http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/books/review/Glanz-t.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=cockburn&st=nyt&oref=slogin- Hide quoted text -
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>Date: Mon, May 12, 2008 at 9:04 AMSubject: Man in a Black TurbanTo: letters@nytimes.com
To the Editor: Mr. Glanz's review (Review of Books 5/11/08) tries to explainMoktada al-Sadr's influence while ignoring how he got it. Moktadaal-Sadr took the lead among his generation of Iraqi Shia in April 2003by having his more moderate political rival Sayyid Abdul Majidal-Khoei beaten to death in public. To acknowledge that mr. al-Sadrhas been called a thug is unhelpful without describing how he earnedthat name.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
Monday, May 12, 2008
Thursday, May 8, 2008
McCain Assures Conservatives of His Stance on Judges
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/07/us/politics/07mccain.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=bumiller&st=nyt&oref=slogin- Hide quoted text -
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>Date: Wed, May 7, 2008 at 11:21 AMSubject: McCain Assures Conservatives of His Stance on JudgesTo: letters@nytimes.com
To the Editor: When Ms. Bumiller writes: of the "judicial philosophy of President Bush and other recent Republican presidents who sought judges who generally construed laws as narrowly as possible" she parrots the RNC's rhetoric without comparing it to reality. This current court, lead by chief Justice Roberts has been consistently activist. In the Medellin case, they recently went so far as to rule that the supremacy clause of our Constitution does not mean what it says. A narrow construction of the Constitution would agree with two hundred years of jurisprudence that our foreign treaties have the force of law. Under the banner of "conservatism" this administration has turned our legal system over to radicals.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>Date: Wed, May 7, 2008 at 11:21 AMSubject: McCain Assures Conservatives of His Stance on JudgesTo: letters@nytimes.com
To the Editor: When Ms. Bumiller writes: of the "judicial philosophy of President Bush and other recent Republican presidents who sought judges who generally construed laws as narrowly as possible" she parrots the RNC's rhetoric without comparing it to reality. This current court, lead by chief Justice Roberts has been consistently activist. In the Medellin case, they recently went so far as to rule that the supremacy clause of our Constitution does not mean what it says. A narrow construction of the Constitution would agree with two hundred years of jurisprudence that our foreign treaties have the force of law. Under the banner of "conservatism" this administration has turned our legal system over to radicals.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
In One Flaw, Questions on Validity of 46 Judges
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/washington/06bar.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=liptak&st=nyt&oref=slogin- Hide quoted text -
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>Date: Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:57 AMSubject: In One Flaw, Questions on Validity of 46 JudgesTo: letters@nytimes.com
To the Editor: Adam Liptak asserts that "Some provisions of the Constitution are open to interpretation, but some are clear." Would that it were so! Scarcely a month ago, the U.S. Supreme court ruled that the Constitution does not mean what it says. Reasonable people may agree that the clause: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby..." gives our foreign treaties the force of law. The U.S. Supreme court however judged in the Medellin case that our foreign treaties have the force of law only if and when Congress enacts legislation to enforce them. When an activist court is in session, everything is up for interpretation.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>Date: Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:57 AMSubject: In One Flaw, Questions on Validity of 46 JudgesTo: letters@nytimes.com
To the Editor: Adam Liptak asserts that "Some provisions of the Constitution are open to interpretation, but some are clear." Would that it were so! Scarcely a month ago, the U.S. Supreme court ruled that the Constitution does not mean what it says. Reasonable people may agree that the clause: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby..." gives our foreign treaties the force of law. The U.S. Supreme court however judged in the Medellin case that our foreign treaties have the force of law only if and when Congress enacts legislation to enforce them. When an activist court is in session, everything is up for interpretation.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Demography is King
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/opinion/29brooks.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin- Hide quoted text ----------- Forwarded message ----------From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>Date: Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:51 AMSubject: Demography is KingTo: letters@nytimes.com
To the Editor: David Brooks correctly identifies our problem of a nation flying apart into enclaves of voters who share no common ground. Senator Edwards has been sounding this alarm for years now. These tensions have always been with us, but were checked for decades by a public school system in which the son of the janitor studied next to the daughter of the banker. What is new in Mr. Brooks' analysis is the implication that this is a Democratic problem. When Reagan promised to dismantle the department of Education, was he pursuing a Democrat agenda? Was it the Democratic party that campaigned to create non-mixing social, religious and ethnic enclaves through school vouchers? Mr. Brooks has free rein to mix revisionist history into his political analysis, but this newspaper would do well to present a counterpoint to such a screed.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
