Letters to the Editor
juneausmog
Published Letters: 223 Editor's Choice: 10
-
a change in process is inspiring
[Read the article: Looking past Pennsylvania]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]but then watch how he executes it. I'm surprised, Joan that you didn't connect the dots between your description of Obama's purpose and the way he handled the ABC debate and running away from reporters that you pointed out later in your blog.
Why do you think people like me don't believe Obama? I've read Lakoff, I love Sirota's essays, I adore Glenn Greenwald's points, I have (until his sexism showed up) always adored watching Keith Olbermann as a breath of fresh air. So I'm no Progressive dummy. Obama's words are truth to power. I think its refreshing.
And then you watch what he does, and what he says in off-handed remarks and I go, wow, this guy is working hard to say what he means, not mean what he says. And he loses me.
And I don't believe he'll change the process. He's taking on the media, the media readers, the politicians; all at the same time. Meanwhile, we have two wars and other shit going on that is not stopping for us to sort out a "new process". This guy is inexperienced and new to executive leadership, so what makes me think he can solve all of our urgent needs, plan for our longer ones and totally and fundamentally change the political process paradigm all at once? And is that a priority right now, anyway?
I think Obama is a classic case of idealism getting ahead of practicality. Since we are exiting an American chapter of pure ideology from Dubya, we need to focus on making things work again. I don't want to spend another 8 years unraveling a sick, dysfunctional monster that is our media, the politicians and private industry. We don't have the luxury to do that now.
While I'm writing this, I'm looking at this ad on the side of this page that says, "REGISTER NOW TO VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA" and I kid you not, the graphic designer has put in subtle shining rays of light emanating from his head. puh-lease.
I find Hillary's stark perspective of I'm-a-politician-and-I'm-in-a-political-battle-and-I'm-not-perfect actually more refreshing. I'm expecting gaffes from her and she doesn't disappoint. But with Obama, he's presented as some perfect package, when I know that he's another politician on the national stage, just like Hillary, just like them all.
-
another example for you, Joan
[Read the article: Looking past Pennsylvania]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]if Obama is so interested in changing the process, why has his campaign sought to suppress a Florida/Michigan re-vote and exclude those votes? I really don't follow these actions with his rhetoric at all.
-
nice male trolls
[Read the article: Feminism is the new funny]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]on this forum.
what, feeling manly enough to write sexist comments on the internet?
-
@ weeping for brunhilde
[Read the article: Looking past Pennsylvania]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]your problem with the clinton's lie in that the pristine trajectory of liberalism was somehow tainted by them and Bill's presidency? He single-handedly tainted it while at the same time, prevented conservatives from gaining another 1-2 terms of presidential power? I really don't understand this theory.
tell me about what the world would be like had Clinton not snatched the presidency from the republicans in 1992?
Exactly.
So don't be such a sourpuss...
-
bridging divides
[Read the article: Obama responds to Wright]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...isn't that what Obama does? He bridges divides and that's why he can transcend bitter, partisan politics, right?
But if he's only spoken to Wright once in the last two months and then Wright started sabotaging him, does that mean he can't bridge divides? Or does that mean he can, he just got busy? Or perhaps he can, but he just didn't want to this time?
I'm confused. Lots of questions about Obama's basic abilities to bridge divides if he can't even do it with his pastor.
-
Wright is confusing as hell
[Read the article: Why Obama denounced Wright]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If one of your main schticks is about how whites keeps the african-americans down, then why would you sabotage the first viable african-american presidential candidate?
Has his ego and greater radical message super ceded his desire to see that the paradigm he preaches against, shattered?
What a nut job.
Still, I fault Obama for not taking care of this before it got to this point. He claims to be the great uniter or different perspectives, and yet he cannot do this with his own pastor. I have always wondered about his lofty declarations regarding these abilities as it would seem to be self-evident in his senatorial career, and yet he is known for his bi-partisanship relationships no better than Clinton or many others in the congress. He's not a stand-out in this crowd. And his inability to resolve this current divide with Wright speaks volumes about his execution abilities.
-
The liar, liar pants on fire problem
[Read the article: Obama "outraged" by Wright]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]that this whole Wright controversy renders, is that Obama either knew for 20 years what Wright was like and is demurring that he did, or lying that he didn't.
Watching video clips of Wright (and the ones shown on The Daily Show were classic), this guy has in no way, been a different kind of person than what was shown on the video. He's been a racist, controversial and political pastor for the past 20 YEARS! He's a big personality that cannot be contained.
So Obama is disingeniousness about being outraged. He is outraged because it has hurt his political ambitions, not because of the subject matter Wright has brought up.
In addition, why can't a transcendent transformer like Obama who unifies ugly bickering partisan politicians, unify himself with his pastor? If he is unable to really unify with the people closest to him, how will this translate to right-wing jerks who don't give a damn in the first place?
I'm not proud of Obama. He did damage control, nothing more.
-
long been favored in Indiana?
[Read the article: "We lost this thing in February"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]uh, no, that's not a correct characterization Alex. Obama was long-favored to win in Indiana; a state that borders his home state. His campaign predicted he would win the state. And he lost it. He also underperformed in NC according to the poll number margins he has long had up until a week or two ago. He won that state because of the large number of African-American voters residing there. And he outspent HRC 2-1 in both states.
Try to be an analyzing journalist, Alex. Not just a parrot of the pundit class.