My letter in NYTIMES

[DrBB]

Hey, been a while since I got one in. This is like number ten I think. Alas, the whole al Qaqaa thing is going to be swept under OBL, I suppose. Still, for what it's worth:

Re "Video Shows GI's at Weapon Cache":

The primary, stated reason for the invasion was to remove Saddam's WMDs for the safety of the U.S. and the world. Al Qaqaa was a known WMD-related site. The barrels of explosives--as the video shows, and as David Kay unequivocally declared to Aaron Brown on CNN--bore the IAEA seal, indicating nuclear-weapons related materials.

I'm just a citizen, not a military strategist, but I simply don't understand. How could our war plan not include a list of such sites and clear orders and procedures for troops to identify and secure them? Wasn't that what the whole war was about? How could we have had a war plan in which that was not job one? What was our plan then?

I am utterly baffled.

Actual letter to be slightly edited down from this, but they read it to me over the phone so I don't recall the exact emendations.

On edit: it will be run in tomorrow's edition. I always seem to get in on Saturday for some reason.

[stray cat]

1. Congratulations!

Good job on the letter. New York Times is excellent.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

2. LOL!

"New York Times is excellent."

You must not read The Daily Howler.

[nodehopper]

7. "NYT is excellent" well, I woulnd´t go that far...

[JNelson6563]

17. It is excellent in that they

are read by so many. Sometimes they are as big of whores as the Moonie Times tho'. (*See "Judith Miller" blather pre-Iraq invasion--she was the mouth-piece for Bush misAdministration & their buddy Chalabi).

Julie

[Infomaniac]

3. Excellent.

And I must say that I am utterly baffled too.

[DrBB]

5. Yeah, I figured I'd boil it down to that

Obviously the cynical part of me is not surprised in the least by this latest piece of fuckuppery, but the stance of the flummoxed citizen seemed to have the most oomph. And it IS how I feel, among other things.

[realFedUp]

4. hey Doc, congrats....eom

[GreenPartyVoter]

6. Very cool!

[idiosyncratic]

8. Excellent letter, but it is too logical.

The people who are going to vote for *bush will never get it.



If Ghouliani can state that these were the WMD and therefor the war was justified . . . and not follow that to the conclusion you arrived at -- that they should have been secured -- the average *bush voter *really* won't get it.

:argh:

[Maiden England]

9. Great letter!

and well done for getting printed!

[DrBB]

10. Actually, today's NYTimes

Vanity kick. I get one.

[Sinnerman]

11. Why has Kerry Stopped talking about missing weapons cache

He was drilling the point Tuesday, Wednesday, & Thursday and then all of a sudden not a peep out of Kerry or Edwards???? Why???
This was the october surprise he needed to drive home it's worth at least 2-3 points easy

[DrBB]

14. Maybe the "12 hour moratorium"?

TPM ripped Kerry's communications director (?) for telling the press Kerry would take a 12 hour moratorium on criticizing the chimpanzee, in light of the OBL tape.

I suppose you could view it as a bulwark against "Aiding the enemy!" charges--a symbolic action that still leaves roughly 48 hours to point out that, guess what, THAT'S the real enemy and he's still at large thanks to *'s Tora Bora fuckup. Best, anyway, if surrogates can do it, and is there a moratorium for them? But it seems like letting your damn guard down a bit. Josh says the subtext is all about strength and being tough, and Kerry has to show toughness, but Kerry's crew might be right on this one. I think his instincts have borne out better than a lot of people expected.

[H2O Man]

12. That's Great!!!

I think that a LTTE is one of the single most important grass roots political actions that any citizen can make. And while they are always very important, in the last two weeks before an election, the LTTE section becomes one of the two most intensely read parts of any paper. The republican party knows that these letters tend to have a lot of influence on the undecided voters, and hence they have organized campaigns. Your letter shows that we can out-do them at this, too! I think that it is so important. Thank you.

