The following is a selection of letters to the WSWS in response to the October 16 article 'Why is the New York Times supporting Kenneth Starr?' by Barry Grey.
Thank you for placing your essays on the WWW.
I have been following your coverage of the Starr scandal which has been excellent. Your essays, in clear plain language, are lucid reminders of the dangerous turn the US has taken. Today's essay on the New York Times was brilliant, and sad in a very meaningful way for some (like me) who had hoped that Clinton would infuse some energy into liberal and left-leaning ideas. Alas, I think you are right that liberalism is reaching a dead end.
Thank you so much again for your writings and posting them on the WWW. Please keep up the great work.
New York City
Dear Barry Grey,
Thank you for your observation on what the New York Times is doing during this critical period of our history. It is sad to read how the Times is humiliating our president. Some times the news media thinks some of us are foolish and have no understanding of what is happening. For that reason they think they can dish out anything for us to consume without reflecting on it. I wish the people would stop reading the Times and their support for Kenneth Starr and read those articles that are for the common good and not for the rich. Thank you for your observation.
I strongly support the Times in the Clinton matter. My impression is that you liberals would take an entirely different stance on the Clinton scandal were his policies not to your liking. Your views seem to reflect an attitude of expediency over principle and the Marxist view that unfairness now is ok if a greater good will be accomplished in the future.
I am sorry to see that the New York Times has supported Ken Starr and his ruthless and shameless investigation on President Clinton. Starr reminds me of the investigators during China's cultural revolution. And the Times has been cheering him on just like People's Daily.
Why is the New York Times supporting Kenneth Starr?
[16 October 1998]