Letters to the Editor
burlydee
Published Letters: 297 Editor's Choice: 7
-
billcap
[Read the article: Newest Clinton ad plays on security fears]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]here's what makes sense -
if you frame the debate as "Who is going to keep us safer from those big bad terrorists" than you are buying into Republicans framing of the issue. And i think this type of ad appeals more to McCain voters than to Hillary or Obama voters. I don't think you can out-Republican a Republican on national security. Democrats have been trying to do that for 8 years, and it hasn't worked. What has worked is what we did in 2006. We recast the debate. We made it about judgment and priorities, not about fear. If Hillary thinks that playing the fear game is okay in Democratic primary, than she better not complain about it in a Republican primary.
Bill Clinton had the perfect response to this type of fear mongering, (special thanks to dkmoorhead)
"Now, one of Clinton's laws of politics is this. If one candidate is trying to scare you and the other one is try get you to think, if one candidate is appealing to your fears and the other one is appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope."
About the race issue - i just gave you my first impression of the ad. I'm sorry I have an opinion. The ad with sleeping children nestled in their beds - these type of ads have been used by republicans to depict Democrats as being soft on crime for a number of years. Usually they come with some mention of Willie Horton, or the scary crack heads or sex predators down the street. More often than not the fear that is conjured is the fear of the proverbial other. In the course of political history that other has been African-Americans. I feel no joy that the other that Americans must fear when they sleep has become Arabs and Muslims.
If you believe this is the way Hillary should run her campaign, hey, go for it, vote for her. If you see fear in every shadow and a terrorists behind every bush, go ahead, support her to your hearts content. But I don't want my politicians trying to scare the shit out of me to get a vote.
You can call me stupid or a Hillary hater or what not. But I calls em like I sees em.
-
I read Gonzalez's website
[Read the article: The audacity of narcissism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]And he has some pretty good critiques of Obama. His political views probably match my own more than any of the major candidates. But at the end of the day, this election is too important to waste votes "challenging" the 2 party system.
If Nader and Gonzalez were serious about changing America they would do what Bernake (sp?) and Lieberman have done - they would run as independents for Congress. They would take the time to actually build a 3rd party.
The one quibble I have with Gonzalez is on CAFA. As a law student who studied it, I just think its patently unfair to make defendants defend 20 different class actions suits about the same behavior across 20 or so states. And the way jurisdiction rules work plaintiffs could pick and choose the "best" courts and laws to attack defendants. I think Obama is right on that one. Its not his fault the Federal judiciary is packed with conservative judges who may be hostile to class actions, democrats need to win some damn presidential elections!
-
skylark??
[Read the article: The audacity of narcissism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I find it odd that you would complain about Democrats jumping off a cliff, when you've got your parachute in hand.
Bill Clinton ran twice under these same complex rules, same caucus/primary system, same Texas, same problem of other candidates and their supporters saying bad things about his campaign... You sound as if you want to take your ball and go home because your team didn't win.
Support the Democratic nominee. Judges, the Environment, the economy, Church-State separation - these are the things, I think, most democrats can agree that any Democratic president will be much better than any Republican president.
So don't jump off that cliff. Your parachute has too many holes.
-
susan sunflower
[Read the article: The audacity of narcissism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]grow up. you are arguing with 20 people on a blog. No one hear represents the Obama campaign. Support the candidate you like, not some people on the internet.
-
Howard Kurtz's response - decide for yourselves
[Read the article: What Howard Kurtz means by "media scrutiny"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Arlington, Va.: Obama's a cokehead? Including that quote -- without comment -- seems way over the line. It's one thing to write about the press being too easy on Obama. I agree they have been; just as they have been too easy on McCain. It's quite another to "balance" that with scurrilous, defamatory spin and name-calling. Don't you owe your readers an apology?
Howard Kurtz: Part of my job is to tell you what's being said out there in the blogosphere and on talk radio, which is occasionally over the top. That includes those making an issue of Obama's adolescent drug use (which he was the first to disclose in his autobiography), the use of his middle name and so on. (Remember that some Hillary surrogates also made reference to Barack's past drug use until they saw it was backfiring.) I'm not endorsing this stuff, but it's not my job to pretend that it doesn't exist.