Letters to the Editor
weeping for brunnhilde
Published Letters: 1150 Editor's Choice: 3
-
@ Celia
[Read the article: My last word (for now) on sexism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]" One key I suppose- doing our best to transcend our tribal instincts- (I think it was Fester who introduced this idea in the other thread?) and not discount the thoughts and feelings of people who feel really entrenched in their positions but to reach out. How to do that when they continue to ridicule you for drinking the cool-aid? Keep on reaching out I guess.
(Now I think I've just really understood "turn the other cheek". Wow.)"
Indeed, Celia, indeed.
Obama never promised us a rose garden, you know? :)
Seriously, it's not easy, but frankly, I have a lifetime of experience being ridiculed for being an idealist, so while I wouldn't quite say it just rolls off, at least it's nothing new.
Trust your instinct to keep reaching out, it's a beautiful one.
Plus, what's the alternative?
As you point out, we've seen the alternative and it sure as hell ain't pretty. It might be comfortable, but it ain't pretty.
Thanks for your sincerity and your openness, I really appreciate them.
Kool aid, indeed. It's funny, because it's so not about the Kool Aid, it's about an actual response to Obama, his message, his demeanor. It's really refreshing.
I think a lot about this, because I wonder how it is that some people can't even acknowledge what it is that his supporters respond to, but chalk it up to some kind of voodoo or naivete or faddishness or whatever the hell.
I feel like I have a secure handle on the variety of reasons Clinton supporters adduce for their support of Clinton, and many of them I think are meritorious, plausible, at least, but I just disagree with them because the "big picture" I see is a different one from the one others see, which is fine.
But I really get the feeling that many Clinton supporters are unable to genuinely appreciate what it is about Obama that people like you and I respond to.
I wish we could actually debate the respect merits of the candidates without just dismissing one another.
(Like I said, I'm an idealist.)
-
@ Aka
[Read the article: My last word (for now) on sexism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's a good exercise for Obama supporters to consider and enumerate his flaws.
The first thing that comes to mind, and it's a propos here, is that I personally winced when, during that debate, he said something to the effect of "We didn't whine about it [i.e., campaign dirty tricks, in this case some direct mailings in Ohio distorting Clinton's health care plan], but understood it was a part of politics."
That disappointed me on several counts. One, I thought the word "whine" was ill-advised. I heard it as sexist and was ashamed Obama had used it.
Also, he implicitly conceded that the mailers were dirty tricks and that his campaign had engaged in them, which disappointed me.
So that was one moment in the campaign where I was disappointed in Obama, where I expected more from him.
Also, his shaky relationship with gay community disappoints me. He gets a pass from me on that because of issues of political expedience, but honestly, I'd like to see him more open to them. Of course, to do that is to undermine his very genuine (in my view) effort to reach out to people who simply aren't ready to deal with homosexuality.
This is a dilemma for me. I give him a pass on this, but I can't say I'm entirely comfortable with that stance. For now, though, I am willing to suspend my idealism and not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Maybe that's homophobic of me, but that's where I am right now.
-
@ rufus
[Read the article: My last word (for now) on sexism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Agreed, rufus, basically with every word.
But then, I've drunk the Kool Aid, so what would one expect?
"WE need to be the ones to fix and change this country, not obama alone. The great thing about obama is he'll allow that to happen. Unlike the gop (clinton included) who do not answer to the american people. "
Yup. He's continuing the Dean movement, "The power to change this country is in your hands, not mine."
And as far as his political centrism, I fervently believe that he wants to be pushed to the left, by all of us.
One of the most telling anecdotes pertaining to his political philosophy he tells is of being a legislator in Illinois, going into the chamber with some great, progressive legislation, only to find out he didn't have the people behind him, so it failed.
He seems to have taken that lesson to heart; one must develop consensus to do the things we want done, especially about social issues. An ethos of "brother's keeperism," e.g., needs to be developed to undo the damage done in the 1980s and 1990s.
Anyway, I could gush on and on, but the point is that this is an uncharacteristically reflective politician, and that's what I like. He's just got the stuff I've always wanted to see in a leader and politician.
That's what's allowed me to overlook the particular weaknesses I've observed along the way: they just pale in contrast to the whole package.
But then, as I say, I've drunk the Kool Aid.
-
@ Celia
[Read the article: My last word (for now) on sexism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ha ha hah ah ah aha ha ha ha ha !!!!