Open Letter to Rosie O'Donnell: Don't Back Down Girlfriend!

(UPDATE #2: Rosie speaks - watch it here)

(UPDATE #1: It was suggested that Rosie replace Don Imus at MSNBC - I agree, and after all turnabout is fair play especially when you're a media outlet holding yourself out to be impartial journalistically you may as well give another perspective a fair and equal shot.)

Okay, I went to Rosie's Blog to see what she's got to say about things. While there, I wanted to send a quick note of support for her strong and principled stance on a variety of controversial issues.

Unfortunately, I couldn't find a way to send her my support via email from her site, so what the hell, this is my open letter to Rosie, and it's a short one:

Dear Rosie:

Don't you dare back down girlfriend. Some one in the media's got to have some balls on the important issues of the day, and it looks like it's going to have to be you.

Had you been on TV speaking your mind, bringing up the issues and stimulating some semblance of a conversation back in 2001 thru today, maybe things would have turned out differently regarding the 9/11 investigation, Iraq, and the criminal republicans and their complicit media.

We need you. We need your voice and the controversy it arouses (at least among white middle-aged men). We need you maybe now more than ever, so DON'T YOU FUCKING DARE BACK DOWN and let the uninformed, brainwashed, stupid lemmings like Elizabeth Hasselbitch get away with their harmful drivel.

Now, what we need is a new version of the Rosie show where you run the damn show and it's all about these issues, your perspective, alternative information and fact. You'd be like the counter-Coultergeist - it would be AWESOME!

With respect,

--Shella

Open Letter to Alberto Gonzales Published in Washington Post (from his '82 Harvard Classmates!)

Dude. When your classmates disown you, you know it's bad. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy in my opinion. Enjoy everyone.

Dear Attorney General Gonzales:

Twenty-five years ago we, like you, graduated from Harvard Law School. While we arrived via many different paths and held many different views, we were united in our deep respect for the Constitution and the rights it guaranteed. As members of the post-Watergate generation who chose careers in law, we understood the strong connection between our liberties as Americans and the adherence of public offi cials to the law of the land. We knew that the choice to abide by the law was even more critical when public officials were tempted to take legal shortcuts. Nowhere were we taught that the ends justified the means, or that freedoms for which Americans had fought and died should be set aside when inconvenient or challenging. To the contrary: our most precious freedoms, we learned, need defending most in times of crisis.

So it has been with dismay that we have watched your cavalier handling of our freedoms time and again. When it has been important that legal boundaries hold unbridled government power in check, you have instead used pretextual rationales and strained readings to justify an ever-expanding executive authority. Witness your White House memos sweeping aside the Geneva Conventions to justify torture, endangering our own servicemen and women; witness your advice to the President effectively reading Habeas Corpus out of our constitutional protections; witness your support of presidential statements claiming inherent power to wiretap American citizens without warrants (and the Administration’s stepped-up wiretapping campaign, taking advantage of those statements, which continues on your watch to this day); and witness your dismissive explanation of the troubling firings of numerous U.S. Attorneys, and their replacement with others more "loyal" to the President’s politics, as merely "an overblown personnel matter." In these and other actions, we see a pattern. As a recent editorial put it, your approach has come to symbolize "disdain for the separation of powers, civil liberties and the rule of law."

As lawyers, and as a matter of principle, we can no longer be silent about this Administration’s consistent disdain for the liberties we hold dear. Your failure to stand for the rule of law, particularly when faced with a President who makes the aggrandized claim of being a unitary executive, takes this country down a dangerous path.

Your country and your President are in dire need of an attorney who will do the tough job of providing independent counsel, especially when the advice runs counter to political expediency. Now more than ever, our country needs a President, and an Attorney General, who remember the apt observation attributed to Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." We call on you and the President to relent from this reckless path, and begin to restore respect for the rule of law we all learned to love many years ago.

THE SIGNATORIES ARE ALL MEMBERS OF THE HARVARD LAW SCHOOL CLASS OF 1982

Hat tip to Ioo from DailyKos for the alert.