This letter is associated with the following article:
Letters
Friday, November 28, 2008 12:00 AM

Mumbai, the NYT's revisionism, and lessons not learned

The Times' Editorial Page blames the Bush administration for "blessing" the military coup against Hugo Chavez without mentioning that it did the same. Why does that matter?

Read other letters about this article

  • Friday, November 28, 2008 02:22 PM

    @AKA Smith

    Now, just why are you trying to silence me, given the fact that I am on topic and have accused you of nothing.

    I was in no way trying to "silence" you and I didn't say you were trying to accuse me of anything. I do think you were off topic but I didn't mention that in my reply and I didn't care one way or the other.

    Was there some part of my post in which I did not make clear my disdain for folks who voted for Obama on faith rather than facts?

    Nope. Except you, and others, keep implying that you seem to think that some majority or large numbers of "leftists" voted on "faith". I disagree. That's what I told you. Was I not clear about that?

    Did I specifically accuse you of anything?

    I didn't say that you did. You're making this personal, not me.

    Why would I have a particular interest in how you voted? If you made a considered compromise to which applied your mind and not your emotions, I don't care how you voted.

    I used myself as an example. I suspect millions of others could say the same thing that I did in how they voted. That's where you and I seem to differ on the subject. You seem to believe that millions (or some large number) voted on "faith" where as I believe that a relative few voted on faith. So, as I wrote in my previous reply, I think that the case against "leftists" "voting on faith", and now being angry or disappointed about Obama because they supposedly expected someone other than who he is, is a way overblown assumption.

    In other words, if the shoe I have mentioned doesn't fit you, why are you trying to shove your foot in it?

    I'm not and I wasn't. Cute little comebacks like that are usually not well thought out and are consequently meaningless to the content of the conversation.

    (Let me also add that I wrote my post before I cam to the end of this thread and have nothing to do with any current eruption.)

    It didn't cross my mind that your post had anything to do with the current eruption. My reply to you also was in no way effected by any current eruption.

    -- AKA Smith

Most Active Letters Threads

725

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
688

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
440

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
329

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame
255

America's regression

It's almost impossible to find a nation with as many torture advocates as the U.S. has.

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon