Letters to the Editor
debaser
Published Letters: 1070 Editor's Choice: 11
-
malcalypse
[Read the article: Is Obama moving to the center?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Second of all, the President does not have the power to overturn laws. What country are you from?"
Well actually I'm from Canada, where the PM absolutely has the power to do so...I guess I'm conflating the two systems of governance..my bad.
But I think my point still kinda stands, after all did I not just read that Obama should have the power to tell Congress jump and they'll say how high? Are you telling me that this legislation is now enshrined in perpetuity? (I'm not being facetious...like I said, it's clear that I'm missing something here and would like some clarification)
Is it really so out of the realm of possibility that Obama is trying to appear more moderate on this issue before the general election and then, with all his "political capital" (as Dubya would say) he could then get Congress to enact something more amenable to your standards?
please help me out here...I'm just not getting the gnashing of teeth over this.
-
you're right
[Read the article: McCain camp pushes back against low polling numbers]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]These last two polls look terrible for McCain AND they're getting big time media coverage (so much so that dear old mum even knows that McCain is lagging far behind).
You're also right that there might be a problem with the methodology...but in a way that doesn't matter. I like to think of myself as a pretty sharp cookie, and any talk of polling methodology makes my brain go fizzy.
In short, McCain is right...these polls are a REAL problem for him - the media likes to pick the winner, and if this thing starts to look inevitable...they will do whatever they can to make it so.
-
ugh
[Read the article: Is Ralph Nader losing it?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Alright, the "netroots" community is really REALLY starting to irk me. It's like if the Dem candidate doesn't fall in lock-step with every single thing they agree with they threaten to jump ship.
get over yourselves people! You live in a two-party system! There is actually no way that one of the two parties will EVER agree with everything you do...so you pick the one you disagree with less. Don't like it? Well then you better work your ass off to make a third party viable (maybe Nader isn't it..but my god, you are the only developed democracy in the world that is still tied to this idea of one or t'other!)
Look, I actually like Nader (but that's prolly because he comes across as a centrist Canadian politician..he just makes so much sense) But I get how you all think he ruined 2000 (which I think is bunk, and has been proven to be so) and therefore blame him for Bush. I think that's kinda nuts, but whatever...if not him, than someone else...show some spine and get your ideal candidate, from the ideal platform and then work to get that party viable. It'll take some time, but them's the breaks...you gotta crawl before you run.
If you're not prepared to do all of that, then please please please realize that you live in a dualistic polity...and realize that Obama will not be everything you wish, but he's still MILES better than McCain.
peace
p.s. Silenced, my heart goes out to you - but I know, as someone who knows from where you come, that no one, absolutely no one, who hasn't been through the same ordeal could possibly understand the maelstrom of emotions that such a thing engenders. Please go back to railing against pot laws...
-
6stringer &rebecalouise
[Read the article: Is Ralph Nader losing it?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I totally agree with each of your last postings...the gnashing of teeth these last few days would be absurdly hilarious if it wasn't so dangerous.
also, can somebody refresh my memory...the FISA legislation that has everyone in a tizzy was a House vote right? Isn't Obama a Senator? It hasn't gotten to the Senate right? We're all losing our collective minds over some musings by Obama right? Not his actual vote right?
Maybe we should lay off the histrionics until after the Senate votes on it? And after it goes to committee, and after it invariably gets vetoed by Bush, until it comes up again in 2009 when there's a very different complexion in Congress...
let's take some deep deep breaths before jumping over the cliff.
-
Nader
[Read the article: Is Ralph Nader losing it?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Look, like or hate him...Nader is doing what Nader needs to do right now. It's campaigning 101, the place he can get the most votes is from disaffected progressives. He's not really going to get them by attacking McCain, he'll get them by convincing them that Obama isn't really an acceptable alternative (an assertion I think is wrong, by the way). So he hits Obama at the place where he has the greatest strength electorally, the African American community. I don't think he's going to win over many African Americans...his natural constiuency is Begala's "egg-head vote", and if he can convince them that Obama isn't up to snuff on knowing how "the slums got so much soul" (in the words of the immortal Jello Biafra ;) then maybe he can get them to reconsider him as an option.
it's really no big deal...his problem is that he used such an amazingly boneheaded term like "talking white", when he should know that we live in a soundbite society...and such a phrase being linked to you is suicide.
(I was actually more surprised that he didn't go guns a-blazing on the FISA thing...it's a straighter line to the egg-heads)
-
actually...
[Read the article: McCain advisor: Politicians "putting politics first and country second"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That's a pretty good campaign theme...hats off to them for coming up with it.
will it be enough? I doubt it.