Letters to the Editor
-
Kitt
That's because I never lied.
You said I was wrong about other things and never detailed what those things might be, even after all this time.
A lie.
-
Hillary's tatics..
Hillary's attack on MLK: It took a white man(LBJ) to finish the job soundbite worked..
Hillary like most white females they parrot the arrogance and selfishness of thier counterparts. Hillary had no problem walking over MLK and kicking him to the curve...
Imagine in her mind LBJ while living in the white house and not subject to the babaric actions and emotions of race filled white folks.. LBJ according to Hillary's revisionist math did all the heavy work!!
I thought adccording to the GOP historians they did all the 1964 civil right work...
Hillary's attack on MLK will cost her big time in the south . I have a very large following down there...
-
Chris Matthews and the OBamarama Spin Machine Gone Wild
Just keep wondering when Chris Matthews will ask Obama just where is some evidence that he is an "agent of change, bold, the antiwar candidate". Just when will Matthews ask Obama about his out of town reasons when the most critical amendment on Iran came up. The Kyl Lieberman amendment. If Obama was really the anti-war candidate he would have voted NO NO NO on that amendment instead he sat on the fence with his finger in the air.
At least we know where Hillary stands....she is a warmonger voting for the 2002 war resolution never apologized and then voted for the Kyl "warmongering" Lieberman amendment. No questions there...the evidence is clear.
But with Obama there is no evidence. Just fence sitting which is evidence enough.
Edwards not taking pac money, apologized for his stupid and bloody vote, solid support for diplomacy with Iran, and will not allow any lobbyist in his administration. Edwards is the change!
-
New Hampshire
Mr. Greenwald:
I'm not sure if you've already seen this, but it is interesting:
http://politics.slashdot.org/politics/08/01/10/1635225.shtml
Could Diebold be at it again?
This is probably worth following up.
Richard York
rfyork@comcast.net
-
re: FBI phone bill
Maybe this is the first stage of the corporates declaring all-out war on requests from the gummit.
The conspiro-paranoiac threat underlying is: if you don't give us amnesty for warrantless wiretapping, we'll mess up your phones. And there are lots of other companies that the government does business with that can also mess with you.
-
@ondelette @ 7:30AM
I may be misinterpreting your response, but I was not trying to and did not make any final judgement on the New Hampshire polling in my comment, except to admit I misjudged it every bit as badly as the pundits, even to the point I was not far from making the comment here that night re: Bill Clinton's effect.
I'm sure my interpretations were affected by confirmational bias; the polls almost uniformly had Obama up comfortably, and my past conditioning told me that Hillary Clinton did not have a chance. Eric Sodomka gave an example in the video explaining confirmational bias that fairly well paralleled my experience.
Also, your examples where the science appears to approach absolute certainty and William Timberman's subsequent comment that he was glad to see you defend science that made me wonder whether you felt I was attacking science in some way by pointing out that it's never 100% certain. (And I know the propagandists on the faith-based naysayer side like to make this out as a weakness.)
I came away from the videos appreciating that the beauty of the scientific method is that very thing, and the humility, curiosity and discipline that it requires. I'm not a scientist (and I take it from some of the comments that you are), but the approach, especially the assessment of the risk of being incorrect, is not that dissimilar in my profession. One exercise that scientists do that is pretty cool is that they attempt to disprove their own hypotheses in order to strengthen them. Sodomka gave as an example an experiment underway attempting to disprove the law of gravity.
Sodomka's arguments regarding global warming are made much stronger by the acknowledgement of uncertainty in my view, and there are, to be sure, still significant differences of opinion in the timing and intensity of global destabilization, even though the scientific consensus is probably approaching ondelette's examples regarding the eventual result of global disaster if nothing is done or we wait too long. I just showed the video yesterday to a global skeptic who wouldn't give Al Gore the time of day, and he was intrigued.
To make another point, I told said skeptic about my own high regard for Al Gore. After a heroic suppression of his gag reflex, he proceeded to refute, not Al Gore's global warming arguments, but Al Gore as a person who does not practice what he preaches - remember his utility bill tiff that made it from a local 501(c)(3) to the national news in one day? That $400 haircut stuff really works.
-
Bill is baggage, to me at least
Bill Clinton isn't baggage? Just ask Al Gore.
I've no particular axe to grind against HRC herself, but Bill Clinton is a burden, even to a lot of us Democrats, who resent his losing the congress for us in two years by being out-talked by New Gingrich. How pathetic -- he couldn't be more inspirational than Newt Gingrich. I guess words don't count -- you need a President to really screw things up. There are a lot of herd-mentality Dems, however, who think Bill was a great president for defying the Gingrich Congress on the budget -- and that's how that certain intern got into the office. But there never should have been a Gingrich budget, and Al Gore would be president right now if it weren't for Bill C's immaturity, which he continues to manifest in his childish reaction to Obama's success.
But of course Glenn Greenwald's (and Kos's) analysis of the even more herd-mentality media is correct.
-
Pundit Schmundit
It wasn't Hillary tearing up that is causing me to reconsider supporting her, it was how the media treated her. I actually prefer Edwards over Obama or Clinton, but he's had the same treatment by the media. And for Chris Matthews to have the gall to even mention that someone may have fiddled with the NH election results, all I can say is, how disingenuous can you get! Where was Chris Matthews after the shenigans of the 2004 election where the exit polls had Kerry winning in Ohio by a fairly large margin, which was not borne out by the actual votes cast by a long-shot. There was actual evidence to support many inequities in Ohio, yet anyone who dared even bring the subject up was immediately shot down. Somebody please tell all these useless, clueless, biased "pundits" that the sword swings both ways. They had their chance to get behind making sure we have fair and honest elections, and they chose not to worry about that issue until it affected them personally. BOO HOO.