Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
AKA Smith
Published Letters: 6540 Editor's Choice: 93
Intelligence and competence as the major difference between our former president Bill Clinton and our current president George W. Bush is quite important, considering where we are now with GWB. Iraq is an issue but it is not the only issue. GWB is in the process of dismantling our constitution by using the war as cover for a presidential power grab. This is about the only thing he has done competently.
However, if GWB were intelligent, perhaps he would not have been so easily manipulated by the neocons he chose to advise him. Would he still be a shallow, power-hungry bastard? Surely. I am not sure he would be any more dangerous.
Whether or not we would have gone to war with Iraq if Bill Clinton had had a third term is easy to speculate upon but impossible to determine. Whether or not Gore would have gone to war with Iraq is also impossible to determine. Whether or not Kerry could have extricated us from the mess is also impossible to determine. If I had a dollar for every American who supported the war but now opposes it, I would be a rich woman indeed.
The real questions that matter are where all the candidates stand on a number of issues and can we trust them to be truthful about the stands they say they will take. In other words, when their lips are moving, are they lying?
In this interview at least, Senator Clinton seems straightforward. While the interview was a good one, I keep wondering when anyone in the media is going to really try to pin the candidates down on what they each will do to rollback those decisions -- like the suspension of the right of habeas corpus -- that are much more of a threat to our freedom than any terrorist attack or even the war itself.
I hate to sound utterly cynical, but I too doubt any of them will truly withdraw all our troops from Iraq. Bluntly, there is too much oil there. I suspect we will continue our conquest of oil nations no matter which party is in power and no matter who holds the presidency. Bill Richardson talks impetuously, he promises the moon, and he has been caught lying more recently than any of them.
People often see the downside of such candidates and I admit that I do too because so many people around me are openly bigoted. However, it occurs to me that the right-wing media calls Senator Clinton by the name Mrs. Clinton because it serves certain purposes. It appeals to the folks who hated Bill but it also reminds voters that she is a woman and tries to play into their fear of change.
However, I have noticed in the Democrate debates thus far a tentativeness on the part of the male candidates to hit hard at Senator Clinton. They don't quite know how to fight with a girl. If Clinton should win the nomination, the Republicans might have a bit of trouble with that as well. They would still have to continue to use code language about Clinton's femaleness, but they could not attack her outright as not qualified for that reason. Such attacks would completely alienate many independant and moderate voters.
If Obama were the nominee, he would have a similar advantage. His opponent would have to be quite careful not to appear racist, even to the extent of being careful to not appear to be appealing to the sometimes ill-concealed racism of the right.
I write from Bush country in the heart of Texas. Lots of bigots here. I was a bit surprised the other day when my mother said she saw that nice Obama fella on television and she liked him very much. Mama doesn't keep up with things much anymore. I wonder if she knows he's black? She likes him because she thinks he will get us out of "that dreadful war." Six months ago she supported that dreadful war. The times, they are a changing -- maybe.
as candidates who are concerned with social and economic justice. Hillary Clinton has long worked on children's issues -- which is a particular interest of mine, and Edward's populist sensibility tells me that he will never forget the poor.
Of the three that the media most covers, Clinton, Obama, and Edwards, it is clearly Senator Clinton who has the most experience. I worry about the corporate investment in Clinton's campaign, but the reality is that no one can win without having raised an obscene amount of money. I would love to hear more about what they will do to make elections fair again. I won't hold my breath.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
Salon headlines in your mailbox
