Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
The letters thread is now closed.
  • ??????????

    Snow was every bit as ridiculous as an obfuscator...but, he had some style.

    My question is, when are they going to fire Perrino? She's making them look not-so-hot, wouldn't ya say? Her ability to argue that up is down, right is wrong, and black is white is just not up to the job.

  • So if the GOP had a better showing in the election...

    ...there would be fewer troops in Iraq?

  • Scooby voice here...

    Hh-wha??! Say it's not so!

    Voting for change doesn't mean change for the worse!

  • What the Dems' message should be:

    To take my previous comment another way, you have the perfect Democratic spin: "Because the public voted to stand up to Bush and the GOP and call for an end to the failures in Iraq, the White House says the Administration decided to send more troops into the Hell it created. We call that punishment for - and counter to - the wisdom displayed by Americans in the last election. We call that tossing more logs on the fire."

  • The Good Ole Days

    Anyone remember not so long ago when Republicans blasted the Democrats for not having a plan, a strategy for Iraq? The Republican party hammered and hammered this point home and the national media just ate it up. Now, the Democrats actually have an exit strategy, have a plan, have the support of the American people, have what they were accused of not having. Rather than be all "YEAH! THEY HAVE A PLAN!," the Republican Party and the MSM changed the goal posts.

    If they didn't want the Democrats to come up with this plan, they should never have asked for it in the first place. Go Senator Reid. You do speak for the American people.

  • What new strategy?

    When will the press come out and ask exactly what is different about what we are doing in Iraq aside from sending more troops? The strategy has always been to provide security in Iraq so they can do what we want them to. The only thing that has changed is the tactics being used to reach this strategic goal.

    The real reason why the strategy hasn't worked so far is that the Iraqis don't want to do what we want them to. No change in tactics will alter this reality.

    The emperor has no clothes, gentlemen. You need to be saying that. Not simply following the ongoing failure of the strategy.

  • She's right

    "More of the same" really is a different strategy from "the same," isn't it? I mean, we're not calling it 'the same strategy,' are we? No, they're doing *more* of what they'd been doing, which is completely different.

  • Uh, Dana ...

    The American people have wanted change in Iraq, and they got it. The president announced a new policy on Jan. 10th that was quite different and divergent from where we were before ...

    I wasn't aware that throwing more bodies onto the pyre was considered a plan. But as I've said before, it's not anyone that they know, it's only the help and assorted locals, so it's not like Junior is aware that we're talking about real people here.

  • Maybe she didn't get the e-mail on her RNC account

    Where was Dana Perino when we had the last two "surges" that were supposed to permanently get hold of the situation in Baghdad? Remember....the ones where we threw the party and the Iraqi's barely showed up? This is NOT something new. It's been done before and it failed. How many times must we try this innovative "new" strategy before Bush will admit defeat. You can't put lipstick on the SAME pig over and over again and keep claiming it's a NEW pig.

    Judging by the extended 15,000 troops who are going to be fighting for their lives for at least 4 more months in Baghad after their one year tour is up...and the callup of even more National Guard troops... I think I heard 30,000....this is a bottomless pit.

    The answer is so simple. When you're in a whole, you stop digging.

    And you stop looking America straight in the eye and lying like you really believe you're telling the truth.

  • Impeach

    Now, now, now, for the love of god. Before any more people have to die for this misbegotten fiasco. I know there must be some Democratic Congresspeople that read Salon. What are you wating for?

  • Ignoring the Polls

    No one in this WH has any intention of accomodating the will of the people. They discard or willfully misinterpret the polls. Let them keep at it. They are just screwing the final nails into their coffins. As for Perino, she is a WH spokesperson. That says a lot about her credibility.

  • You have to admit, it works...

    According to polls, somewhere around 60 percent of the public has wanted this war drawn to a close - to give up - for months now. Yet the big lie, the one that equates "supporting the troops" requires continued warfare, is so powerful that even a Democratic landslide (especially given our voting infrastructure), based on the war, was insufficient in moving even the Democratic majority to assert any real authority.

    Lies work.

    Niger cake worked too.

    So did Iraq and 9/11.

    And so did Colin Powell at the UN.

    And so did the current World Bank president and, "It will pay for itself."

    And so did purple fingers.

    And so did Chalabi.

    And so did Tony Blair.

    And so did the networks.

    And so did cable.

    And so did the New York Times and the Washington Post.

  • Fall guy named up front

    Boy, Petraeus is brave. He must have taken the job knowing he was going to be the fall guy. The WH can't get through a sentence about Iraq without reminding us that somehow it was all the FNG's idea.

  • Here's a novel way to calm Iraq..

    And shock the slog out of everyone else:

    The Dems can prepare for war with Russia!

    (Time they took a little pre-emptive diversion of their own )

    "Russia threatening new cold war over missile defence"

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,2054142,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=12

  • It's Time to Raise the Legal Ante

    After just watching another in a long line of Watergate rewinds on cable TV, I am convinced that the parallels are sufficiently clear for Congress to act legally against the President in the way that the Constitution lays it out: address articles of impeachment against him. By not acting in this manner, this country runs the frightenly real risk of permanently subverting the world's most powerful democratic document.

    That thought makes me physically ill.