Letters to the Editor
-
bush administration practices
about a year ago, I thought we needed a movement to challenge the primary contenders to explicitly state that they would dismantle bush's torture apparatus and repudiate all his secret spy programs, publicly. If they would not so affirm, they ought not to be considered as presidential candidtates. I guess it is too late for that now. They all want that power, and I think they secretly thank God for giving us eight years of Bush.
-
Young Ezra ....
sure got Glenn going today .. and it is part of what I think liberals are missing about the whole Ron Paul thing ... no liberal I know would consider voting for Paul in the general election .. to me .. the only point of giving any support to Paul now .. would be to throw a monkey wrench into the Republican nomination .. that's it
-
Clear Position
Though this time you mention the actual position on abortion legislation Ron Paul holds - which is quite different from his personal position, I guess - you do not make it clear enough:
Ron Paul is against federal legislation on abortion.
This is totally in sync with his other positions, obviously based upon the unifying theme of less federal more state. His position here goes quite counter to pro-lifers, who want to ban abortion altogether. He might personally believe it wrong to abort but he will not make this a law.
Granted, for pro-choicers a federal law allowing abortion may sound better but would possibly be wrong - unless more power to the central government in Washington, DC is wanted.
PS: Before anyone tries, I am pro-choice, find Ron Paul tempting on exactly the same counts Glenn regularly mentions but am not associated with him [actually I couldn't vote for him even if I wnated to].
PPS: Unfortunately none of the Democratic candidates-to-be leave much positive impression [Dodd and Kucinich are exceptions on a small scale].
-
+100 on the content
However, I'm also reminded of the "they're all the same" permathread.
You know, the argument that because Democrats are weak and corrupt they're "the same as" the pastor-loving billionaire-teabagging animal-abusing torture enthusiasts and blood- and pus-encrusted spawn of Chthulhu on the Republican side. It's just not so.
Similarly, Ezra Klein is not "the same as" Jonah Goldberg, much as one might disagree with Klein in this particular case. Stupidity and even cupidity among those who are not actually funded by the VRWC should be reacted to with sadness and regret , however ironic, rather than with full throated fury.
Therefore, I would prefer NOT to see the carefully honed edged weapons of rhetoric developed to eviscerate the Conservative movement deployed against Klein; it confuses the brand in the public mind.
Which is a roundabout way of saying that I found "prancing" and the "Chris Matthews" gag detracted from the point you were making.
As we say in LA, though: "Love your work!"
-
Why does Greenwald even have to be writing columns like this?
I suppose this environment comes more naturally to someone trained to work in a court of law, but I find it endlessly frustrating. Engineers don't have to deal with this endless peeling away of irrelevant garbage. Is it too much to ask that supposedly intelligent writers and editors be able to separate issues like adults rather than acting like pre-teens shouting "so there"?
Oh, well. After one latte this morning I feel philosophical enough to realize this is the price we pay for a free press.
-
Thanks Glenn
The political process obviously (to me, anyway)entails satisficing as opposed to optimization behavior. This post lays that out beautifully.
I'll have to head over to Ezra's to see what got you so steamed. Did you adress him provately, only to have him ignoy/rebuff?
What's that Jon Stewart says? Oh, SNAP!
Helluva takedown.
-
H/T Glenn
This post is the most succinct and uncompromising statement of how a patriot should act as I've read in ages. The world is real, and we have to act in it as best we can, consistent with our consciences, yet in full knowledge that we may be making a mistake that we'll have to pay for later. Ezra Klein is making the noises they pay him to make. You, on the other hand, are feeling your way through the swamp -- as we all must -- and allowing us to watch you do it.
Thank you.
-
Damn Glenn,
How do you keep topping yourself? If just ten percent of the M$M would put in the hard work and logical and detailed examination of the real issues and importance of this election, you could rest a little.
Politicians who are zeroed in on winning and they have to be, have to look left, right, backwards and forwards as they wend their way through an exhausting campaign process that now is under a “looking glass” of explosive proportions as these candidates parse their words, issues and actions. And we have to examine whether a candidate is speaking to the primary or general election audience.
If the candidate like Dodd or Biden, chooses to remain firm and fixed, they become fringe candidates thanks to the M$M that only wants a horse race spectacle.
The whole process doesn’t lend itself to allowing us to really know who best supports our positions and will carry out our wishes. That is probably why many voters, including to a degree myself, seem to swing and sway from one to another.
If I weren’t reading and listening to you Glenn, I would not currently be supporting Dodd and making sure that I watch Paul on Meet The Press this Sunday. My mind is both more confused and more open. I think that is a good thing.
-
Lambert
Therefore, I would prefer NOT to see the carefully honed edged weapons of rhetoric developed to eviscerate the Conservative movement deployed against Klein; it confuses the brand in the public mind.
I generally agree and make an effort to make the distinctions you're suggesting. But go read the post he wrote -- it just completely distorts what I said, attributes to me views I plainly do not hold, and used a series of highly derogatory adjectives to describe what I said with no purpose other than to cloud the issues -- I think with some malice -- rather than engage in a discussion of them.
Put another way, what he wrote wasn't a good faith effort to engage in a discussion over issues about which we disagree, and thus -- while I really felt the need to correct his misstatements about my views -- I wasn't going to treat it with more respect than it deserved. Despite all of that, I tried to keep the focus on the broader points that I think merit real discussion.