Soapbox

Do the editors the Columbus Dispatch, along with the major networks’ Evening News, assume that Americans all have a subscription to the New York Times and read TheDailyKos online? Is that the reason why the Dispatch, week after week, fails to cover important, breaking stories critical of the Bush administration? Do you figure that your subscribers are already reading about it on blogs or other newspapers and only need you to report on votes by the School Board?

That must be why the Dispatch is keeping silent on the story of Jeff “not really” Gannon, the fake reporter given daily access to the White House to ask the President sycophantic, softball questions despite using an assumed name, having no legitimate press credentials and managing several gay military porn websites. You must assume that we already heard how he was apparently given access to information on the Valerie Plame leak even before it hit the mainstream press, when he wasn’t even a real reporter. I’m sure, if this happened in a Democratic administration we would be reading daily updates on your front page!

You must also be guessing that we are well-acquainted with the recently released documents sent by Richard Clarke to Condoleesa Rice on January 25th, 2005 that appear to put the lie to her sworn statement that “No Al Qaeda plan was turned over to the new administration”. You must be confident that we have already read Clarke’s plan and his urgent request for a principal’s level meeting, saying, “We would make a major error if we underestimated the challenge al Qida poses.” and so can judge for ourselves if the administration truly did all it could to prevent 9/11.

Though you give us daily updates on the trial of pop star michale Jackson, we hear nothing from The Dispatch about Fox News reporter Brit Hume. He took sentence and sentence fragments from a speech by Franklin Roosevelt and re-arranged them to make the claim that FDR supported privatizing when in fact, he never made any statement of the kind. This is a deliberate con job by a “news organization” to sell the American people a pig in a poke, but either you do not consider journalistic prostitutes hired by the President to be “news” or you think we already know all about this.

Sadly, these assumptiopns are not true. While surveys have shown that only 22% of people under the age of 65 rely on news broadcast or newspapers for their news, sadly, there are still Dispatch subscribers who hear nothing of the mis-steps and malfeasance of the Bush administration unless a truly balanced news source is brave enough to report them.

Is the Dispatch such a source? Or will more and more central Ohio residents have to turn to another source for complete, accurate news?

Shame on the Columbus Dispatch’s editorial writers.

Shame on you for deliberately misleading readers in your editorial “Throwing a Fit” . When you characterized Stephanie Tubbs-Jones and Barbara Boxer’s attempts to light a fire under the issue of voting reform as a childish temper tantrum, you crossed the line.

Did you actually listen to what was said that day? Either you didn’t, and so have no business commenting on it, or you did, and chose to engage in yellow journalism. The democrats who objected on Thursday made a point of saying that they were not trying to overturn the election of 2004 or cast aspersions on the results, but only to demand that real reform be made at last, before the next election is upon us and its too late! In what way is this childish?

To say that the party leadership should have “shut them up” to avoid looking bad shows an appalling lack of understanding of the concept of free speech and what the democratic party stands for.

After the election debacle of 2000, big reforms were promised by those in power. 4 years later, we find many were never even begun, probably because no one made a big enough fuss. It has become clear that someone must stand up and shout “The emperor has no clothes!” to convey to the entrenched bureaucracy of Ohio how urgent it is that meaningful changes are made now.

Maybe you think it is too much to ask that a person who stands in line in the rain for hours feels confident afterwards that his or her vote was cast and counted. Perhaps you don’t think fair voting is an important part of democracy, but is it good journalism to belittle those who do?

There are indeed people in Ohio and elsewhere who feel that George Bush stole a second election from America and would like to overturn the results; however, Senator Boxer and Rep. Tubbs-Jones do not count themselves among this group. If you cannot stick to the facts in the future, I suggest you change your name to “The Columbus Enquirer”.

I respond to the letter of 1/6/05 about American aid to tsunami victims in which the author complained that all the world hates the U.S. but loves our money. When he asks “where is the UN when we need their support?” I assume he means that if they want our money, they must agree to our wars, even if they think they are wrong. He closes by saying, “If you want to play with our ball, you have to play by our rules”.

With those kind of conditions, doesn’t that make our money not aid, but extortion?

The US loves to remind the world that it is the only superpower. Well, of those to whom much is given, much is expected. It is fitting that America should lead the way in assistance in times of global crisis, and after a slow start, we are doing just that. Good for us. What does the writer want- a medal? Oh that’s right- he wants the UN to back everything we do.

While the U.S. provides more in raw dollars to foreign aid than any other single nation, we are far from being the “most generous nation on earth” that we like to label ourselves. Other countries do not give as much total cash but are more generous as a percentage with what they have. We would do well not to look down on them or diminish their contributions. This is not supposed to be a competition to see who can look more generous (Australia, with 1/100th of the U.S.’s GNP would be currently be winning, if it were) but a race to save human lives.

What difference does it make how much money Egypt or Libya is donating? Do we measure ourselves by their yardstick? Should we help only if others do first? And France, by the way, immediately sent a team of over 100 doctors and other specialists to the area and has now pledged over $57M. The writer should check his facts before attacking America’s favorite whipping boy.

Finally, did Jesus say to care for others only if they agree to follow your rules, to feed the poor only if they’ll sit through your church service first? Should we help starving children only if their governments agree to run things our way, or if other governments give as much as we do? Of course not. We help because when you have so much more than everyone else, it’s just the right thing to do.

