Letters to the Editor
little lord baltimore
Published Letters: 189 Editor's Choice: 9
-
Sigh.
[Read the article: Some free advice for Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Shawn. I'll try to explain this as slowly and clearly as possible:
You posted a link that said that black poverty had decreased by 33% under Clinton. I posted a link that said it had decreased by 10%. You claimed that blacks had increased their median income by $17,000 per year under Clinton (meaning that black should have had a median income in 2000 of over $140,000). The same link I posted says that the median income increased approx 4% per year. I've never said that progress wasn't made under Clinton. The point that I was making was that in addition to the progress there were mistakes. I was making the point that there are differences of opinion and that the issue is much more complicated than you are making it.
The Journal that you cited also featured an article saying that Obama is the right choice for black voters. By your own conclusions, then they must be racist and self hating blacks as well.
Thanks for your pity and your insults, but I don't need them. I'm running intellectual circles around you and it's tedious and, I'm realizing now, completely unproductive. I won't engage you any further.
-
Unity ticket?
[Read the article: Obama, Clinton and the black-brown divide]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm sorry. I know this thread is supposed to be about Joan's piece, but I have to address the fairy tale of a Clinton/Obama unity ticket.
For what they're worth, here are my thoughts:
1.It's a ploy. It's a way for Hillary to continue to suggest that Obama is not ready to be president and that she is.
2.It distracts from the reality of the situation. Obama has won 26 state contests (27 if you count the caucus in TX) Hillary has won 13 (14 if you count the primary in TX.) By the convention, Obama is expected to be ahead in the popular vote. And most importantly, Obama is leading in the pledged delegate count by between 100 and 170 delegates, depending on who is counting. There is, mathematically, no way that Hillary can win the nomination. And there is no reasonable argument as to why the super delegates should over-rule the voices of the states and the pledged delegates in order to give the nomination to Hillary.
3. Hillary needs Obama to help her mitigate the damage that she and her campaign have done. She needs Obama on her ticket to help her appeal to the black voters, the new democrats and youth voters, the white men, the middle class and the educated voters (basically the long standing supporters of the Democratic party) that she has insulted throughout her campaign. She needs Obama to help her win those red/blue swing states where Obama has been extremely popular and where the Clinton name is toxic.
4. In my opinion, it's insulting to Obama to suggest that despite all of his accomplishments and her failures in this campaign, that he can wait simply because he's younger than she is. It brings back the idea that it "wasn't his time." It completely ignores the reality that he has spearheaded the closest thing to a political movement this country has seen in 20 years, while she is only comfortable when she is tearing him down. For me personally, it also brings up all of the old stereotypes that a black person has to wait to be given things, that he is not allowed to have what he as rightfully earned through his hard work and intelligence. Rather, her should wait until the white people in charge give him permission.
If anyone should fall on their sword for the good of the party, it's Hillary. If she is really so concerned about Obama's readiness to lead, or how he will survive the Republican attack machine, why not drop out and work with him to come up with a successful strategy for beating McCain in the fall, rather than suggesting that McCain is more qualified to be President that Obama?
-
Hi Ana
[Read the article: Obama, Clinton and the black-brown divide]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I did about 10 minutes of research on google and I turned up some articles and editorials that you might find eye opening too:
1)http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/08/wuspols108.xml&CMP=ILC-mostviewedbox
2)http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/08/opinion/08herbert.html?em&ex=1205208000&en=31d70c80e38a743a&ei=5087%0A
3) http://www.jbhe.com/obama1.html
4)http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2008/03/hillarys_foreignpolicy_experie.cfm
Here are some polls and research showing McCain beating Clinton but not beating Obama:
5)http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_clinton-224.html
6) http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN0565259320080306
Here is a poll showing that Obama will win those big blue states:
7)http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/03/08/mccain-vs-obama-electoral-math-from-1006-compared-to-0308/
Enjoy the reading!
-
I agree: it's unity or defeat
[Read the article: Obama, Clinton and the black-brown divide]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I just think we disagree as to what unity means.
Ideally for Obama (and I think for our chances of winning in November), Hillary would withdraw from the race, and put her considerable intelligence to work towards repairing some of the damage that she has done so far this campaign. Obama would chose someone who has solid credentials in the Democratic party, but is respected by Republicans, as his running mate (maybe Wesley Clarke or Bill Richardson or even Katherine Sebelius) and we would crush McCain in November.
Hillary would go on to become one of the most respected and beloved Senators and elders in the party, probably becoming the first female Senate majority leader. In that role, she would still be in the public, while Obama could use his charisma, intelligence, thoughfulness and skills to address the problems that we face economically, internationally and militarily.
Hey, I can dream too!