Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
The letters thread is now closed.
"There certainly was plenty of evidence around the FBI files and absolutely no repercussions for the Clintons."
Perhaps you missed the fact that the Special Prosecutor assigned to investigate your FBI files allegation, Robert W. Ray, reported that there was no evidence whatsoever of involvement in, or knowledge of any illegalities, by anyone in authority in the Clinton Administration, including but not limited to both Bill and Hillary Clinton.
"In the F.B.I. files matter, the independent counsel determined there was no substantial and credible evidence that any senior White House official, or First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, was involved in seeking confidential Federal Bureau of Investigation background reports of former White House staff from the administrations of President Bush and President Reagan."
Source: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9806EED8173AF934A25750C0A9669C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print
Nice try.
No Cigar.
Thank you, Thank you, Thank you.
Shooter has long reminded me of a character I read of many years ago and your latest post finally lifted the veil and allowed me to pinpoint who that character is..... Shooter reminds me of none other than.....
Ignatius J Reilly.
The coup de gras if you will. Klein's incompetence will suffice as the final reason to demand my money back and to cancel my subscription to Time.
... and in the large can end in only one of two ways: with a gradual increase in the intellectual quality of the media, or with the media actively working to squash the more informed voice of "Everybody Else". Presumably, the media will work for the latter end, and presumably it'll start with the removal of comments from Time's site.
Sign up on their blog column and post a new entry like:
Joe Klein, resign.
FIRE JOE KLEIN.
etc. etc.
Take three minutes. I'm going to do this each day that Mr. Greenwald writes about it...
Clueless Joe Klein... I have neither the time nor legal background to figure out who's right.
Joe Klein's Col. Nathan Jessup to Glenn Greenwald's LTJG Daniel Kaffee...
Col. Jessup: Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whose gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.
We know how that turned out. If someone has the time and the inclination (and talent) to do a parody rewrite:
"I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a laptop, and get a cushy job in the big time MSMmedia..."
4) the margianlized leftist ACLU pointy head civil libertarian.
I love this trope. I suppose it comes from the equally dishonest right wing propaganda surrounding the NAMBLA case. As a civil libertarian and first amendment specialist, Glenn, I would have hoped you might smack it down as a matter of principle. I fail to see what is "leftist" or "pointy headed" about the ACLU. Dedication to free speech and the separation of Church and State?
In the United States Supreme Court over the past few years, the American Civil Liberties Union has taken the side of a fundamentalist Christian church, a Santerian church, and the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. In celebrated cases, the ACLU has stood up for everyone from Oliver North to the National Socialist Party. In spite of all that, the ACLU has never advocated Christianity, ritual animal sacrifice, trading arms for hostages or genocide. In representing NAMBLA today, our Massachusetts affiliate does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children.
What the ACLU does advocate is robust freedom of speech for everyone. The lawsuit involved here, were it to succeed, would strike at the heart of freedom of speech. The case is based on a shocking murder. But the lawsuit says the crime is the responsibility not of those who committed the murder, but of someone who posted vile material on the Internet. The principle is as simple as it is central to true freedom of speech: those who do wrong are responsible for what they do; those who speak about it are not.
It is easy to defend freedom of speech when the message is something many people find at least reasonable. But the defense of freedom of speech is most critical when the message is one most people find repulsive. That was true when the Nazis marched in Skokie. It remains true today.
http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/protest/11289prs20000831.html
Ktwdawg,
I hope you have excess cooling in your rig, if not you had better be keeping an eye on your the core temp of the vid card(s).
I wonder how long Glenn "The War is Irretrievably Lost" Greenwald can maintain his curious silence on the raft of good developments coming out of Iraq over the past few weeks.
His silence on the topic is thunderous.
-- Publius Maximus
Sure, things are improving in Iraq -- they're improving so much that the U.S. Army is all but officially broken. As soon as the exhausted and demoralized troops return home*, then the attacks will pick right up to where they were prior to the escalation.
*If they ever return home -- to keep things from spiraling out of control, Shrub (Bush II) may orders tours extended through January '09 and then leave this mess in the lap of his successor.