Letters to the Editor
jjppmd
Published Letters: 34
-
Oblonics
[Read the article: Obama's got ground game]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Must admit that the campaign of Mr., or should I say Rev., Obama, is one of the more fascinating political phenomena of my lifetime. Through a combination of lofty rhetoric, energetic self-promotion as the (only) agent of "change" (change what? to what?), and capitalization on the pervasive disgust with politics as usual, he has surprisingly thrust himself into serious consideration for arguably the world's most important job.
What's disturbing about all this is that after all the inspirational grandiloquence, neither he nor most of his supporters are able to articulate very much in the way of substance behind all the style. When asked about specific policies, proposals, initiatives or even proposed solutions to our complex problems, all we get is more empty rhetoric about "change", "hope", and then more "change". He and his campaign have undoubtedly been surprisingly effective strategically, cobbling carefully together an unusual coalition of idealistic young, disaffected middle class types, and minorities (reverse racism?)
And what of the still developing story of Oblahma's long history of association with some pretty unsavory folks, e.g., the racist Rev. Wright as well as a gaggle of advisers on the Middle East who are widely thought pro-Islamic in their orientation (think Zbigniew Brezinski, Susan Rice, and others).
.
Beyond all the pep rally atmosphere, hype, and predictable confetti from the political fashionistas (including many of Salon' staff) , American voters need to think clearly about the right answer to the question: who among the current crop of candidates is really best qualified for what is arguably the world's most powerful position?
Whether one likes Mrs. Clinton personally or not, her intelligence, experience, policy focus, probity, and desire to "do the right thing" clearly elevate her candidacy way above her neophyte Democratic rival.
-
Oblonics
[Read the article: Obama's got ground game]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Must admit that the campaign of Mr., or should I say Rev., Obama, is one of the more fascinating political phenomena of my lifetime. Through a combination of lofty rhetoric, energetic self-promotion as the (only) agent of "change" (change what? to what?), and capitalization on the pervasive disgust with politics as usual, he has surprisingly thrust himself into serious consideration for arguably the world's most important job.
What's disturbing about all this is that after all the inspirational grandiloquence, neither he nor most of his supporters are able to articulate very much in the way of substance behind all the style. When asked about specific policies, proposals, initiatives or even proposed solutions to our complex problems, all we get is more empty rhetoric about "change", "hope", and then more "change". He and his campaign have undoubtedly been surprisingly effective strategically, cobbling carefully together an unusual coalition of idealistic young, disaffected middle class types, and minorities (reverse racism?)
And what of the still developing story of Oblahma's long history of association with some pretty unsavory folks, e.g., the racist Rev. Wright as well as a gaggle of advisers on the Middle East who are widely thought pro-Islamic in their orientation (think Zbigniew Brezinski, Susan Rice, and others).
.
Beyond all the pep rally atmosphere, hype, and predictable confetti from the political fashionistas (including many of Salon' staff) , American voters need to think clearly about the right answer to the question: who among the current crop of candidates is really best qualified for what is arguably the world's most powerful position?
Whether one likes Mrs. Clinton personally or not, her intelligence, experience, policy focus, probity, and desire to "do the right thing" clearly elevate her candidacy way above her neophyte Democratic rival.
-
Oblahma
[Read the article: Hillary Clinton makes her stand in Ohio]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]remain somewhat perplexed as to the basis for all the Obama support among otherwise thougtful people. Strong on sweeping almost evangelical rhetoric, Obama is notably short on any proposals, policies, or even ideas which make me think he's even remotely qualified to assume what's arguably the world's most powerful position.
What I see under his inane and repetitive mantra of "change" is a constituency cobbled together from ideal young people, disaffected middle class and of course minorities.
While Obama has clearly been adapted as the darling of the fashionistas (including much of Salon's staff). Interestingly few if any of his supporters are able to articulate any specific policies or ideas which he espouses, or plans he has committed to putting into concrete action.
In contrast we have a candidate who is very knowledgeable, experienced, focused, policy-driven, and obviously highly intelligent. Whether personally lovable or not, it seems obvious who the more qualified candidate is for our most important elected position......Hillary Clinton
(p.s. I have no connection with the Clinton campaign)
-
Killer Kuriya
[Read the article: The cold price of hot blood]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Kuriya is a well-recognized narrow-minded weak Salon contributor and this piece is unfortunately just another example. Many of us wonder and often discuss how he remains on your staff.
-
Iran's threat
[Read the article: The Iran hawks' latest surge]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I find it fascinating how any subject involving the Middle East brings the anti-Sems out of the woodwork, usually cloaking their real (but thinly disguised) bigotry in "anti-Israel", or "anti-Zionist" clothes. And equally striking is the obvious reality of Iran and the threat it poses-- a large and influential Muslim country, led by a fanatic wacko, who has publicly stated murderous genocidal intentions, and well on the way to acquiring nuclear weaponry.
I submit that if this scenario involved any other country as target of this xenophobia and threatened genocide, much of the world (even Salon's fashionistas) would be up in arms about the need to block this obvious major threat to world peace. Ahmanadjead's threats remind me of those by another madman around 60 years ago, who many didn't think would carry out his publicly stated murderous intentions.
I think a very good moral case can be made for 1. invading Iran 2. deposing the current Islamofascist regime and 3. possibly preventing a horrible disaster causing untold loss of life.
And the animus toward little courageous Israel, bastion of democracy and decency in the Middle East, and victim of thousands of Islamic terrorist incidents, is beyond any reason or comprehension--except the oldest prejudice.
Think about it.
(and I'm Christian, BTW!)