Letters to the Editor

• viciousness? Doc 4563 (or something like that)

  [Read the article: Update: Michelle Obama disagrees with me]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  How would like you to be an Obama supporter? If you were you would see your candidate called a magic negro by the same Rush Limbaugh--and worse, at an opponent's event another black candidate would talk about him doing "something the neighborhood" to the chortles of laughter. You would know that mailers had gone out in New Hampshire accusing him of not being pro-choice, although he very much is. You would know that phone calls went out in Nevada calling him Barack HUSSEIN Obama, and that nobody could trust him--and you would know that a Clinton supporter resently resigned or was asked to leave after she sent an email in Iowa calling your candidate a "muslim who's trying to destroy the nation."

  When you tried to complain, you would be called a whiny loser who needs to "grow up." Your outrage would be met with smug, "well wait till Rove gets in the game."

  You might say "Rove is clearly already in the game."

  Joan would say, "don't be so sensitive. We're trying to toughen him up in case he wins the nomination....though it probably won't be this year, my dears."

  On the other hand, when you repeat any, God forbid, Republican talking points --or--legitimate criticisms of your candidate's opponent, you would be accused of trying to break apart the party, accused of mysogeny (I'm lucky that I'm a woman, but I've still been called it on these boards)--scoffed at for being a divider and not a uniter. This attempt to portray Obama's supporters as the evil within is THE most dangerous thing going on right now--in terms of a Democrat winning the general election.

  It seems clear to me that Clinton was destined to win. She has the name brand. People who don't know anything about politics will vote for her because they feel they know her. Who's to blame them. I think nobody expected Obama to go this far (I know I never did) and now they--the powers that be-- don't know what to do with him. Or his supporters.

  I just hope that out of this mess, Obama's accomplishment in pulling in independent voters shouldn't be minimized by Clinton supporters. I think it's time to call an end to the "crybaby" memos. They/we are allowed to get upset when our candidate is called a magical negro and/or a drug dealer who is a muslim trying to destroy the nation. Salan is up in arms at the C-word organization organizing against Clinton, and so it should be. But the idea that the viciousness has somehow limited to your candidate of choice is false and misleading. Mine has suffered a lot of viciousness too, and I don't belive myself to be a crybaby for being similarly outraged and disgusted.

  Permalink Friday, January 25, 2008 01:17 PM

• outraged and disgusted was what I said Gams on Glass

  [Read the article: Update: Michelle Obama disagrees with me]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  let's keep it real. "Hurt" reminds me more of the crybaby charges, and God knows that crying is not allowed in baseball.

  As for the coronation, Hill has been running for eight years. He's the new talent--but not necessarily the one up for the promotion. You can disagree with me, but the press has been somewhat easy on Clinton's Senate record, and have largely gone along with her talking points that he's not experienced enough to be President.

  But larger than that, the biggest obstacle in getting elected is name recognition. All things aside, she has a reputation as a public figure. His reputation is too new and untested with most people. That's the way the cookie crumbles, and no, most Obama supporters I know expected him merely to put up a good fight. Which, more or less, he has.

  Permalink Friday, January 25, 2008 01:31 PM