Letters to the Editor
-
But who did this to him?
Thoughtless, careless, selfish, hard hearted,hard headed, self righteous, pompous, myopic, delusional, power drunk,infantile, hypocritical, self centered, greedy crappy stupid men.
-
Righteous anger
If America's gentle, avuncular Uncle Gar can sound this angry, imagine what Molly Ivins would be sounding like right about now. Boy, I miss her.
-
Good words!...
Thanks, Garrison.
-
Vincent Bugliosi
Has a wonderful column on Huffpo on how GWB should not just be impeached but put on trial for war crimes. He makes the point that this man had no problem putting criminals on Texas deathrow to death and laughed about it openly. VB opines that a similar fate should await a man like GWB who has sent thousands to their death on a lie. He makes a wonderful point, and I would hope that others in power or authority take heart from his column and state openly what up until now I have only heard Sean Penn say. Garr's column is good, just doesn't go far enough.
-
God bless America!
Is anybody working on the War Crimes indictments?
-
Forget the Indictments
GWB will never be indicted for war crimes or anything else, because too many people in this country see him as a puppy Prez, to cute and affable to blame when he soils the carpet.
-
Memorial Day actions
I am grateful for Garrison Keillor's commentary, and hope that everyone who feels similar grief and anger over the situation in Iraq will transform those feelings into action.
This Memorial Day weekend, CODEPINK and other progressive groups across the country will be doing freeway banner drops calling for impeachment and the end of war. We're also urging people to make appointments with their Congressional reps while they're in their home offices from May 24-June 1 to urge them to stop funding the war and bring our troops home now.
For more info on how to take action, you can visit http://www.codepinkalert.org/article.php?list=type&type=356
What better way to honor the fallen vets than to work to protect those who are still in harm's way?
-
Thanks a lot, Garry...
... for the finest essay yet on why it is essential that nobody who thinks like you do should assume the role of our Commander in Chief. Your whining, sanctimonious moral equivalency is not something I'd like to rely on if I'm in an elevator at the 65th floor of a New York or Chicago skyscraper. Or if I'm on an airplane over Lake Ontario at night. Or if I'm in line at a toll booth near Washington D.C.
You've managed to conflate every single one of the left's current tropes into, what, about 500 words? You've managed to get Memorial Day weekend off to a remarkably bitter start. But what the hell, it's an election year. I suppose that people like you -- English majors and New Yorker writers, film producers and Manhattan fundraisers -- wouldn't know a real soldier unless someone pointed out the people wearing camo bdu's at another gate when you were catching your last flight to LAX.
Actually, people like you are fun to have around as long as you don't screw anything up. Keep doing your show, and your Bush and Cheney jokes. They're funny. Just don't think that you're ready to run the Department of Defense. Or the IRS, the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, or the 82nd Airborne. Dick Cheney promises not to start a variety show as long as you and Al Franken promise not to try to run the country.
-
Stunningly Simplistic Commentary
I've never bothered to read Keillor's articles on Salon before. For some reason, I read this one and it's certainly a doozy. This is some of the most simplistic thinking there is. He starts by insinuating that Cheney is a Nazi...doesn't that mean he loses the argument. He then insinuates that we are somehow wrong to view some people as terrorists...as if some of the horrific events that everyone knows are terrorism are not real. He then blatantly states that Richard Nixon somehow prevented the communists from getting a bad name...somehow I think it was the left wing sympathizers who denied Stalin's crimes that created the ambiguity. He then says the War on Terror is a joke "to most people"...this attitude will last until one second after a major attack.
Where's ElectroRobot when we need him? I'm ready for a one-liner...
-
It's best to avoid the debate about...
...who is the worse butcherer of human beings: Stalin or Hitler? Nevertheless GK jumps into this. Seems to me that debating who was worse makes us focus on the personalities of the two murderers while forgetting the fact that they both ordered the killing of millions and millions -- people who had personalities, too.
Nevertheless, Hitler's mass murder was based on an all-encompassing racist vision and used assembly-line technology for extermination -- and the Germans knew pure evil was being committed in their name.
Overall, the Holocaust, Hitler, Nazism, and Stalin should not be written and spoken about in a short op/ed piece, because the small size of the forum necessarily creates a sense of flippancy, which serves no one.
-
Thanks Gayle Brandeis
I think I will do just that. Thanks again for the info.
-
i agree, schencka
for sheer numbers, you have to nominate Mao (though a lot was negligent homicide). and i believe hitler killed more russians than stalin (there was a war, you know). going back in time, the british probably committed more genocides (tasmanians, et al) and Genghis (and sons) probably killed a greater percentage [did you know that fully one percent of humans carry Genghis' Y chromosome?]. but as schencka said, this is not something we descendants of Cain ought to compete for in a stupid little essay.
-
It's about time
You let rip with an on-the- money and angry op-ed. I've been waiting for this since a couple you did in 2006 on the Military Commissions Act, and, my favorite of all, "Let the Voices of 9-11 Be Heard". You do righteous indignation without all the sanctimony better than anyone else in my book.
About the only thing I disagreed with was your recounting of the history of cold war containment of communism in the period following WWII. While I would like to lay all responsibility for our dealings in the two 1/2 decades after WWII (and the waging of 2 wars to further that containment) on the Republicans, most of the policy responsibilities fell on Democratic shoulders and one of those decades was presided over by President Eisenhower, who in retrospect seems to far outshine those of his party who followed him to the White House. In retrospect, he actually comes across as wise and somewhat benign. He wasn't out to destroy the social contract that the New Dealers had made with the country.
And your anger in the face of the horrible loss of life and debilitating injury to another generation of mostly young men and women is entirely justified. We should all be more angry. On our local news this a.m. the death of a 39 year old father of 3 whose family resides in a nearby small town was reported from Afghanistan. He was due to return home in July and as a 21 year veteran had already served tours of duty in Iraq and in Bosnia.
Finally, yep, I agree. Once the Republicans grabbed hold of the word appeasement they aren't going to let go until they are able to successfully make it stick to a hapless Dem or two. Just maybe, though, this time, we have learned that weasling gets the party nowhere with that bunch and we can start sticking them with a couple of dastardly terms as payback. Nothing too esoterical, like authoritarian. Something a bit more basic and guttural. Perhaps others could help me out here.