Letters to the Editor
Uncle Fester
Published Letters: 1346 Editor's Choice: 12
-
@Kate Saint or Fraud
[Read the article: Geraldine Ferraro still needs to apologize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"The argument is not that I'm pristine, because I'm swimming in the same muddy water," Obama said. "The argument is that I know it's muddy and I want to clean it up."
This is an entirely self serving 'argument'; it actually reinforces the claim that Obama has tried to position himself as a superior being forced to enter the human muck in order to save it from itself.
I couldn't disagree more. Are you saying that anybody that wants to improve the life of others is either a saint or a fraud?
You are really reaching here.
There really seems to be a problem here of self-described liberal thinkers that are only capable of binary thinking: good or bad. The lack of nuance is appalling. Everbody has the seeds of light and darkness inside their soul. That's why I never thought Ferraro should apologize, even though I disagreed with her, and I can understand the Rev Wright even though I think he tends to swim in the deep end of the pool.
-
@Reality Do you believe him?
[Read the article: Geraldine Ferraro still needs to apologize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I probably don't believe him. But I've actually gone to the church website and poked around (www.tucc.org). It doesn't look like a stronghold of militant black power to me. Since I don't go to his church, I have no way of knowing if sermons like this are typical or infrequent. As I said before, the Rev reminds me of a lot of old black preachers. And I know a lot of you are excited that evidence of Obama's mortality has been revealed, but I can't help thinking we have bigger fish to fry. Hillary isn't exactly lillywhite or pristine either.
-
@maureen: Look before you leap:
[Read the article: Geraldine Ferraro still needs to apologize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Maureen, I think you're in the deep end of the pool on this one. It's clear to me that Obama is looking to move beyond the politics of the '60's and '70s and has said so repeatedly. This would include figures like Rev. Wright and Ferraro. I agree with this, because I think these figures are stuck in the past. Because they are stuck in the past, their ability to effect postive change today is much diminished. Personally, if I had to listen to the Rev Wright every Sunday recycle the same of old litany, and see how things were not getting done, and how nothing was changing, I would seek a new direction myself.
I found it strange that Barack Obama was so hung-up about his racial identity as he was born and, for the most part, raised in Hawaii where only 20% of the population is white and his skin colour would have blended in far more easily with the majority of people there than if he'd had red hair and fair, freckled skin.
It's true that Hawai'i is an Island paradise. But it also has it's share of ethnic tensions between native hawaiians, asians (mostly japanese) and white people (haole). Just because it's the Island of Pele, doesn't mean you can escape human nature. So it's very not strange.
-
@NYShooter The Super delegates
[Read the article: Geraldine Ferraro still needs to apologize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I agree with that we need to find out if Obama can take a punch or if Hillary has the skills to take it to the next level. But I haven't gotten my arms around the Super Delegate issue yet, other than to think that some are craven. Was it acceptable for a large number of Super Delegates to pre declare for Hillary or Obama? Isn't that a rubber stamp? On the flip side, shouldn't a Senator or other politician be allowed to endorse a candidate? Is it really weak kneed to change your position based on the opinions of your constituients? It could be.
Shouldn't the Super delegates be able to step in at any time if they feel the interests of the party as a whole are being damaged?
And that’s the issue of the Super delegates, the reason for their creation, their duties and their responsibilities. I mean, simple logic would dictate that if, assuming the “math” is similar to today, and we anoint the “leader” as our Candidate based on those numbers, who needs the Super delegates? Were they conceived to be Super Rubber Stampers? They were created for just a situation like this and charged with the duty of exercising their best judgment as to what’s in the best interest of our country, and our party. I have been quite disheartened that so many weak kneed delegates have so early succumbed to the momentary wave of emotions and pledged themselves, or changed their preference so as to be on the “right” side. I hope the voters don’t forget this dereliction of duty the next time these guys and girls are up for reelection.
-
@Shawn: You forgot something
[Read the article: Geraldine Ferraro still needs to apologize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Hi Shawn, I know you like to diss the caucus process. But you keep forgetting the popular vote where Obama has over 13M votes and leads by over 700,000. So there must be a lot more lefties out there.
Let's vote MI and FL and see what happens to the numbers then. When Hillary leads the popular vote, you will have a case.
Shooter, most of the public has already spoken
Caucuses skewed with a a handful of lefties in states like Idaho and Vermont is NOT the public.
If you haven't learned that by now over the past 30 years I don't know what to tell you.