Letters to the Editor
JoeCHI
Published Letters: 39 Editor's Choice: 2
-
Obama's Precondition Flip-Flop
[Read the article: What Beltway media stars mean by "centrism" and "extremism"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Missing from your article is any mention of Obama's contradictory positions on preconditions.
In an interview with a reporter from the Miami Herald the day before the YouTube-CNN debate, Barack Obama said he'd meet with Chavez, but only "under certain conditions."
Taylor Marsh has the details:
http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=25974
-
Clintons Beat GOP Every Time
[Read the article: Stalking Hillary]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's folly for the Democrats to think that the GOP is going to be any kinder to an Edwards or Obama candidacy than they would a Clinton candidacy.
The GOP will try to eviscerate whomever we nominate.
Already, the GOP has labeled Edwards as someone who doesn't believe that there is a "Global War on Terror". Likewise, Obama is already defined as someone who wants to Kumbaya with Jong-il, Chavez, Assad, Castro and Ahmadinejad.
Kumbaya with Castro and Ahmadinejad? Tell me again the up-side for Democrats in pissing off the Cuban and Jews and handing Florida's electoral votes to the GOP on a silver platter?
For decades, the GOP has blasted the Clintons with everything and anything short of a nuclear bomb. In the end, the Clintons beat them every time.
Hence, Clinton remains the only two-term Democratic President since Truman.
The reason the GOP fears the Clintons is because the Clintons know how to win. Most importantly, they have the track-record to prove it.
-
Ahmadinejad, Pakistan? Yes! Barry Bonds? Ugh...
[Read the article: Piling on on Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Am I the only one who thinks it's absurd that Obama wants to kumbaya with Ahmadinejad and Jong-il, plus invade Pakistan, BUT, he remains cautious and non-commital with regards to having Barry Bonds to the White House?
-
<b>Ethridge's Glass Bus
[Read the article: Don't ask, don't tell]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As a gay man who has been in a committed partnership for 17 years, I believe that Ethridge's characterization of being "thrown under the bus" by the Clintons strains incredulity.
The fact remains that Ethridge left her wife and children from the Clinton years, moved on to another wife, and had additional children with her.
It seems to me that Ethridge herself threw her commitment and marriage "under the bus".
-
Don't Forget The Daughters!
[Read the article: Chris Matthews skewers Mitt Romney]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I am a Clinton supporter who regularly writes MSNBC to complain about Matthew's and Carlson's offensive misogyny. In deference to intellectual honesty, I find this argument to be just as sexist as the crap that those neanderthals regularly spew about Hillary Clinton.
Why aren't Matthews or Walsh arguing that the daughters of Clinton, Edwards, Bush, et al. enlist, too?
The Romney boys have no more obligation to enlist in the armed services then any other man or woman in America. The fact that their father is running for President is irrelevant.
-
Rove As Lucy, Democrats As Charlie Brown
[Read the article: Is the White House supporting Hillary Clinton?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Don't think for a moment that Rove is working the "Hillary is fatally-flawed" angle cause he wants the Democrats to put up a "stronger" candidate for the GOP to run against in the general.
Please!
Since when has Rove been the least bit concerned about either a fair fight, or the Democrats winning?
Rove is trying to inject seeds of doubt regarding Clinton becuase he's done his homework and has come to the conclusion that Clinton is the only Democrat who can win in 2008.
It's classic Rove as Lucy teeing-up the football for us Democratic Charlie Browns. Let's not think for one moment that he won't pull the football away from us. He did it in 2000 and 2004, and he'll try to do it to us again in 2008.
Let's not invest ourselves into the GOP propoganda again. Instead, let's elect a candidate who has a proven track record at beating the GOP for a change.
The Clinton's have taken everything and anything short of a nuclear device that the GOP has thrown at them. Still, the Clintons have beaten them every time.
Rove will always play ruthlessly. Let's rise to the occassion this time!
-
Scherer's Personal Animus Vs. The Facts
[Read the article: Barack Obama's Republican edge]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]According to the most recent head-to-head state-by-state match-ups between leading Democrat and GOP candidates, Hillary fares better than either Obama or Edwards in the south and swing states. This is particularly true in Florida, Michigan, Arkansas, and Ohio
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html
Further, the electoral college math shows Clinton beating Giuliani by a larger margin than Obama:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/8/18/195354/266
Finally, Chris Bowers at Open Left (no fan of the Clinton candidacy by any stretch of the imagination) demonstrates Clinton eviscerating both Giuliani and Romney in an electoral college analysis:
http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=938
That Scherer would use something as skewed as the Iowa Straw Poll as a basis for the "Obama is more electable due to his crossover appeal" arguement is flawed on so many levels I don't know where to begin.
Scherer is entitled to whatever personal animus he might have towards Senator Clinton. However, if a more fact-based arguement regarding electability is something he is interested in, the data is out there for him should he be interested in making the effort.
Perhaps it is that Mr. Sherer doesn't like the outcome that that data actually supports.
-
Edwards: "Special Interests For Me, But Not For Thee."
[Read the article: John Edwards turns on his fellow Democrats]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Did Edwards have anything to say about trial lawyer money?
What about union money?
And hedge fund money?
Or News Corp money?
I didn't think so. Sigh.
-
Caution! Angry White Male!
[Read the article: John Edwards turns on his fellow Democrats]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]A campaign officially becomes absurd when its straight, white, southern, Christian, millionaire, male candidate (and his wife) asserts that his predigree is somehow a hindrance to his Presidential aspirations.
Sigh.
-
Shapiro's Strained Logic
[Read the article: How Hillary could tank]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yet despite her strong overall lead, more than half the Democratic voters (in almost every poll) prefer other presidential candidates.
Nonsense!
The latest USA Today/Gallup poll shows Clinton 50%, Obama 21%, and Edwards 13%.
Shapiro argues that those numbers indicate that half of the Democrats prefer someone other than Clinton.
The problem with Shapiro's argument is that, according to your own metrics, one must logically conclude that 79% of Democrats prefer candidates other than Obama, and 87% prefer candidates other than Edwards.
Is this really the best Shaprio can do?
-
Forever-Home This!
[Read the article: Ellen, the dog bullies and me]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Righton! And it ain't just LA!
Here in Chicago, the animal rescue organizations are rife with self-righteous prigs!