To the Editor: David Brooks correctly identifies our problem of a nation flying apart into enclaves of voters who share no common ground. Senator Edwards has been sounding this alarm for years now. These tensions have always been with us, but were checked for decades by a public school system in which the son of the janitor studied next to the daughter of the banker. What is new in Mr. Brooks' analysis is the implication that this is a Democratic problem. When Reagan promised to dismantle the department of Education, was he pursuing a Democrat agenda? Was it the Democratic party that campaigned to create non-mixing social, religious and ethnic enclaves through school vouchers? Mr. Brooks has free rein to mix revisionist history into his political analysis, but this newspaper would do well to present a counterpoint to such a screed.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
Monday, April 28, 2008
Self-inflicted Confusion
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/25/opinion/25krugman.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=krugman&st=nyt&oref=slogin- Hide quoted text -
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>Date: Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 9:36 AMSubject: Self-inflicted ConfusionTo: letters@nytimes.com
To the Editor: We all look forward to seeing the tangible programs that will give form to senator Obama's message of hope. To contrast his campaign to the "no nonsense" offered by senator Clinton however is risible. "Nonsense" is the mildest word I would use in describing her sniper-dodging exploits in Bosnia. At this stage in the campaign, neither candidate has to vie for the media attention. It is time that they share with the electorate their programs for the next administration.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>Date: Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 9:36 AMSubject: Self-inflicted ConfusionTo: letters@nytimes.com
To the Editor: We all look forward to seeing the tangible programs that will give form to senator Obama's message of hope. To contrast his campaign to the "no nonsense" offered by senator Clinton however is risible. "Nonsense" is the mildest word I would use in describing her sniper-dodging exploits in Bosnia. At this stage in the campaign, neither candidate has to vie for the media attention. It is time that they share with the electorate their programs for the next administration.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
Thursday, April 10, 2008
In Justice Shift, Corporate Deals Replace Trials
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/09/washington/09justice.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=lichtblau&st=nyt&oref=slogin- Hide quoted text -
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>Date: Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 9:39 AMSubject: In Justice Shift, Corporate Deals Replace TrialsTo: letters@nytimes.com
To the Editor: When news of the crimes at Enron broke, we waited to see if this was the anomaly, or merely the first of a pattern of corporate crime. Now we learn that the extent of corporate malfeasance has been deliberately masked by our own Department of Justice. In keeping with this administration's fetish for secrecy, the public was shielded from the results of our own public investigations and investors were blinded to the actual behavior of companies we were funding. It is overdue that our Department of Justice got back to enforcing the laws duly passed by congress. Instead, it has enriched GOP loyalists as monitors of DPAs, skirted the law, and kept the public in the dark.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>Date: Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 9:39 AMSubject: In Justice Shift, Corporate Deals Replace TrialsTo: letters@nytimes.com
To the Editor: When news of the crimes at Enron broke, we waited to see if this was the anomaly, or merely the first of a pattern of corporate crime. Now we learn that the extent of corporate malfeasance has been deliberately masked by our own Department of Justice. In keeping with this administration's fetish for secrecy, the public was shielded from the results of our own public investigations and investors were blinded to the actual behavior of companies we were funding. It is overdue that our Department of Justice got back to enforcing the laws duly passed by congress. Instead, it has enriched GOP loyalists as monitors of DPAs, skirted the law, and kept the public in the dark.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Cleric Suspends Shiite Militia's Fight in Basra
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/31/world/middleeast/31iraq.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin- Hide quoted text -
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>Date: Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 8:53 AMSubject: Cleric Suspends Shiite Militia's Fight in BasraTo: letters@nytimes.com
To the Editor: Accustomed as we are to daily news reports of crises and successes that mean nothing, Americans sometimes don't perceive a real existential challenge when it arises. Iraq's government faces such a challenge right now. If it grants Moktada al-Sadr the broad amnesty he seeks, it will embolden other thugs to extort amnesty for their crimes. If it does not negotiate with him, it will be pilloried as a puppet of the American occupation. The weak leaders whom Washington favors cannot deal with such a challenge.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>Date: Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 8:53 AMSubject: Cleric Suspends Shiite Militia's Fight in BasraTo: letters@nytimes.com
To the Editor: Accustomed as we are to daily news reports of crises and successes that mean nothing, Americans sometimes don't perceive a real existential challenge when it arises. Iraq's government faces such a challenge right now. If it grants Moktada al-Sadr the broad amnesty he seeks, it will embolden other thugs to extort amnesty for their crimes. If it does not negotiate with him, it will be pilloried as a puppet of the American occupation. The weak leaders whom Washington favors cannot deal with such a challenge.Barry Levine1142 Brown AveLafayette, CA 94549
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
