Letters to the Editor
dirtdawg
Published Letters: 8
-
The War Room seems Pro Hillary and Kind of Sucks Now
[Read the article: Reexamining the Ferraro fracas]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sorry, but I came to the War Room several times a day when Tim was writing. He was even-handed and a great, concise, writer.
Several times since, I have had the suspicion that the War Room has turned pro Hillary. This post leaves no doubt in my mind. I mean, there's just no defense for this kind of crap. None. Zero. Ferraro was way, way out of line and people responded accordingly(with the exception of Hillary Clinton).
And what's this about?:
But some intangibles, including his race but also his good looks, his age and his charisma, have mattered to at least some small degree for Obama, as they would have for -- and I imagine I can't stress this part enough -- any other candidate of any race.
How about some "intangibles" like, say, a great ground game, strategic genius, big ideas, incredible coalition building, phenominal leadership abilities and, oh yeah, class? Could it be possible that Obama has bested several other candidates and is kicking the paintsuit of his main contender with sheer skill and intelligence?
Call me when this column is back on track.
-
Wow. Salon takes the overwhelming negative reaction to this story as a sign that it's front page material?
[Read the article: Why Hillary Clinton should be winning]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Last night I was amused by the rightly negative reaction to this idiot article. Today, I am disgusted to see it has moved to the "headline" position and insulted by the editor's total disregard for their readers' opinions. I guess Salon is little more than a trashy tabloid. The kind who will do whatever it takes for attention, positive or negative.
Sad.
-
Don't dismiss my feelings because I'm a man.
[Read the article: Hard drive]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I didn't even read the article because I don't bother with things that refer to males as "creatures." Up yours, y'know? I'm writing this more as a ricochet off the previous comments.
Men are allowed to be "sensitive" about sexism and even have an opinion about it(!) because we also deal with it every day.
I am a stay at home father. When women are primary caregivers, it's a job. But since I am a man, people are always asking me, "so what else do you do?." I guess I should be chopping wood while the kid naps? I'm not sure.
Or how about having one of my daughter's friends come over to play? I almost never do that because, well, I'm a man. And many moms believe that, since I am a man, if their children come to play at my house when I am the only one supervising there's some kind of realistic chance that I'm a sexual predator, or whatever. So I send my kid off to her friend's to play.
And how about the fact that every time I take a walk, if a woman sees me, they're afraid I'm going to assault them right there on the road? I'm not ladies! I'm only taking a walk, just like you. I used to try and ease their fears by crossing to the other side of the street or just generally acting "submissive". But lately I'm tired of giving a damn. If you want to be terrified of every male you see, that's your problem. I know there's creeps out there, and I know it can be hard for women to feel safe when they're alone, but I'm not one of those creeps. 99% of us are not one of those creeps.
I am aware that sexism toward women is a serious problem. Especially in the media. I see the movies where womens' only role is to give men an opportunity to shine (ie: most movies). I've seen the commercials on the television where sexism is so incredibly rampant and relentless, that one almost becomes numb to the atrocities. But myths about men being sexual predatory gorillas who beat every woman they see are also strongly perpetuated by the media (Lifetime Network, anyone?).
Women need to understand that men have a role in this discussion as well and, yes, we have feelings too and we also do not appreciate our outlook being dismissed because of our sex.
-
Who's side are you on anyways?
[Read the article: The 527 monster hiding under Obama's bed]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For every negative story about McCain I read in your blog, it seems like there's 4 negative stories on Obama. What's your malfunction?
-
I meant "whose".
[Read the article: The 527 monster hiding under Obama's bed]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]My malfunction is lack of mastery over the English language.
-
Thank you for this blog (column?)
[Read the article: A strange calm comes over Wall Street]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I appreciate Leonard's ability to explain complex financial issues with coherence and respect for the readers. This blog has become a must read for me as of late.
I agree that something must be done. Too many assets are tied up in mutual funds and 401k's to be comfortable with doing nothing and watching the market tank. Believe me, I understand people's distrust of George Bush and his wealthy banking buddies, but pretending there is not a problem is foolish.
Until yesterday afternoon, when McCain's political sideshow came to town, Congress was working in a true bipartisan nature for the first time in years and seemed to have a reasonable, if not flawed, bill on the table. It is tragic to see that bipartisan spirit fall apart in such volatile times.
-
Talk about backhanded compliments!
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]To answer Mr. Krauthammer's question about whether I really know who Obama is and what he believes, I answer "yes, as a matter of fact I think I do." Mr. Krauthammer seems to find it hard to comprehend a less calculating president than he is accustomed to.