Letters to the Editor
softdog
Published Letters: 186 Editor's Choice: 8
-
Wow...Were's Joan Walsh when you actually need her?
[Read the article: Opus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Breathed has used the anxiety closet joke for decades now - and the few times the character's anxieties *don't* reflect his own opinion, he spells it out. The man is not subtle.
I find it interesting Walsh is silent on this. Perhaps Salon has this policy of not commenting on its own, but man.
I know Breathed enjoys being "provocative" at times, but its fascinating how frequently that provocation involves dumping on the less powerful, especially women. It's sort of the frat boy version of not being PC.
-
Wow.
[Read the article: This Modern World]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So out of all the images in that strip. Salon chooses the one with Obama.
Funny that.
-
Dishonest Joan: It was a smackdown - of the Republicans.
[Read the article: The Brazile-Begala smackdown]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Note that Walsh doesn't include what Brazile said prior to the excerpt - just like other sensationalized posts about this exchange.
Walsh provides no links to the full transcript or video and I question if her version what Brazile really said,
In reality, this wasn't a smackdown, it wasn't "a glimpse of the deep tensions rending the Democratic Party".
It was "a vigorous agreement" about how the Democratic party has always been "not the monochromatic Republican Party".
The only smackdown came when Brazile and Begala united to strike at Republican spin.
This wasn't "worrisome politics" except for fans of one candidate who can't stand discussion which respects both. Or if you're in the habit of using overblown language to get reader reaction.
Maybe what disturbed Joan was Brazile's point that Obama couldn't have gotten this far if his appeal was limited to stereotypes.
Only fanatics believe either candidate has an exclusive coalition.
Walsh has become a lazy media type who imposes her predetermined dramatic narrative - Democrats doomed by division - no matter what is observed.
She could still express her worries and/or prefer Clinton in this post, but her dishonest presentation makes it infuriating.
-
Joan's lack of blogger ethics.
[Read the article: The Brazile-Begala smackdown]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"There was no transcript of that segment of the hour available when I posted" - then you shouldn't have summarized what she said, the context would have made sense without it.
Or you could have waited until it was available. As it was, you provided NO LINKS to where you got this transcript or to the original video.
That's not ethical blogging, that's posting before thinking, something Joan does a lot.
-
@ncawley and others
[Read the article: The Brazile-Begala smackdown]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's OBVIOUS You Obama-Addicts Don't Read.....
Maybe if you Obama-addicts were not so filled with hate you could read the article.
This article states the words spewed by Brazile and Begala only. Jane> is just reporting on what was said.
-- ncawley
Y'know, if you're gonna name call and accuse people of not reading, you really need to learn to read.
Here's a hint anyone wanting to make their case: hurling terms like "obama-addicts" pretty much establishes yourself as part of The Stupid.
This goes double for Obama fan who resort to Chappaquiddick jokes about killing Clinton - this only proves the insults correct.
-
Wow. This is almost as irritating as stuff against Obama.
[Read the article: What does Hillary want?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So now Salon writes something about Clinton which indulges in an absurd, somewhat insulting comparisons.
There's actually little comparison between Robb/Wilder and Clinton/Obama - federal wiretapping charges alone is a vast chasm. It's all just a set up to say Clinton should give up now and a list of demans. How nice of Dan Conley to speak for her.
There is a dreg of the usual bias in that it's still All About Clinton. Obama seems an afterthought. But it seems Salon's negativity is universal.
Here's a thought: How about taking a week's break and featuring posts/articles about anything but the horse race? They can even be stupid and navel gazing, just as long as they don't mention the primary.
-
@ back290's
[Read the article: What does Hillary want?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I WILL VOTE FOR MACCAIN AND AGAINST ANY CANDIDATE BACKING OBAMA
-- back290's
So you are going to vote for:
-Banning abortion, 100 years of Iraq occupation, More wars in the middle east, No health care plan, No environmental plan, No relief for bankrupt homeowners, Pandering to right wing religious politics and 4 to 8 more years of Bush policies and corruption.
You are willing to destroy your country and cut your own throat in a tantrum about the process. What kind of emotional moron are you?
If Clinton gets the nomintation I'm voting for her - no matter how she gets it. If Obama gets the nomintation I'm voting for him - no matter how he gets it.
Intimidation, back room dealing, fuzzy math. I don't care at this point. Both nominees are conservative centrists, neither one is my first choice, but either one is better than Republican rule which will destroy our country if not the planet.
-
Okay, How Will Joan Explain This?
[Read the article: Clinton: "I am in this race"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-05-07-clintoninterview_N.htm
"I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on," she said in an interview with USA TODAY. As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article "that found how Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me."
"There's a pattern emerging here," she said.
Clinton rejected any idea that her emphasis on white voters could be interpreted as racially divisive. "These are the people you have to win if you're a Democrat in sufficient numbers to actually win the election. Everybody knows that."