Slighting the Greens and Kucinich.
The Green Party, on balance, still seems the best alternative for the progressive voter. Media indifference and hostility, however, have so far slowed its ability to attract support. The Progressive itself must sadly share responsibility for this: In the last year, none of its issues included a single article or interview focusing on the Greens to familiarize readers with their views. It is no wonder that there is scant enthusiasm for a third party challenge.
Gordon M. Sites
Sakura City, Japan
Thanks to the editors of The Progressive for spending an entire five sentences on the "electability" of Dennis Kucinich, whom The Progressive has repeatedly recognized as the most progressive candidate. "It's hard to appear electable when you get precious little ink or air time," you admitted in "Up for Grabs," before moving on to fawn over Howard Dean.
I thought it was the height of irony that a magazine could call itself The Progressive, extol Kucinich as the most progressive candidate, and yet refuse to grant him decent coverage. But now we find that same magazine bemoaning the lack of ink given to Kucinich. The Progressive has always recognized abuses of language when committed by the right; the article mentioned above uses quotes when referring to the "Clean Skies" and "Healthy Forests" legislation. I suggest that you continue to exercise the same honesty--bill yourself as The "Progressive. "
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Title Annotation:||Letters to the Editor|
|Article Type:||Letter to the Editor|
|Date:||Feb 1, 2004|
|Previous Article:||Public education for all.|
|Next Article:||Praise for Galeano.|
|Above the patriotic din. (The Word from Washington).|
|LETTERS IN THE EDITOR'S MAILBAG.|
|Up for grabs.|
|Kucinich's stands draw an audience.|
|Dennis Kucinich responds.|