Letters to the Editor
Taliesan
Published Letters: 942 Editor's Choice: 19
-
You know
[Read the article: Clinton supporters push back against NARAL endorsement]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This has been the Clinton supporter strategy all along - if you don't support their candidate you are a "traitor." It kind of tells us exactly what it has all been about.
It has been about a personality cult, about sticking with someone for aesthetic change rather than real change, about empty headed rhetoric and about every single charge that has been laid at the feet of Obama's supporters.
It has been about the precise same instincts that guide African nations down into oblivion - the feeling that you owe a candidate your vote.
NARAL endorsed the candidate it liked best based on what it saw of the candidates. It didn't betray anybody, it simply made a choice - and that that choice didn't agree with the choice of a lot of Hillary supporters? So be it. You don't have to agree with NARAL and it doesn't have to agree with you.
-
ljwalker53
[Read the article: Clinton supporters push back against NARAL endorsement]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If it came down to McCain versus Hillary I would vote Hillary, because she has the better policies and represents the better path for America to take.
Hillary is if anything slightly to the left of Obama on a lot of issues and while I do not believe she will deliver, it is better to go with someone I have doubts about being good, than someone I know will be downright terrible.
If it comes down to McCain versus Obama, a lot of the Hillary supporters here loudly and proudly proclaim that they will vote McCain.
A lot of people take this as being about race and age for the very good reason that about the only things Hillary and McCain have in common are age and race. Their policies are totally opposed and the direction they want to take America are totally opposed.
Thus it is not the entire pro-Hillary movement that is racist, I can say quite comfortably that there are Hillary supporters who are basing their decision on their understanding of the issues and their understanding of the candidates.
However there is an element of racism in Hillary's camp and there is an element of a personality cult in this constant claim of betrayal. Hillary herself recently noted as much with her statement on "white uneducated Americans."
People are free to vote for whoever they want, and a primary is considered where you vote for what you want rather than the lesser of two evils - which is what the general election has turned into over a period of years.
Now you support Hillary and if it is based on issues, that is fine. It is your choice to support Hillary and though we will argue over it, and lies will be met with anger on both sides, but after all the shouting is done it is still your choice who you vote for. You aren't a traitor for supporting Hillary Clinton.
Just as it is NARAL's choice as to who it will endorse and there is no "betrayal" involved in that decision. The vote isn't owed to anyone.
-
ljwalker53
[Read the article: Clinton supporters push back against NARAL endorsement]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You mean Obama should have actively encouraged people to not endorse him? Or encouraged people to not criticise the record of his opponent?
Your idea of running a nasty campaign is not comitting political suicide?
And your idea of tough is someone who cannot take that?
Obama is running a campaign that will have to go up against McCain in just a few short months - he is not going to turn around and tell people to not endorse him.
If the situation was reversed nobody would expect Hillary to turn down an endorsement either - particularly if that endorsement undercuts a popular challenge to her electability.
This is a political primary here, Obama is in it to win this race.
-
ljwalker53
[Read the article: Clinton supporters push back against NARAL endorsement]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Lets try to get to the bottom of this:
What was it that you actually liked about Hillary?
I can tell you what I like about Obama - he has provided well thought out policies, his speeches have been generally good, and he was against the war from the start.
His guiding philosophy with foreign policy appears to be less dictatorial than what has been present in the past and he appears to have a more reasoned approach to Israel.
He has not taken money directly from lobbies (Though that he has taken money from people working for lobbies is disturbing) and he has avoided a lot of easy buttons such as blaming illegal immigrants for urban unemployment.
Further I like the internet based campaign, the ground game and that he has gone for the red states that the Democrats have a bad habit of ignoring. I like that he has appealed to educated voters and that he is striving to gain ground in young votes - which speaks of growing the party.
So please, tell me what you like about Hillary's campaign, that way maybe we can get a civil discussion going.
-
What a real scientist would do
[Read the article: The atheist and the creationist: Can't they just get along?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Weigh up the evidence.
Okay: Young Earth Creationism -
Arguments pro: Religious documents dating back to Babylon.
Major religious leaders.
Arguments against: Various scientifically verified dating techniques.
Evolutionary theory that is confirmed by genetic science, archeology, animal husbandry, farming in general really, and basic zoology.
Ice cores in the arctic and ant-arctic.
The lack of evidence favouring religion one religion's creation myth over any of the others.
Religion being based on faith, not evidence. Lying wasn't a recent invention.
And the various absurdities contained in the various religious myths aside from creation - such as God stopping the sun and this major celestial event only being noticed in a small area in the Middle East.