Letters to the Editor
burlydee
Published Letters: 283 Editor's Choice: 7
-
@ Moira kelley
[Read the article: Hillary Clinton throws economists off the bus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I get what you are saying but I don't equate pandering to being strong-willed. I think fighting for what you actually believe in is being strong-willed. Clinton is doing what Kerry did, move to the right on all positions - but you aren't going to out Republican the Republicans. You have to make an argument for your ideas.
As for ignoring McCain - Salon and the rest of the MSM has been ignoring that guys slip ups for years. His free-pass is something we agree on, but this isn't the place to discuss it. This is about actual differences between two Democratic candidates.
-
@ jebdlm
[Read the article: "There's a pattern emerging here"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]if someone legitimately believes HRC is using the "race card" (i hate that term) than they should just not say it? You seem to have a problem with the accusation, but if that is how people feel, than they have every right to express their frustration. I happen to believe there is ample evidence of the Clinton camp attempting to use race as a wedge issue. And for the record, no Democratic presidential candidate can win without the black vote. Now I doubt african-americans are going to vote McCain, but stay home... I wouldn't doubt that. This is all moot of course because HRC is done for. She has no chance of winning. So the choice is simple McCain or Obama. Who do you support?
And btw, Obama won the under 60 white vote. So its not like he doesn't have any support among white voters, just elderly white voters. I'm pretty sure McCain voted Clinton :)
-
Why I called Joan a racist
[Read the article: How much can John Edwards help Barack Obama?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't think I specifically called her a racist, I think I said she was practicing institutional racism, but perhaps I did. She seems quite sensitive to the charge, so I will explain.
It was around the time of the Jeremiah Wright flap, right after Wright gave his speech to the NAACP. Before than I had grown very weary of Joan's columns - the obsession with Obama's flaws, the total pass Joan gave to HRC for Bosnia, Ferraro, her white working class rhetoric, etc, etc. I had always chalked that bias up to partisan politics, but the harping on Wright gave me pause. Since than I have been unwilling to post here, because I don't feel my views are welcome. But something XH wrote, a poster who I like, caused me to stop lurking, and to respond -
XH said - "• As for you being a racist, I don't think you are, and I think others here should think twice before carelessly throwing the word "racist" around. (The same goes for those who would call others "sexist" without good reason.)
What others see as racism, I sometimes see as double-standards. I do think you seem to apply double-standards in some of your arguments. People sometimes will interpret double-standards as racism (or as sexism, if the double-standards are used against Clinton), but it's a stretch to assume one knows what motivates somebody's imbalanced application of principles."
I think XH hit the nail on the head. Being a black male, I see the double standard as racism. Mostly because it affects every part of my life.
When you read the speech Wright gave to the NAACP, and than read the column Joan wrote about it, than you can't come away with any other impression that she had horribly misconstrued his words. She had cherry-picked the most damaging remarks, quoted them out of context, and used them to smear Obama as if he had said those words themselves. She was openly courting the idea that Wright was a "scary black man" who needed to be feared. She was pushing the idea. Nevermind that the central point of his speech was that we need to accept our differences and come together - no - some of his thoughts were angry and Joan painted him with the scary black man brush. She talked about how he was guarded by the Nation of Islam (which of course, was false) as if the Nation of Islam was on par with the KKK. She did, and continues to this day, to ignore Wright's service to his community, his country, and his relationship with past presidents Johnson and Clinton. Joan showed, and continues to show, a complete inability to think beyond her limited experiences. She doesn't understand why Wright's word may resonate with some people, and she doesn't want to take the time to understand. He is scary, he is black, and is that all she cared to know. And nothing Obama said, or has said, or could say, would ever placate this fear. So maybe it doesn't reveal that Joan is a racist, but its prejudice, and it impact MY LIFE, like racism (not Joan's particular remarks, but the double standard in general).
After spending weeks constantly writing about Wright, to the total exclusion of any substantive issue, I could come to no other conclusion than there was some racism involved. The story was completely media driven. The effects on the campaign will always be debated, but it didn't seem to hurt Obama in Indiana or North Carolina. There wasn't a great outpour from readers to hear more about Wright, and in the pages of Salon it was the exact opposite. Sadly, African-Americans are often asked to "explain" the words or behaviors of there brethren as if they themselves had said those words or participated in that behavior. Just read any posts from ProudTexasGirl to get an idea of what I'm talking about.
I think Joan turned her back on progressive ideas by constantly attacking Wright. Joan was playing identity politics, and has been for quite some time. That she was attacked because of that, well, just comes along with the job.
-
@ Jameka
[Read the article: How much can John Edwards help Barack Obama?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Exactly who are you referring to? What post said that Obama doesn't need Hillary supporters? What exactly can we do to win you over?