At least that should be why we do it. Perhaps the writer has a different agenda for his “charity”. I guess some people demand recognition and applause for doing the right thing- others just do it.

I sent this letter to columnist Jonah goldberg this week, after an op-ed piece in which he basicly stated that Bush’s religion is real and Kerry’s is fake, so Bush should be president. What a worm.

Mr. Goldberg-

Your Column today (10/18) contained glaring logical errors. You are entitled to your opinion, of course, but it would be nice if you presented some basis , other than raw prejudice, for your opinions.

Your basic premise seems to be that George Bush’s faith is “real” and Kerry’s is “fake”. You apparently come to this conclusion based on the fact that Bush says “God bless America” all the time and John Kerry refuses to condemn all abortion and gay marriage. With this flimsy rational, I cannot help but think that your real motivation for belittling Kerry’s faith is that Kerry does not share your political agenda.

Your elevating of your position on abortion and gay marriage above concern for the poor and sick in this world is interesting, considering Jesus himself never felt the need to speak on either of these issues. If you want to judge our politicians based solely on how they follow the Old Testament, shouldn’t you also address their support for slavery, stoning adulterers and making burnt offerings?
I do not presume to know if the president’s professed faith is real or false, but I do know that talk is cheap. Even the devil, as they say, can quote scripture. Therefore I am more impressed by actions than by words. Bush is quite concerned for the unborn alright- at least the ones headed to abortion clinics. His concern for the unborn is sadly lacking when it pertains to his pollution standards, which are allowing unborn children to be poisoned by ever-increasing levels of mercury and arsenic in the air and water. He demonstrates little concern for the unborn dieing in Iraq when their mothers contract hepatitis because we still have yet to repair their sewage and water treatment facilities more thn a year after we destroyed them. So if we judge by his actions rather than his words, I would say Bush’s commitment to “life” comes out neutral, rather than “pro”.

Jesus also said that if we would love him, we must feed his lambs. You complain that John Kerry picks and choses when to follow the Bible and when not to, yet the president has done that very thing! Under George Bush, poverty has increased in the United States to the point where our poverty rate is only just below that of Russia! In my home state of Ohio, demand at food pantries is at record levels, with more and more working families unable to feed their children. More people have to chose between buying food and going to to the doctor, and if George Bush follows his advisor Grover Norquist and “starves the beast” we may one day return to the era of our elderly eating cat food to survive. So it is clear that president and the Republican congress are chosing NOT to follow Jesus’ command to feed his lambs!

Jesus also said that to love our neighbors as ourselves is the second greatest commandment. I believe that this is what Senator Kerry is trying to do in his refusal to punish gay and lesbain people for the way they are born. George Bush claims that he merely wants to protect a sacred institution (though the sacred is not the jurisdiction of the presidency) but he is, in fact, making an entire group of people into second -class citizens. This is not about protecting marriage- it is about legislating the “Jesus loves me but he hates you” mentality that is so contrary to all the teachings of Christ.
Finally, Matthew 6 says that we should not parade our faith in order to impress other but should make it a private thing between ourselves and God. George Bush not only invokes the Divine at every opportunity but has even gone so far as to say that God “told” him to go to war in Iraq, thereby paving the way to shift the blame to the Almighty if the war continues to go sour!

My point is that it is impossible to judge what is in a person’s heart. We all know of people who profess no faith at all, yet live good and moral lives, and others who attend church regularly yet lie, cheat and abuse others. It is completely inappropriate for you to assume that John Kerry, a man who attends church regularly and honors his family, is not a good christian just because he does not subscribe to your particular political views! Going by those standards your dear president is, to many Christians, the worst kind of sinner!

First they came for the homosexuals. They tried to turn them into second-class citizens and put their bigotry into the Constitution. It didn’t seem right… but I’m not homosexual, so I didn’t said nothing.

Then they came for the poor, reducing taxes for the rich while hunger and rising poverty destroyed the future of more and more of them… but I have enough to eat, so I said nothing.

They came for the women and mothers, to require even those whose lives had already been violated once by rape or incest to endure government-forced pregnancies… but I’m not pregnant, so I said nothing.

They came for the Iraqis. They dragged them from their beds at night and threw them in prison, attached electrodes to their bodies and committed other unspeakable wrongs. It was horrible to see… but we’re at war, after all, so I said nothing.

They came for the scientists and professors and former advisors who disagreed with them, savaging their honor and accusing them of helping the terrorists.. .and it seemed unfair, but I said nothing.

They came for the ordinary ones who spoke up. They arrested them and branded them criminal for wearing the wrong T-shirt, the wrong buttons, for asking questions, and even for simply saying the word “No”… but I keep quiet, so I said nothing.

Then they came for a senator. They made commercials saying he hadn’t earned his war medals, an d ignored the Navy when they said he had. They made an hour-long info-sland-umentary that accused him of causing the deaths of POW’s in Vietnam, even though it had already been proven that he didn’t.. .but I wasn’t voting for him, so I said nothing.

They came for the Constitution itself: the right to speak, the checks and balances of government and the right not to learn about their religion in my science class; the right to vote, even if you are poor or black.. .and it made me frightened… but I said nothing.

And when they come for me, for something I do that isn’t patriotic enough for them, or isn’t fundamentalist enough for them… will there be anyone left one left to say anything?