Letters to the Editor
-
This is off-topic, but...
Glenn, you may have already seen this, but if you haven't, you should (in fact, so should everyone):
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/26/opinion/26gabler.html?hp
An article analyzing that ever-so-irritating pro-McCain bias in the media.
-
To: Jeanette D.
There is no way.
"You can lead a whore to culture but you cannot make her think!"
Most of the Republicans I know merely parrot what they hear from Rush, et al. When I ask them where they've read some abominable lie, they are dumbstruck. I'm not sure that all of them can read.
They vote for the people who keep them from healthcare, wage increases and education. Then they blame the illegal immigrants because Rush tells them to.
-
And Rush Limbaugh
I'm not sure it can be emphasized enough just how rotten Limbaugh is. He's systematically dishonest (to this day I haven't been able to randomly tune into his show and not hear untruth within 30 seconds) and he's a complete creep, regularly saying truely sickening things like his belief that opposition to apartheid in South Africa was a cynical ploy to get blacks to vote for Democrats and a communist plot while also subtly implying reverse racism in opposing apartheid.
When Slobodon Milosovic died Limbaugh speculated that Bill Clinton assasinated him. Can you imagine what kind of backlash there would be from the noise machine if some liberal pundit said something as comparably unhinged as that?
-
blank is in error
No Kerry didn't ignore the noise
The response time to an attack of that nature (Swiftboats) must be instantaneous. Kerry did not respond immediately. Even Begala has said it's difficult for the opposition to get it's point across with your fist in his mouth. A good clean hit in the mouth is better than a kidney shot or below the belt. The mouth is where the worst dirt comes from with the right.
-
@ Jeanette D.
I read the editorial by Paul Campos that was linked and, in the comments section, there were accusations that DailyKos and Huffington Post are hate-filled websites, and that liberals are the problem because all they have to do is call someone a racist or a Nazi, which stifles all discussion.
conservatives are the problem because all they have to do is call someone an America-hater or a socialist, which stifles all discussion.
-
@Blank's Ghost
I'm not sure it can be emphasized enough just how rotten Limbaugh is.
There is not one criticism he had for Clinton that does not apply much moreso to Bush. If Rush had any self-respect, dignity, or integrity at all, he'd tear into Bush for the exact same reasons he did Clinton.
He could not be a bigger partisan hypocrite.
-
blank
Look Dems can take one of two paths. Either they can get in an alley fight with the GOP and literally take them down. By that I mean a scorched earth policy of actual personal destruction. Or they can get off their high horses of identity politics they're mired in and speak to the actual failures of the current admin that McCain seems intent on continuing and what, specifically what, chapter and verse they plan to do about it.
Personally I would prefer to see them do both at the same time.
But they can't really, since at the core of things they really work for the same people.
-
@Jeanette D.
I read the editorial by Paul Campos that was linked and, in the comments section, there were accusations that DailyKos and Huffington Post are hate-filled websites, and that liberals are the problem because all they have to do is call someone a racist or a Nazi, which stifles all discussion.
Needless to say, my perception is completely at odds with those assessments, but, apparently, the people who hold those views are 100% convinced of their validity.
So, where does that leave us?
Perhaps they haven't read Jonah's book yet. Where he compares Hillary Clinton to Hitler and liberalism to fascism - wait... that can't be right.
-
To: mysticmom
I just read the article you posted. It leads me to a question:
Considering the press has continually abetted the candidacies of the completely unqualified, idiotic and deluded (Bush, Reagan, McCain)...
Does the MSM care about our country at all?
-
@ Magritte's pipe
Thank you for illustrating the nature of the stalemate so well.
Now what do we do?
See, in right-wingnut land, the very act of pointing out hatred makes one just as much of a hater. I admit that it's a very convenient way of looking at the world. To paraphrase Ryan O'Neal in Love Story, "Being a right-wingnut means never having to say you're sorry."
-
Satire?
One person commenting on Professor Campos article stated that Instapunk is "satire." Anyone get that impression based on his writing? I thought not.
-
Hillary's membership in the "Family" has not become an issue in the media
perhaps because the right-wing noise machine would never call attention to it, and no one in the media would treat this troubling fact as a matter of concern.
Also know as "the Fellowship," this group is lead by Doug Coe, a charismatic pastor that Clinton has described as, "a unique presence in Washington: a genuinely loving spiritual mentor and guide to anyone, regardless of party or faith, who wants to deepen his or her relationship with God."
Kathryn Joyce and Jeff Sharlet, in a September 2007 article in "Mother Jones," say:
"The Fellowship's long-term goal is 'a leadership led by God—leaders of all levels of society who direct projects as they are led by the spirit.' According to the Fellowship's archives, the spirit has in the past led its members in Congress to increase U.S. support for the Duvalier regime in Haiti and the Park dictatorship in South Korea. The Fellowship's God-led men have also included General Suharto of Indonesia; Honduran general and death squad organizer Gustavo Alvarez Martinez; a Deutsche Bank official disgraced by financial ties to Hitler; and dictator Siad Barre of Somalia, plus a list of other generals and dictators. Clinton, says Schenck, (a pastor and admirer of Coe) has become a regular visitor to Coe's Arlington, Virginia, headquarters, a former convent where Coe provides members of Congress with sex-segregated housing and spiritual guidance."
The beltway crowd seem to be granting Clinton a pass on the issue of her religious affiliation, while the media conducts a feeding frenzy over Obama's association with Rev. Wright, egged on by the right-wingers.
Hillary's membership in the religious cult, which has made a fetish of secrecy, has never been mentioned by TV pundits, and most Americans are unaware of her affiliation with this group. I can't think of any other explanation than the fact that this group consists of right-wing evangelicals. It is not considered extremist by the media; therefore Hillary's longstanding membership in this group is considered inconsequential.
Regardless of the dynamics, Hillary is being given a pass, because her religious beliefs appear to be sufficiently conservative to those who manufacture these "controversies."