Letters to the Editor
-
Hillary no Nixon
People, please stop comparing Mrs. Bill Clinton to President Richard Nixon. You dishonor his name.
-
Unethical editors
Does she go on and on because she gets paid by the word? Or, is she a masochist ... one of those hooded creatures that crawled around fetish clubs in the 80s dying to get whipped or peed on in public?
I once saw a guy handcuff himself to a tree in a cruising park in toronto, kneel on the ground and make urgent, gutteral noises to attract passersby.
From an anthropological perspective this phenomena is fascinating but on a personal level it is difficult not to shudder.
The editors of Salon are ethically negligent. They are disgracing themselves, journalism, and humanity by encouraging Ms Paglia to enact her masochistic nature on their pages.
Editors have ethical responsibilities not just grammatical ones. If they can not live up to these responsibilities they should find alternative employment.
-
Abusive
Camille's writing is abusive and disrespectful of a person. Just because someone is a public figure does not give others the right to insult her parents and siblings and to make unfounded comments about her attitude toward this or that gender. What is your point, Camille? Should we write similar things about you? There is an old saying that if you point a finger, there are three pointing back at yourself.
-
To MrFlippy
So CP's lay opinion on HRC is a "spot on" take, you say? And how do you know that? Is she qualified to be Mrs Clinton's psychoanalyst? Does she know her that well in person? Do you? Methinks you have swallowed and incorporated too well all that vile, vituperative vitriol about the Clintons spewed by Limbaugh and his ilk that has been a staple of right wing radio and print since Clinton took office. Gimme a break.
Absolute rubbish, this piece. And agree with other posters here who say (and shall we psychoanalyse her, too? She's fair game, isn't she?) that the piece seems to have been posted just to grab some sorely needed attention for the writer.
-
Hillarys' burden
The article by Camille Paglia was extremely refreshing.Sometimes I wonder if half of the country are retarded, with all this adoration for these two lying grifters. Oh, and Camille, you and yours always leave one thing out. Bill Clinton RAPED Quanita Brodrick. Remember? Sixty minutes, prime time, #1 show in the country? How can someone be charged with RAPE on T.V. and not vehemently defend themselves? I would sue. Wouldn't you? Bill Clinton did none of these because HE DID IT! And HILLARY LET HIM. She's the wife of the RAPIST. Period.
-
To goomygoomy
Bill Clinton did none of these because HE DID IT! And HILLARY LET HIM. She's the wife of the RAPIST. Period.
Man, this sounds not unlike the rantings of a raving lunatic screaming at everyone in capital letters. Go take your Xanax, please.
-
Great Article
Great article that expresses how many, if not most, feel. Despite the militaristic attitude of Hillary's adoring, unthinking, and unquestioning sycophants, she is unelectable. Thank God for that!
-
Can a column against a woman be below the belt?
Nasty, hateful stuff, Ms. Paglia.
-What is your source for the denigration of Hillary's brothers?
-If you have been reading as many books on Hillary as you imply, you would know that she has been deeply religious and an active Methodist since her teen years where she was inspired by a progressive minister at the Park Ridge Methodist Church.
-Hillary's health plan was unsuccessful, going from wildly popular down to defeat in great measure because of million-dollar ad campaigns launched by the same insurance industry that Obama thinks he can reason together with.
-But Hillary's health plan also changed the agenda in this country. After that plan, the question in America was not whether we should determine to insure every person in America, but how to accomplish this goal. You can verify this by seeing that even the Republican candidates espouse this goal, while espousing plans that would take an eternity to accomplish it.
-Is it possible that Hillary is in love with her husband, who is after all brilliant, good-looking, loads of fun to be around, and as public-service oriented as she is? Would she be the first woman to endure much to try to salvage a marriage she ultimately believes in?
-Your cynicism is blocking your reasoning power and your venom does far from persuade.
-
Interex7
confirming suspicions
Like I said, reasoned argument referencing the specialists' literature does not even register with some people, it flies right over their head, as if they were children.
brightstar65 wrote:
>Scientists have been working round the clock, analyzing data from before the time of the >dinosaurs to come to this startling conclusion that ALL SCIENTISTS (but TWO dumb ones) >think you must know if you expect to be able to live among us Borgs.
>SUBMIT. SUBMIT. SUBMIT NOWWWWWW.
It is YOU and all the libs that miss the point.
I understand, our technology in the past few centuries has allowed us to expend much more energy and thus create potential side effects on our environment.
Yet, despite this, our maximal total output of energy planetwide is only less than 1 percent of that which we receive from the sun alone.
Sure, there might be some small but accumulating effect from human exertion.
That effect would be much smaller than scientists imply and would be swamped by natural causes anyway.
You say scientists have data that shows global warming is occurring. Well, once someone is on a racket or becomes a believer, that person inadvertently tends to skew all data to support their belief system. SO, that all but INVALIDATES scientists from the argument-- at least the true believer scientists. Scientists are supposed to keep their objectivity, not jump on bandwagons.
You say global warming is inevitable and is happening. Even if we did understand all the systems at play on the planet, which we most definitely do not, then there is great danger is still misinterpreting the interactions of those systems. In trying to remedy a problem, one might thus create a greater, more dire problem in the process.
...
I won't go on. I just realized anything I say will not change true believer minds. Common sense and logic left you a long time ago-- that is why you are libs.
I will say though that I agree that if we are changing the planet and making things worse with out technology, then sure, we need to begin to look for solutions. The danger in in rushing to a premature conclusion, then screwign things up even more with ill conceived and rash 'solutions'.
My fear is the reason has left our scientists already and thus we are on a death course.
Also, a bigger problem is phthalates, PCBs and other long lasting agents in the enviromment. Destroying the biozome and all the creatures on it by screwing up the DNA is FAR FAR worse a problem than temperatures rising a few degrees.
But ignore the REAL problems because there is a lot more money to be made milking the carbon credits scam than there is in holding back industry from polluting the enviroment. In other words, yes, I do believe you all are being SCAMMED.
Can you say "imbeciles"?