Letters to the Editor
-
@ Martin Gifford
Democrats have to work harder to come up with better more nuanced plans and then they need to work harder still to sell them because people are too lazy to think deeply and in consideration of long-term outcomes.
Sell them? Lazy? Disdain for the hoi-polloi is coming through loud and clear. Martin, nuance is for the realm of abstract thinking. People aren't lazy, they are preoccupied with the daily grind of life. They are also wary of vague rationalizations and airy constructs of unmeasurable premises. They see it every day in advertising and political posturing. More of the same isn't going to work.
Republicans just appeal to patriotism etc. to sell their simple plans that look strong and decisive.
No, the plans WERE strong and decisive. Their correctness, value, or whatever judgement, is a SEPARATE consideration. As long as you conflate simple and decisive, with bad, you have already lost the argument to voters.
-
It's fun to watch
Shooter and Martin... Worldwide Happiness!
Call me lazy but...
adnoto... They actually believe they are changing the landscape and will go to great lengths to dismiss the truth staring them in the face. For the more intelligent members of their coalition, the cognitive dissonance has to be astoundingly intense.
I'm not trying to change the landscape. I'm just trying to draw a better map. You are the crazy ones and the earth is still round and most of it is still covered in water. More of it will be if the polar ice caps keep melting.
-
A. M. Cox
She's an idiot, which is fine. Therefore, it doesn't surprise me that she feels the NYT's decision to skip these cluster fucks is inconsequential. But it isn't. It's important. And, yes, it will affect positively the newspapers's reporting.
-
Michael Goldfarb...
What a riot. If you haven't clicked through to read his original post, you should do it. It's only two paragraphs and it puts The Onion to shame. No one could mock the stereotypical right-wing take on "terror" better than that.
In sum: Glenn is a weak-stomached lefty and the US government is ALWAYS right when it comes to interrogating terrorists. They have never -- repeat NEVER -- detained and tortured someone who wasn't a terrorist ready to strike. They all had it coming to them. And if you can't handle that, then you're a communist pussy.
-
@ Holly McLachlan
It's simply asinine for anyone with pretensions towards being an adult (much less a professional) to give a damn about Obama's bowling abilities --- but that begs the question: why were the doyens of the high political press so avid about this "issue" today? Glenn didn't craft it out of nothing, and it didn't spring full grown from the brow of his neuroses.
The event happened, it got ridiculed, but the reaction to the ridicule was indeed full grown from the brow of his neuroses.
To see where that goddess of wisdom started, you have to recognize that the MSM is rife with guys who've simply never recovered from junior high school trouncings. They feel like total Larry Birds when they think they've found some physical activity that they're as good at as a black man.
While there may be some truth to that, the real criticism is about pursuing an activity that had no chance of success. How indicative of future policy decisions might that be?
Placing our nation in debt bondage to the PRC is simply un-American. The people who did this simply must be turfed.
I can second criticisms about profligate spending. If it makes you feel better, the largest holder of our paper is actually Japan. The bad news is that whoever is elected will likely continue current policy. They will have to deal with current situations not woulda, coulda, shoulda.
-
"I can second criticisms about profligate spending."
This is irony, right?
How much of your lazy ass's net worth was just saved by the the taxpayer bailout of Bear Stearns?
-
Heaven forbid
you have already lost the argument to voters.
-- shooter242
That you should lose an argument... TO THE VOTERS!
I don't think that was a slip of the fingers. Your mind is going and as you keep losing arguments with the voters, I expect and hope to hear you've defenestrated sooner than later.
-
Glenn:
... compare the two paragraphs...
We covered that in discussion last night. When you get lazy, as I often do when posting, you leave out certain qualifiers. In this case, I left out "seem to." Shame on me, mea maxima culpa, et cetera.
Nevertheless, I never said -- nor do I believe -- you, we, the mass of anti-Busheviks, whether "leftist" or not, have no power; that's what you keep saying people like me believe. In my case -- can't speak for others -- it's never been true.
The question remains: do you want real change (in media, politics, whatever) or do you want stasis? "Incrementalism" will keep things pretty much as they are indefinitely, world without end, amen. That's fine for some people, but we don't always have a choice in the matter.
As it happens, there has been -- in my view -- an overthrow led by the Busheviks, and we're living in the midst of some of the swiftest political and social changes we've ever seen. You've reported on a good deal of it (some of your best journalism). In the face of the real reactionary revolution (now there's some congnative dissonance!) that's going on, regardless of any of our desires, clinging to incrementalism is kind of silly. Events long since moved beyond...
But maybe you're OK with the autocracy we're sliding into, and you believe that it can be modified incrementally, bit by bit over the years and the generations, and that eventually, if we keep pushing, it will get "better." But it will still be an autocracy, and The People will still be its subjects.
I see no way to incrementally get back the republic the Revolution of 1776 was fought for, however.
Maybe I'm wrong. I often am. ;-)
-
Bowling and War
To see where that goddess of wisdom started, you have to recognize that the MSM is rife with guys who've simply never recovered from junior high school trouncings. They feel like total Larry Birds when they think they've found some physical activity that they're as good at as a black man.
While there may be some truth to that, the real criticism is about pursuing an activity that had no chance of success. How indicative of future policy decisions might that be?
OK, let me get this straight. The fact that Obama decided to bowl, was bad at it, and continued to bowl anyway, in public, shows that he is a bad decision maker and shouldn't be trusted with the presidency.
The fact that Dubya decided to go to war in Iraq, was bad at it, and decided to continue to be at war in Iraq anyway, in public, shows that he is a good decision maker, and is an excellent president who should be trusted to make many life and death decisions.
Is that your basic argument?