Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
fightthetheocracy!
Published Letters: 1591 Editor's Choice: 27
Why can't you let Hillary go? She was never going to be the nominee. For one thing, she is a type A personality. They don't take the back seat well. Second of all, just as many Hillary supporters took the sexism of the media (as in NOT Obama) personally, many Obama supporters took, and still take, Hillary's sense of entitlement personally. We honestly don't beleive that she would work for the best interests of the party or the country. Bill Clinton had little or nothing to do with it.
Third of all, it is important that a president and his running mate get along. Quite frankly, I don't think that's possible with these two, there's too much bad blood. Not the least of which being the fact that many Hillary supporters think that Obama "owes" her the nomination. For what? What makes her more important then anyone else running for the job? Becuase she was his opponent? Based on that logic, he also owes Edwards, Kucinich, Biden, Gravel and whoever else was in that media circus in January. This is exactly the sense of entitlement issue we are talking about.
Hillary's campaign is over, it is time to move on. If you can't do that, then the rest of us aren't going to wait for you to catch up. This is how politics works. Your candidate runs, they lose, you move on and support the nominee. You don't keep dragging it out to try and prove that your more important then every other voter, like Hillary supporters appear to be doing now. Obama doesn't "owe" Hillary voters anything. They can either get behind him and support the smae causes their candidate did, or they can spend the next four years with a chip on their shoulders hoping that the next presidnet fails and it vindicates their bitterness. Needless to say, the first option sounds more appealing.
The republicans have always been two steps ahead of the democrats as far as elections go. If they know that younger voters are more likely to turn out this year then last time, don't think they won't try and find a way to sabatoge the elections like they did in 2004. Long lines in swing states, "voter I.D. cards", conviently losing people's registration, voter intimidation in minority nieghborhoods, you name it. Republicnas have no conscience, they will do whatever it takes to win. There is no dirty trick beneath them. If we truly want the youth vote to turn out, we had better make sure they can first.
Either they support the same things she did or they don't, thus, they would back the candidate that does also. Why is this so hard for some people? The only reason I can think of for why some Hillary hold-outs would not back Obama now is either:
1) They were backing Hillary for reasons other then actual policy which is kinda stupid if you think about it.
or
2) They are really republican trolls out to sabotage Obama and hoping at the last minute the DNC will change it's mind at the convention and they will get to go up against Hillary and use all those horrible things they've been saying about her all these years in the general election. It's no secret she was the talk radio favorite.
Guess which one of these I think it is.
No one backs ALL of a candidates policies because the world is far from ideal. But we still learn to live with the candidates that we are given. In 2000 many people backed Nader because he represented how they felt better then Gore did. I don't doubt this, but in the end, becuase so many votes were siphoned away from Gore, they got a president who didn't represent ANY of their ideals. Some are better then none.
I know that Ms. Zacharek must be tired of super-hero movies but I certainly am looking forward to next March when we'll get "Watchmen". Now if only Superman could get a decent reboot.
and guess that this isn't the first time that he commented on something he doesn't know anything about. Of course we all know what an expert on marriage he is what with the three he put behind him.
Exactly!
A bunch of dried up old hens can't accept the fact that their candidate wasn't entitled to the nomination just because of her last name or gender or whatever. They want to get back at "mans world" and don't care about anything else. They pull shit like this and then complain about being accused of entitlement
his show would be off the air by now. Ditto "Faux News". I've often wondered why someone hasn't done that before. If we can't get a microphone like the right's, lets take theirs away. Win at whatever cost seems to be working for the right, the "advance orders" on this book show that. While we're at it, let's sue any media outlet that takes this book seriously without picking it apart. If the media isn't going to do it's job, let's punish them for it.
After Obama gets elected, he can investigate all these televangelists and where there political support goes. It's time to bring down the right wing noise machine by whatever means necessary.
Not that I don't like Star Wars (I wanted to be Luke when I was six) but wouldn't something like this be better on DVD? In a summer filled with Iron Men and Bat Men is this really theater worthy? This seems like something to be released closer to Christmas for something to take the kids to after all the presents are opened. Remember "Batman: Mask of the Phantasm?" Warner Bros. knew better then to try and put it up against Jurrasic Park and whatever the hell else was playing back then.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
