Letters to the Editor
captainlarab
Published Letters: 541 Editor's Choice: 41
-
The romanticization of culture thing
[Read the article: The baby I turned away]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I actually don't have any problem with Jessica Gross's romanticization of Indian culture. It was a little over-the-top but not unreasonably so, and I actually think a genuine appreciation for a foreign culture lends itself well to international adoption.
Look, you want your kid to grow up feeling proud of her ethnic heritage. It seems to me that it's helpful if you already have a genuine interest in her native culture. If you think her home country is icky (and there are adoptive parents who won't travel to the country they're adopting from; they pay someone to bring the kid back), she's going to pick up on that. Another reason we were drawn to Guatemala is because my partner studied Spanish and has always felt oddly "drawn towards Latino culture." She can't explain why this is the case, but somehow, she felt comfortable with the idea of raising a Latino kid. Like I said, these things are irrational.
So, we have a Latino kid, who kept the name that her birth mother gave her because we think it's beautiful. We play Spanish kids' songs, take toddler Spanish classes together, cook Latino food, and have decorated with Guatemalan textiles, Oaxacan knick-nacks and what-not, not just in her room (which might have made her feel really different from the rest of us), but integrated throughout the household. Why? Because we liked these things anyway. I'm hoping this will result in a child who doesn't feel divided against herself, and who can see that we believe her "people" have accomplished some wondrous things, even if at the moment they're a little down on their luck economically. But it works because we have a genuine interest.
So, I think the fact that Ms. Gross considers yoga one of the wondrous achievements of Indian culture and likes Kingfisher beer actually would have lent itself well to raising an Indian child. I think she should continue her interest in all things Indian, and turn her firsthand knowledge of the dire conditions in which orphans are cared for there into some sort of constructive activity, even if it's nothing more than the occasional check to UNICEF.
-
I didn't have any problem with this
[Read the article: Hillary Clinton's softer side]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't see Hillary as a "crybaby" in this clip. I see her as human, I see what I think is a glimpse of the real Hillary (the exhausted Hillary, to be sure), and she's also being gracious in implicitly conceding that her political rivals are in this for the same reason that she is: for the good of the country.
That said, this clip doesn't influence my vote. It just makes me like her a little bit more. She loses me when she starts up with the "some of us are right, some of us are wrong, some of us have an idea of what we would do as President on Day 1, some of us don't." Aside from the fact that Obama has extremely well-thought out views on many issues, this comment about knowing what to do on Day 1 made me think: Hmmm, who was that President who made lifting the ban on gays in the military one of his first priorities upon assuming office?
See, that's what Hillary doesn't get: Obama is the Bill Clinton of 2008. And maybe we're all in for yet another Slick Willie, but this year, this is the guy coming from a place called Hope.
-
Something I keep coming back to r.e. Clinton
[Read the article: Changes for the Clinton campaign?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You know, Hillary Clinton did something a few years ago that I thought I'd gotten over, that I thought I could live with, but that I keep coming back to in my mind the more it seems that Obama is a viable alternative and that the "inevitability" scales have fallen from my eyes. It wasn't the Iraq war vote, or anything associated with health care, or Monicagate.
A few years ago, pre-Iraq, she co-sponsored a bill to prohibit flag-burning in a statute that would have most certainly have been found to be unconstitutional (and she would most certainly have known this, being one of the top lawyers in the country). I remember being very pissed off about this, not only because it was obvious pandering, but because it was highly ineffective pandering. The bill wasn't going anywhere, if it had actually become law it would have been struck down, and it didn't matter one whit to the presumably mostly-veteran audience to which she was trying to pander (anyone who's big on the flag-burning issue is always going to see her as one step removed from Jane Fonda, no matter what she does). As a veteran myself, I was offended that anyone should think they could pander to me in this manner.
And then I guess I got over it--you know, politicians are politicians, they're all the same, yada yada--and when people talk about Clinton's other "negatives" these days, they're usually focused on other stuff. But me, I just keep finding myself returning to that bill, and thinking, did I actually learn everything I needed to know about Hillary Clinton from that one bill? Could I have, from that bill, easily anticipated everything else that has since come to pass? I'm thinking yes.
-
The electorate is in a very anti-establishment mood
[Read the article: The witch ain't dead, and Chris Matthews is a ding-dong]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]And I think that may, in part, explain the results in N.H. In Iowa, Barack was the anti-establishment candidate, and Clinton found herself locked in as the "establishment." Same thing happened with Huckabee.
But after the big Chris Matthews-led anti-Clinton pile-on, it's possible that the NH voters came to see *that* as the establishment, and Clinton suddenly became anti-establishment. And who do they vote for on the Republican side? McCain, an anti-establishment candidate of a different sort. We've known for years that his status as an iconoclast is largely what fuels his popularity. The minute he starts looking like "the anointed one," he's toast.
Any way you look at it, it appears the electorate across the board is giving a big "f-you" to the ruling elites in this country, and it's a glorious thing to see.
Great article, Rebecca.