Letters to the Editor
-
@ shooter
Oh, I'm sorry. You had no inkling that former Generals might be affiliated with the pentagon, or military industrial complex? Perhaps you thought they might be anti-war? The GENERALS? My, what a gentle soul, so innocent and naive.
and
most commenters on a particular subject have hidden affiliations. Yes, yes, I know. It's a horrible thing to say, but sadly it's reality. Generals are not the only ones with financial and philosophical ties to shadowy entities. You know in your heart it's true. Search your feelings.
Of course, I know it's true that former generals may be predisposed to spout the Pentagon line, even when they aren't being explicitly told by the Pentagon what to say and how to say it as was the case here. Just as I know that there's a good chance that medical experts are talking the Big Pharma line and pundits on energy policy may very well be speaking for Big Oil. That's why the only things on my TV are DVDs and the cat.
Hmmm. Because Racism is a more pressing issue than mistaking Generals for anti-war advocates? It's now an issue in the election. Ignoring it only makes it worse.
I think Americans would welcome the chance to discuss race in a productive way, but I don't see how deconstructing Wright does that. If there's anything to explore there, it's the unquestioned assumption that his ideas have some special import because he is black. The more important discussions on race are tied up with its cousin, socioeconomic class. What would be best is if Americans could discuss both race/class and the heavy hand of government in our free press, since both are important.
Wouldn't it best, if everyone revealed all? Shouldn't every commenter come clean and bare all like they do on the financial networks? Wouldn't this be a better world? I merely ask that Glenn acknowledge the reality of ulterior motivations from the left as well as right. Fairness is all I desire.
The standard for ethical behavior by professionals in every institution I've ever been a part of and every one I've been familiar with is to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest. So yes, I think when someone is being paraded out as an expert, especially on issues of life and death, it behooves the public to know exactly who's buttering their bread.
I'd like to know your argument as to why this isn't good policy.