Letters to the Editor

• The fierce warrior mother and the motherless son.

  [Read the article: Hillary Clinton's Texas-size moment ]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  I came away from the debate with the clear impression that Obama has the potential to be one of the great presidents of our country but this is not the right time. His heart and head are in the right place but he does not have his feet firmly under him. The adoring mobs screaming for the blood of Hillary are going to tear his heart out and throw him to the wolves. This is not his true nature and it could destroy him.

  Senator Clinton is willing and able to dig in and do the dirty and thankless job of laying the groundwork to clean up the mess that the Bush administration has left the country in and then handing the reins to Senator Obama when the time is ripe. Together they really could get the country back on track. I believe that these two people really care about each other and are pained by the position they have been forced into. The dying, corrupt patriarchy is a blood thirsty, wounded animal clawing at them.

  We must focus not on what Senator Clinton once was but on what she has become. She is no longer the consort, wife, handmaiden. She knows the enemy and has been forged in the crucible of the decaying system and has emerged as a pragmatic but fierce warrior-mother. Hillary and Obama need each other and we, as a country, need the two of them standing together. Hillary's "attacks" seem to me more like the chidings of a mother to a son compared to what he is going to be up against when she has been finally dragged to the town square and stoned to death. Perhaps she is just trying to toughen him.

  In the debates he looks to her, repeats what she says and then scrambles to find a way to differentiate himself from her. His heart is not in it. They are like a mother and son struggling with their relationship. I honestly believe that if she could speak her heart she would simply say "Your time has not yet come. Let me nurture you, protect you, show you the way." My heart bleeds for Barack. The mobs screaming for the blood of the mother and the mobs screaming for the blood of the son must not hold sway. The decayed, wounded, vengeful beast of the failing power structure is standing in the shadows, waiting.

  Marklee

  Permalink Friday, February 22, 2008 01:38 PM

• sigh

  [Read the article: Some free advice for Obama]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  I feel the need to weigh in here just to balance out all the hysteria toward Conason's article. These are all valid points that have been made elsewhere in the media and he did a good and fair job of pulling them all together.

  I have read in the past that Obama has not been demanding Clinton's tax returns because 1)she is not legally obligated to reveal them at this time and 2)he knows it could open him up to similar demands about his financial dealings. His campaign advisors, in an effort to "go negative", are forcing him on this issue, but I don't think he really wants to go there.

  From what I've seen, the so-called "attacks" by the Clinton campaign are basically dramatized arguments implying that she is more qualifed than Obama. They provoke questions that many voters think are valid. Obama needs to focus on these issues and respond to them effectively. I think he can continue to make a sound case for himself and I'm sorry all his foaming at the mouth supporters are demanding he go into attack mode. It weakens his stance and leaves him vulnerable to people thinking "aha, he can't convince us that he's better qualified so he's distracting us with this finger pointing stuff".

  Permalink Friday, March 7, 2008 01:59 PM

• The three three a.m. ads

  [Read the article: It's 3 a.m. Who do you want answering the phone?]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  Everyone keeps talking about the "3 A.M. ad" being so effective. I don't think so. It was a lame ad, kind of Hallmark like. BUT there were two other ads in very quick succession, one from the Obama campaign within 12 hours which was a VERY good response I thought:

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=879o1_pxO0c

  But was quickly undercut by a third ad from the Clinton campaign:

  http://youtube.com/watch?v=4l4_jMyV3mY

  I think the ad in which Obama talked about not convening the oversight committee MAY have done some damage, which he, unfortunatley set himself up for with his response ad.

  By the way, I personally do NOT think it was intentionally "darkened" - I have worked with film and video and this is a color adjustment issue - taking a brightly lit TV debate and trying to get it to match with the rest of the video. These ads were being thrown together in a matter of hours.

  Anyway, I wonder why the media only cites the initial ad? It was rather banal, no way could it have had that much effect. From what I've read, even Hillary and many on her staff weren't so crazy about it.

  Permalink Friday, March 7, 2008 03:25 PM

• To show her contempt for the blood sucking hordes

  [Read the article: Mirror, mirror on the Wall]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  I have only perused the numerous headlines about Mrs. Spitzer, but read little of the articles as they seem absurdly inappropriate.

  If she wasn't standing there she would have been hounded to death by photographers stalking her everywhere she went. In spite of everyone saying this was humiliating for her, it allowed her far more dignity and control than being chased down the street by the media whores.

  To journalists everywhere: stop poring over this woman's life and intentions. It's none of our business. It's unseemly, pathetic and unprofessional.

  Permalink Friday, March 14, 2008 03:15 PM