Letters to the Editor
Joel_Grant
Published Letters: 174 Editor's Choice: 13
-
@JoeCHI
[Read the article: I was wrong about Wright]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Who claims:
"20 Years In The Pews Is All I Need To Know"
Apparently you specialize in not knowing much.
"There is nothing that Obama can say to repair this fissure."
And nothing he could say that you would hear.
"The fact remains that Obama sat in those pews for 20 years affirming the rants of a racist, hate-mongering, anti-American, delusional man."
You can sit in a church forever without "affirming" everything you hear from the pulpit. Obama listened to quite a few sermons and you heard a few sound bites.
But that is all you need to know, right?
"Most damning is the fact that he and his wife brought along their children."
They could have asked you to babysit. But then they would have to wipe off all the spittle.
-
He should bluntly tell the truth
[Read the article: What should Obama do about Rev. Jeremiah Wright?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Obama should bluntly tell the truth about what is happening: it is a right wing smear, vicious, racist, and stupid.
Barack is an appealing candidate who threatens to win by convincing moderate Republicans and independents to vote for him. Barack is a thoughtful, mild-mannered person who does not use or inspire fear.
So the right wing, unable to smear him directly, is smearing him by association. The other smear, the 60's radical Obama knows, seems not to have the legs of the Wright smear.
It is nothing but old-fashioned red-baiting guilt by association. It is an old trick and Obama should bluntly call it out, identify clearly what is going on, and warn us that if we fall for this move from an old playbook we are going to wind up stuck with yet another idiot right winger in the White House.
This is about McCarthyism at its worst.
Oh, thanks Salon for saying "How high?" when Karl Rove asks you to jump.
-
Great news
[Read the article: Taking back the debate over Israel]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Great article, great news. I will be sending them some money.
I happen to believe that the most pro-Israel position to take is a moderate position that stresses land for peace, a two-state solution, and negotiation.
That is, if the situation is not already completely hopeless.
But let those who disagree do so. The problem is not that people offer different solutions. The problem is that deviation from a particular orthodoxy is shouted down.
That's the real problem. We need a genuine debate, not a rubber stamp.
-
@ Baldie McEagle
[Read the article: Why the Jeremiah Wright story deserves more attention]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Who believes:
"I doubt anyone here thinks Wright is of no interest whatsoever in this election year."
I am that guy.
Jeremiah Wright's opinions are intesting as an election issue only insofar as they are shared by a candidate. And that means they are of no election interest at all, because if a candidate shares those views they are interesting because they are the views of a candidate.
Wright's opinions would surely be interesting to Obama's biographer, but Wright's opinions tell me nothing about Obama's ablitities or his intent.
We are facing a world wide food shortage; a continuing occupation of Iraq; a potential meltdown in the world's financial system; an increasingly dysfunctional healthcare system; homelessness; soaring budget and trade deficits; crumbling infrastructures; students who are falling increasingly behind; and is that enough?
When is enough enough?
At some point we will look back at these days, as the nation obsessed over a presidential candidate's opinions, with shame. Well, most of us will.
The Karl Roves and neocon warmongers will look back in pride that they were able to hijack what should be a serious undertaking, the selection of a president who is going to inherit a country that is hurtling towards the edge of the cliff.
Interesting? Jeremiah Wright? This whole thing is nothing but the age-old right wing red and race-baiting game.
Some of us fell for it again. So how do we stop? How do we leave this crap "issue" behind and get back to the serious business of vetting the people who would make life or death decisions?
I think we stop by stopping and this is my last post or comment about any of this.
Everyone - just slap your cheeks, wake up, and leave this non-issue behind. Let Karl Rove work on his next scheme and let the rest of us figure out how to keep on living.