or "recertifications" for commentators.
-
Letter to Time
I sent this letter to Time, with the subject: "Tone-Deaf Joe Klein"
Editor,
When is Time going to fire columnist Joe Klein? In his Nov. 21 article, "The Tone-Deaf Democrats," he makes the false statement that a Democratic FISA bill "would require the surveillance of every foreign-terrorist target's calls to be approved by the FISA court". Is he lying, or just incompetent?
Klein also implies that human rights are incompatible with national security and he equates defending the Constitutional rights of Americans with protecting terrorists. So he should also be fired for dishonesty and political stupidity. What could be a more baseless, servile, and traitorous argument than to suggest that we must yield every American and human right, as if that will somehow help in defeating terrorists?
And hey, Joe, how many times has Bush caught Osama since he began his illegal spying and torture in 2001?
-
The Joe Klein-est thing that Joe Klein ever said
http://alternet.org/columnists/story/31330
"People like me who favor this program [warrantless surveillance by the NSA] don't yet know enough about it yet," he [Joe Klein] says, "Those opposed to it know even less -- and certainly less than I do."
If you disagree with Joe Klein, you're ignorant, lazy, and treasonous. So there.
-
Paul Daniel Ash
I think Mr. Klein either completely misunderstands the situation or is intentionally misrepresenting it. It appears that the NSA has access to foreign-to-foreign communication that passes through the US, and subjects it to what is sometimes referred to as "data-mining". It is hard to interpret the results of the contracts from NSA to the telecoms that have been discussed here in the past in any other way. Many of us feel that it is important to protect communication with US participants from this. It appears legally possible, but challenging, to do so, while the f-to-f has no protection at all.
-
Uhm, that talking point about "terrorists' rights"?
It doesn't originate with Rush, although he undoubtedly will run with it.
Joke Line:
Unfortunately, Speaker Nancy Pelosi quashed the House Intelligence Committee's bipartisan effort and supported a Democratic bill that — Limbaugh is salivating — would require the surveillance of every foreign-terrorist target's calls to be approved by the FISA court, an institution founded to protect the rights of U.S. citizens only. In the lethal shorthand of political advertising, it would give terrorists the same legal protections as Americans. That is well beyond stupid.
That talking point actually comes straight from the Republicans. Mitch McConnell, speaking on the Senate floor in October:
The bill that’s being taken up in the House has two major weaknesses. First, it requires intelligence officials to obtain a warrant before listening in on foreign terror suspects abroad. In other words, if we want to listen in on a terrorist in Tehran who may be talking about blowing up Los Angeles, we’d have to stop and get a court approval first. I guarantee you there isn’t a single person in this country outside this building who thinks that makes any sense.
/snip/
The Bill of Rights doesn’t extend to terrorists overseas who want to hurt us here at home. Our laws have always reflected that. In a post 9/11 world we are being asked to affirm it. We didn’t hesitate in August. We shouldn’t hesitate now.
Link:http://tinyurl.com/2cnvan
"Liberal" "democrat" Joe Klein is simply repeating the lies originating from Cheney and Addington and presenting them, just as McConnell does, as the sane musings of each "person in this country outside this building". Although Klein is clearly lying here, the lie is not his. Since it belongs to those powerful, admirable Republicans, it's okay to repeat such "political shorthand".
I couldn't find links to them now, but I also remember Kyl making many comments along the same lines during a FISA hearing.
-
Joe "Wormtongue" Klein
Klein reminds me of the J. R. R. Tolkien character Grima "Wormtongue" who whispered poison in King Theoden's ear, thus rendering him impotent and weak.
Democrats need to reject such perfidy if We The People are to retain a voice in our government. If we wish for Republican foreign policy we can elect Republicans. But if Democrats act like Republicans the people will be robbed of a choice, which is of course the goal of Klein and his class. This sad state has already come to pass in England and is occurring now in France as the powerful elites are subverting the French Socialist party for their own ends.
-
"Wormtongue"-- I Like It!
Great idea, ramoncreager!
Why limit it to Klein, though? It's a great appelation for his whole class. Once we get everyone referring to the Faux-Democrat Versailles crowd as "wormtounges," their power will be virtually gone.
We need one more good term to fill out the new Oz chant:
"Chickenhawks, and wormtounges and _________, oh my!"
-
@Ondelette
“You must be asking rhetorically, Glenn, because this is not a true assessment of the situation, it is a hypothetical.”
I agree with Ondelette. Given our intelligence failures in the region, it’s hard to see how we could say with any assurance that we would “know” the outcome of any proposed scenario in this region. Iraq, anyone? Afghanistan anyone?
Further, no consideration of that question (even as a hypothetical) can be seriously entertained without reference to the history of the region. The thing American leadership consistently ignores, in pursuit of contemporaneous and ad-hoc national security issues, is the impact of imposed U.S. interventionism in the domestic affairs of middle-east nations. Also ignored is the fact that their human rights are interpreted differently through the prism of their own traditions and cultural norms developed over thousands of years.
Another recent example of this shortsightedness as policy is the outcome of U.S/British influenced intervention in the overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh who had been democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran in the 1950’s. Iranian oil had been under British control until Mr. Mossadegh began pursuing the nationalization of that natural resource. It was his view, and that of the Iranian people, that Iranian oil belonged to Iran and should be controlled by Iran. That novel idea was unacceptable to U.S. and British interests and resulted in the coup that saw him overthrown.
The stated rationale by U.S. policy spokespersons was that Mossadegh was a “communist sympathizer” who would drive Iran into the sphere of the Soviet Union. Concurrently, U.S & British operatives in Iran spread rumors that Mossadegh was about to impose a dictatorship that would curtail human rights. He was eventually replaced by “our son of a bitch”, the Shah, as an absolute dictator in Iran. How’d that work out for us?
That period of Iranian history eventually resulted in the “hostage crisis” that plagued the Carter administration and is clearly a part of the animosity and distrust of the U.S. lingering and operating in Iran today. Combining this type of policy amnesia with the lack of balance in the approach towards Israel is a recipe that has proven to be disastrous time and time again in the region.
Few Americans remember, or are aware of, this history; but virtually all Iranians and others in the region understand this. The people of these nations do not examine what is in their interest with a view of what is of momentary concern to U.S. “national security”. That would be true even if some of these “national security concerns” had not been ultimately proven to be fallacious and cupidity-driven. Rather, it is their recollection of the impact of those concerns and actions previously undertaken by the U.S. to address them that naturally causes concern and mistrust. No one can logically ignore the potential for islamo-fascist recruitment as a possible consequence.
It saddens me that our national leaders continue to fail at comprehending this.
Oh, and Joe Klein is just stupid and ultimately, irrelevant. “Limbaugh is salivating”
Really? It’s time to reassess priorities no doubt. Glenn’s article and the subsequent discussion here is much more relevant and worthwhile than any discussion of Klein and his motives. Who cares?