Letters to the Editor
DurianJoe
Published Letters: 1310 Editor's Choice: 69
-
@Joemartin
[Read the article: Obama in the Women's Building!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I agree completely that the priority is to first elect a Democrat, but with the qualifier that the Democrat be the right Democrat, both to beat the Republican nominee and to govern effectively. That is why I support Edwards as my first choice.
Where we disagree is in the relative strenghts and weaknesses of Clinton and Obama. I find much to admire in both individuals, and frankly more to admire in Obama than Clinton. However, the flip side is that I see more merit in the symbolic election of a woman than in a black. For me, that makes it a wash. For what it's worth, I plan to vote for Edwards in the primary, but to vigorously support whomever becomes the Democratic nominee. Given my druthers, it would actually be Kucinich, but I'm willing to trade in a little idealism this time around.
-
@JoeMartin
[Read the article: Obama in the Women's Building!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]To respond to your points and questions:
I like Edwards a lot too, but not as much as Obama.
To each his own. I'm going with Edwards because of his emphasis on helping the poor and fighting Big Business, but personal preferences are just that...
On the Clinton v. Obama issues we were talking about you just said that the practical outcome of electing the best democrat is paramount; then followed it with how the symbolic achievement of breaking the gender barrier is more important to you than breaking the race barrier. How the hell is that a practical determination.
I think Clinton and Obama would both make very good Presidents based upon their own individual qualities. However, all things being equal -- and with those two, for me they are equal -- I'd tip the scale for symbolic reasons. That is, there are many more women than blacks in this country. A woman President would be more significant for that reason.
Keep your eyes on the Democratic Convention. Which Candidate will energize our base more?
Clinton would energize the base more, IMHO.
Which Candidate will cause more independents to flock to our cause?
That would be Obama.
Which candidate will demoralize the Republicans?
Now that is a good question. The Repugs loathe Clinton. Then again, the Repugs as a party are racist to the core. I think the Repugs will despise either Clinton or Obama.
Sorry, but I have to turn in now. I'll just conclude that I am happy with all of the Democratic candidates, and I am confident that, barring illegal shenanigans by the Repugs, a Democrat will win in 2008. That is cause for joy, but just the fact the George W. Bush and Dick Cheney will be out of office is reason enough to celebrate.
-
@Joemartin
[Read the article: Obama in the Women's Building!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]My opinion, humble or otherwise, is that fiery convention speeches and rah rahs from the audience do not guarantee a general election success. Bob Dole got a rah rah reception at his convention, as did John Kerry.
Hillary Clinton has been attacked by the Repugs for 15 years. Do you honestly believe they can find new modes of attacking her? They'll just recycle the same shit we've been hearing for a long time -- and few still care.
Barack Obama is fresh meat for the Repugs, and they will tear into him with all the glee that their racist, xenophobic operatives and followers can muster. If anything, he is a bigger target than Clinton.
Your point is just that you prefer Obama. That's fine. He's too conservative for my tastes, but then again so is Clinton. That's why I support Edwards, who has both the superior policy stances and the ability to beat the Repugs in 2008. But don't pretend that Clinton wil NOT bring in Independents who favor seeing a first woman President, and don't pretend that Obama will NOT bring in Independents who favor seeing a first black President. Like I've said before, I have no problem with that reality.
-
Brightstar, you've fallen for an anti-Obama smear campaign
[Read the article: Obama in the Women's Building!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Your letter referenced the falsehood that Obama does not put his hand over his heart when he recites the Pledge of Allegiance. That hoax has been debunked: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2007/11/obama_nabbed_by_the_patriotic.html
Moreover, I thoroughly disagree with your claim that neither Clinton nor Obama can win in November. Both of these candidates are excellent, and either one will beat whatever horrorshow the Repugs nominate. It's just that Edwards is better than both of them.
EDWARDS 2008!
-
Horrors! Delay might sit out the election.
[Read the article: Quote of the Day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In equally important news, I cleaned the lint out of my dryer yesterday.
-
Of Spades and Hoes
[Read the article: Dolores Huerta: "Como se llama" Obama?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Clintons tried to use an underhanded tactic to make it more difficult for casino workers to caucus, because their union has endorsed Obama. It had nothing to do with many of the works being latinos. So, both sides in this episode are guilty of sleazy tactics.
If you think that's bad, though, just wait until the general election, especially if either Clinton or Obama is the Democratic nominee. The Repugs are going to unleash a campaign based on hatred the likes of which we haven't seen in generations. A woman?! A black?! Those are both second-class citizens are far as the GOP is concerned, so how dare one of them try to become President.
A preview of the coming ugliness was given to us by none other than Rush Limbaugh. This past Tuesday he spewed out a speech about Obama and Clinton in which he repeatedly emphasized the word "Spade" in relationship to Obama, and used the word "Hoe" in an obvious reference to Clinton. Go here to hear it for yourself, or read the transcript: http://mediamatters.org/items/200801150021?f=s_search
The Repugs have spent the last 35 years wallowing in the swamps of hatred, and they are going to use every last drop of it to defeat whomever the Democrats run; if it's a woman or a black, get ready.
-
No Thrasher, it's not a fear tactic.
[Read the article: Dolores Huerta: "Como se llama" Obama?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Do you disagree that if Obama or Clinton is the nominee, the Repugs won't use race or gender against them?
I support Edwards not because he is white, but because he is more progressive than either Clinton or Obama.
P.S. You continue to play the minstrel.