Letters to the Editor
AKA Smith
Published Letters: 4545 Editor's Choice: 83
-
Slackie Onassis,
[Read the article: Will the real Hillary please stand up?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You raise some good points about the contributors to Clinton's campaign, but we fall out of sympathy when you continue to cast her as a Republican. The Clinton's (both of them) have always been moderate Democrats. Neither of them has ever grasped at the liberal label, and it would surely not be to their advantage to do so.
Whenever the Democrats have nominated a liberal, they have lost. Democrats are in much more danger of losing the election if they nominate a liberal than if they nominate a moderate. They are in more danger of losing the election if they nominate a liberal than if they nominate a woman. After all, when Kerry was painted as a "French" liberal, it was actually effective with the voting public. Let me put it this way: We will never go broke underestimating the intelligence of the voting public.
Also, remember that Bush "won" in 2000 by using buzz words that would soothe voters into thinking that he was more moderate. After all, what does compassionate conservative actually mean? We now know that it means a conservative without much compassion. If he'd campaigned in a t-shirt that said "Narcissistic Sociopath" across his chest, we would have had a much clearer sense of what we were getting. Instead, now, the voter has to do much research and decoding of language to go to the ballot box. Most won't do that.
Back to the campaign contribution issue, I doubt that there is a single viable (means that they have a substantial campaign war chest) candidate of either party who does not have some very questionable contributors.
As to whether the Dems win or lose, naturally I would like to see them win. However, I probably will not cast my vote in the primary with an eye to who is most likely to win. A little hint is that I have voted Libertarian as often as I have voted Democratic. Most people consider that a wasted vote, but it is my vote and I can waste it if I choose. I simply vote for the candidate who I can stand whose positions are closest to my own.
-
Christopher1988, you seem to be a Tammy Wynette fan.
[Read the article: Will the real Hillary please stand up?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Truly, I don't think then Ms. Clinton was maligning Tammy Wynette but rather the concept that she herself would stand by her husband if she did not think his cheating days were over. She did not lie as much as she was mistaken in her own capacity for either compromise or forgiveness.
I really think it is silly to judge Clinton, the wife, in the same manner that we would judge Clinton, the politician.
Actually she does offer an explanation in her book. Initially she believed her husband's lies. She still continues, however, to believe that there was a right wing conspiracy. Of course, she was absolutely correct in her assessment of the right wing. I actually knew someone connected with "The Starr Report" and I can promise you that they were out to get ole Bill. That some of the things they wanted to lay on him were absolutely true does not mean that they were not out to get him.
About politician's personal lives: I believe they are entitled to them. Their personal lives should only come under scrutiny when personal information has bearing upon the fate of the nation, or when they commit crimes, or when they themselves make it an issue. When Gary Hart said to the press "Follow me around" the poor fool was laying down the gauntlet and the press dug up the dirt. When Bush attacked Kerry's military record, he invited scrutiny of his own.
I don't really care about Barbara and Jenna and their chasing around. I don't care if Bush used to be an addict. It only becomes relevant to me if Bush is an addict while holding office. I don't care about presidential infidelities. I don't even care about first lady infidelities. My interest in first ladies usually extends to who designed the inuagural gown. I was interested in what Hillary as first lady had to say only when she was involved in the health care initiative. To me, all that stuff is just gossip and "Stand by Your Man" is just a country song nowhere near as good as "Your Cheating Heart."
-
To haaaley,
[Read the article: District attorney won't take gang rape case]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sometimes women are too "level-headed." I recommend that women be much more aggressive in protecting themselves and their rights (without resorting to indiscriminate violence).
However, I am not your garden variety pacifist liberal and I live in a concealed carry state.