Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 92 Editor's Choice: 3
-
How Hillary Clinton lost my vote (and my wife's)
[Read the article: How Hillary Clinton botched the black vote]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I happen to be in what has turned out to be a popular demographic for Obama: white, male, 56, college educated, comfortable, liberal, politically active.
To be honest, I have never liked Hillary Clinton and I voted for Bill Clinton twice enthusiastically. My wife also voted for Bill twice and took a disliking to Hillary the minute she read It Takes a Village (she resented being told how to bring up kids by "experts"). I never read it, I just didn't like her arrogance. But, I liked Bill so no problem.
Before I knew much about Barack Obama I was a Kucinich fan as was my wife and we would have voted for Hillary without enthusiam as we've been loyal Democrats our entire lives.
However, my 92 year old mother kept telling me to check out Obama, she saw something special in him. As I've learned more about Obama, heard him speak at a big rally the night before Super Tuesday in Hartford, read his various platforms on his web site, read his books, and talked with lots of people, online and off, I became enthusiastic about his campaign and the idea that in my lifetime it might actually be possible for a black man to become president. I liked what that said about Obama and I liked what it said about the country. Yes, I liked Gary Kamiya's piece here on voting for Obama partly because he's black. I want someone running this country who has a big world view and isn't afraid of complexity and will talk with the American people like adults. No pandering, political or otherwise. Some may resent the fact that the first politician to get this mix right happens to be black, I happen to love the idea. And I'm a fan of Cory Booker too.
In the early days (a few months ago) If Hillary had gone on to win without a negative campaign she had my vote in November. My wife's too.
Then things got negative. Hillary saw a bit of blood with the Wright issue and started pecking and hasn't stopped since.
Those of you who are enthusiastic Clinton supporters will find it difficult to see this, but to me, the more I see both Hillary and Bill Clinton go after Obama to hurt him in the eyes of their target demographic, the more I like him and the less I like the Clintons. I would imagine black voters feel the same way. I would say the Clintons are hurting themselves more than they are hurting Obama. Why? Because at this point, it will be a lot harder for me to rally behind her should she somehow win the Democratic nomination. My wife will not vote for her. Period. She's mad as hell. And, if she wins it, think about what her process will have to be: she'll have to damage Obama. She can't win on her own positives, she must damage him to get delegates to move.
My guess is Hillary and her "war room" have calculated exactly how much damage they can take on themselves in their "kitchen sink" campaign but as this article points out clearly, she's lost the black vote and she's now going to slowly lose some of my demographic as well.
How on earth will Bill and Hillary Clinton be able to turn around and support Barack Obama if he becomes the nominee?
And they call themselves Democrats?
-
It's not about the gas tax (stupid)
[Read the article: Obama is wrong about the gas tax]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This issue isn't about the gas tax, it's about Hillary Clinton finding her voice and attempting to paint a contrast between her as "doer" and Obama as "thinker."
I believe Hillary jumped on the McCain bus (with a windfall profit twist) to amplify the new her: the person who will fight the world to protect Americans, get tough with Iran, oil companies, anyone who gets in her way. This gas tax thing is an extension of her quest to display balls under her skirt.
The problem is that it might be better to not be a "doer" if you're doing the wrong thing, like voting to authorize the Iraq war and the Kyle Lieberman bill and puffing up against Iran and anyone else who gets in the way. If memory serves, we've just spent 7 years suffering someone attempting to show balls and look where we are.
Isn't it ironic that the one with the supposed resume of experience (Clinton) is the most reactionary and the one with the supposed weak resume (Obama) is the most considered.
As political pandering, reactionary might work but it won't work to run and change the country. I choose considered, I choose Obama.
-
Lieberman and Clinton: the end justifies the means
[Read the article: Things that don't exist in Harry Reid's world]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm from Connecticut and what Lieberman did here is disgusting. The fact that Reid (and Clinton) are willing to talk with him or have anything to do with him shows how desperate they are, pandering for the Jewish vote and maybe Reid too by association.
I'm Jewish and there is no doubt in my mind that Lieberman found his voice/issue with the Iraq war and Iran and he's painting himself as the lone protector of Israel at all costs just like Hillary is painting herself as the lone protector of all things American at all costs.
The fact that Reid and Pelosi could not get together and impeach Bush/Cheney says worlds about their inability to lead. The fact that Reid didn't toss Leiberman out of the Democratic party shows how spineless he is.
I am embarrassed to be from Connecticut when Lieberman's name comes up, but hey, we did vote for Obama.
-
Reid on On Point Radio right now
[Read the article: Things that don't exist in Harry Reid's world]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Harry Reid is going to be on the excellent radio show On Point right now:
http://www.onpointradio.org/
If you miss it, you can get it as a podcast from iTunes or their site.