[DrBB]

13. Interesting--hadn't heard this before:

in the last two weeks before an election, the LTTE section becomes one of the two most intensely read parts of any paper.

Interesting factoid--where did you get that from?

I don't know that writing these is as important as direct canvassing or GOTV work, but it is what I can do, so I do it. I write a ton of 'em. My own thought is that it's obviously worked for the rightwing, and in a lot of cases quantity counts as much or more than quality. I always try to respond to slanted news coverage and whatnot, irrespective of whether it has any chance of getting published. If they don't feel the heat, they won't change. At the very least we can try to offset the Wurlitzer a bit. They need to know the wingers aren't the only passionate, upset people out here.

[H2O Man]

15. Letters to the Editor

I've taken numerous courses in political science, and some in media, but I didn't learn it there. I have had the opportunity to work at different levels on a number of campaigns in the past thirty years. I live in rural, upstate New York, so many elections are between a republican and an "independent" (a republican who lost in the primary, but feels (s)he can win in the general election). And so many years ago, I worked for two "independents." And that's where I learned the art of flooding newspapers with letters as close to election time as possible. The goal is to get as many in as possible at the exact point where the opposition can not respond with letters, because of space and time deadlines. The method is to have a small group of about four of the best writers sit down, and list the top topics that work for their candidate. Then write simple, three paragraph letters to be distributed to a ready-made network of people (who will hand-write or re-type the letters, so it is not obvious that they were made by the same person). They are the basic letter: paragraph one has the introduction that states the issue in three sentences; paragraph two is four sentences that explains how the issue effects the reader/community; paragraph three is three sentences that say that this candidate will help solve the problem. Obviously, there are variations of the letter.

The letters are distributed, and sent in a wave to the local/regional newspapers. Think in terms, for example, of the war in Iraq: if a person, no matter how good an author, writes a letter with 10 "main" points, it doesn't get printed, or it is edited, and fewer people read it. But have ten people send a three paragraph letter, each covering one "main" topic, and most will be printed, and it creates an entirely different image for the reader.

I've often said there are three groups in an election: <1> those who always support you; <2> those who always oppose you; and <3> those who are "undecided." The third group is the only one that a candidate needs to concentrate on (usually) in the campaign. Thus, the LTTE should be less of an appeal to group #1 (unless turn-out is a major concern); should ignore #2; and should be made to sound like a common sense approach to the #3 undecideds.

[DrBB]

18. Fascinating. I've had a pretty good record sussing the NYTimes...

...I've done some professional editing and I know a bit about rhetorical analysis. Part of the fun is honing my sense of what they'll take. And keeping it short always helps, not least because there's frequently a need to fill in that last bit of column. Like I said, I've had a lot more scores than most people I know with the Times.

You do have to craft the thing. I figured they'd find this a useful perspective to have represented--not outraged partisan but honest, befuddled citizen. I thought it was a pretty good read on what might fly, and it's always pleasant to get it right.

on edit: btw, meant to say I've appreciated your Plame threads a lot, though I haven't been one who weighs in on them much.

[H2O Man]

19. I think it's an art ....

and when it is properly done, it can have a beneficial effect on how the editors and reporters view the news. Many people have the mistaken notion that you need to give all the answers in a letter. I think that in many cases, it is better to simply formulate the question in the context of your choice .... this gets the reader to think about the issue. It allows them to decide. And that is the essence of grass roots democracy -- allowing everyone the luxury of thinking for themselves.

Your letter was a great example of the art of LTTE. It is obvious that you have experience organizing your thoughts in a manner that makes other people think. I admire that, and hope that the Plame threads have made people think, too.

[vetwife]

16. Congratuations ! This is terrific !

[SpiralHawk]

20. A LTTE in the NYT = a Home Run in the Bigs

Congrats, and thanks.

"President Bush has said that he does not need approval from the UN to wage war, and I'm thinking, well, hell, he didn't need the approval of the American voters to become president, either." -- David Letterman

[KT2000]

21. Found it on the site

good letter - short and to the point.