Letters to the Editor
cubster
Published Letters: 40 Editor's Choice: 1
-
Check the St Regis Hotel Registry
[Read the article: Vitter apologizes]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You mention that a large number of the calls come from the St Regis. I imagine a number of the other calls come from posh hotels as well. I would think that you could look at the day and time in question and see who was staying at the hotel that day. Most Hotel's bill rooms for the calls that are placed locally. That means that the St. Regis would have the identity of the person whose room called Pamela Martin's escort service. I was also thinking it would be useful to know if Vitter paid for his service or was it covered by the government or a lobbyist.
-
Article pulled
[Read the article: When waterboarding was a crime]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I went to the Washington Post to read the article that you referenced. It is no longer listed on the editorial page or the outlook section on the site. It is not in the online version or print version of the website. I am not sure why, but it looks like they have changed their minds about displaying this article. I thought you would like to know since you are referencing this article. As far as the Washington Post is concerned this article can only be found by doing a search on nthe author.
-
Obama News coverage
[Read the article: My sanest conversation on TV, ever]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Joan,
I saw your discussion on Morning Joe with Mika. It was one of the best discussions that I have listened to in a long while. It made me start thinking though about the coverage of Barrack Obama. You mentioned a couple of items that were legitimate things to press Obama on without being racist. His voting record and his long time association with a Land developer indicted for fraud are two that I would think the press would go after. It surprises me that not even reporters known for going after Democrats (Scarburough, Mathews and Russert) have barely touched on these topics if at all. It makes me wonder if they are saving these items for the general election. None of the Republican candidates have spoke on any of these subjects either. They have only attacked Hillary. This makes me wonder if they see Obama as the Mgovern candidate and are manuevering to have him be the democratic choice. They do not have the same stigma around attackin the first Black candidate. Their ignoring the Black and hispnic debates show they have already written off those blocks.
Thanks
-
She won by 17%
[Read the article: Did Hillary Clinton really win in Florida?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Both candidates saw Florida as an important contest. Hilary gave a high profile speech (within agreement rules) and Obama for the first time ran National adds rather than state targeted, which accidentally played in Florida (couldn't be helped). These adds stopped the day of the beauty pageant Florida primary. The news media have shown exact vote counts in All kinds of polls, including straw. They have shown exact %s and counts for Wyoming (Republican) as well as Nevada where only Ron Paul and Rommney ran. This makes me wonder why a large turnout vote in Florida, which has the most diverse makeup so far in the race, would not be an interesting indicator of voter trends, at least as much as SC and Nevada. The key question for the Obama campaign is whether he can perform as well with Asians and Hispanics as he has with the Black voting block. He still had the same low penetration into the Hispanic vote that showed up in Nevada. The curious thought that crossed my mind is how the headline would have played if Obama had unexpectedly trounced Hilary. Would the press still have said , "Oh Gosh, no dleegates doesn't matter" or would they have had banner headlines about major upset of Hilary machine. This vote breakdown is no more important than the SC one, but it is also no less. Hilary not only beat Obama and Edwards in Florida, She also beat McCain. The democrats had a much higher turnout and her total was at least 150K higher than his. So is it important, not to the media types that already have an Obama narrative. I hope the Obama camp is looking closely at this breakdown, because they need to solve the Latino wall before they can hope to compete in a general election, if they get that far.
-
The weak kneed Democratic leadership
[Read the article: The Senate's FISA agreement]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Can someone explain to me why it is important to get a stronger majority for Harry Reid. Won't that just make his kowtowing that much harder to perform. Won't having fewer Republicans on the floor make it difficult for him to find out what Bills to pass and which to eviscerate, and then apologize.
Is there a way to get the names of the Democrats in the Senate besides Reid and Rocky fella, who are currently in the ownership of the telcoms.
What ever happened to the Grandstanding hearings that Conyers used to have in the basement when he could get the lights on. He was talking about investigate this and impeach that. Now that he has the effective vehicle for those investigations. Weenie!!!!!!
Why is everyone excited about Obama or Hilary. It would be a first, but I am starting to think that it is a false choice between those that believe in an authoritarian approach, and the soft sniveling weenies that say they are fighting the good fight for us. Why should we give our time and money to these people who are afraid even when they are in power. And don’t tell me they have a slim majority. You made the point, that one of the perogatives of a majority party is that you set which Bill comes to a vote. Reid made a choice that would make every Republican proud. He chose the Bill that forced 60 votes to get rid of immunity rather than the one that would have required 60 votes to place it in the Bill.