Letters to the Editor
Gwool
Published Letters: 366 Editor's Choice: 40
-
A pair of Comfortable Shoes
[Read the article: Will fate grant John McCain a do-over?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Only two politicians have ever given speeches I heard that energized me so much the hair was standing up on the back of my neck, and McCain was one of them.
Back in 2000.
I still have the McCain bumper sticker on my 1999 Ford truck now driven by my son. It's tattered and worn, but it simply will not come off that bumper sticker.
Maybe he is the answer in that he is somewhat old and tired, but certainly has battle experience. We don't know what the hell to do in Iraq, but we know we have to do something. Arguing over how we GOT there is not going to do a damn thing to figure out the best possible scenario for getting ourselves out of there.
Our Military intelligentsia is always trained to fight the last war. Figuring out how to hedge row hop happened through on the field promotions after D-Day, not from any training from WWI field manuals.
The Powell Doctrine was in direct response to vietnam in that it called for us to never enter a battle unless we were committed to throwing everything we had at it. It worked in Iraq I, where we didn't seek to occupy the damn place.
Rumsfeld was trying to reorganize the military bureaucracy BEFORE 9/11 hit and he used Iraq as a proving ground for his more technology reliant military strategy which left us with prescious few boots on the ground.
McCain was always very forthright in advocating the Powell doctrine. It is no coincidence that he and Powell were both vietnam war veterans and saw what happens when you underplay your hand on the battle field.
Russert drilled McCain based on video footage saying he would stay in Iraq for 100 years if he had to. McCain very deftly expanded on the statement by referencing the myriad of countries where we have troops stationed today. (Japan, Korea, Turkey, Germany, etc.) He said the issue wasn't whether or not we had troops in a country, the question was whether or not we were experiencing casualties having troops in the country and suggested the surge was PART of the reason why the casualty count has dropped. The Iraqis finally realizing Al Qaeda is a worse occupier than we are has a lot to do with it as well, there's no doubt, but without the surge we wouldn't have pushed them out of some of their strongholds.
So maybe the older, tireder, and hopefully wiser McCain *IS* what we need today. He knows what it's like to be in battle and to be brutalized in captivity.
He's got my vote at the moment. I am not as fervent in my support for the man, but he still has my vote. He may be just what we need right now to figure out a way to piece that country back together while minimizing the loss of life in the process.
-
The Gloves Could Be Coming Off
[Read the article: Shake-up in Clinton campaign: Maggie Williams comes aboard]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If Clinton loses this thing in NH, I would not at all be surprised to see her take the gloves off and beat the living bejeezus out of Obama.
Her tears, which I believe to have been genuine, reminded me of the picture of Nancy Kerrigan after getting clubbed by Tonya Harding's goon, blubbering, "Why me? Whyyyyyyyyy?"
It's about her. Bill has been out there whining about the Media giving Obama a Hall Pass. Before it was the right wing media that went after the poor, persecuted Clintons. Now, apparently it is the left wing media.
If she loses, she will unload everything she has on that guy, as that is the only way the Clintons know how to react. I also think it will backfire on her badly.
National polls have these two even nationally. If Obama wins, there should be a modest bounce. If Clinton wins, it will be a function of the expectation game as to what happens to her bounce or at least stop her free fall.
She will get nasty before she does anything else. She and Bill can't help themselves. It's the only way they know how to campaign.
-
A Funny Thing Happened on the way to the Dethroning
[Read the article: Illustrative New Hampshire snippets]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]At 9:05 pm the major outlets are practically choking every time they mention Clinton being in the lead with about 23% of the precincts. Fox talked of their exit polls suggesting Hillary was toast, while CNN has been keeping quiet as has the major talk radio station.
Maybe the old girl will repel the attack from the upstart. Parsing the poll data had me convinced Clinton was going to get clobbered with Obama getting a huge bounce going out of it. I was convinced the Clintons would then unleash the fires of hell against this guy stopping at nothing to negatively define him.
Bill was out there today whining about the unfair media not being hard enough on Obama, which is so damned consistent with the persecution complex this couple has when it comes to media coverage. The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy was evil and now the Liberal Media was promoting Obama which was unfair. Is there any media that is "good" in their view if it does not sing Clinton virtues?
So tonight is fascinating to me, as it seems to defy all the poll data. When did the Clinton resurgence happen? What triggered it? Was it the teary-eyed moment in the diner that had me thinking of Nancy Kerrigan whining "Why me, whyyyyyyy!" when Tonya Harding's goon clobbered her? Was it a calculated moment akin to Big Bill's ability to cry on cue? Was it an impromptu moment that struck a chord with perimenapausal women everywhere who vascillate between tolerating their husband and wanting to tear their murderous faces off at the slightest change in estrogen?
What the hell happened? Come on Glenn, figure it out for me, you schmuck. How to the swarming media hoard blow the poll tracking, or what was it in the last 36 hours that swung it.
Or should I just wait for all the precincts to report and then try to figure it out?