Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
lacquer
Published Letters: 11
It's galling to read these threads here, most of which could go in the dictionary to explain the phrase "missing the forest for the trees". Basic statistics and basic timeline facts are swapped around and ignored, with one instance standing in (as convenient) for an entire campaign. For example, the number of independents and republicans that crossed over to vote for Obama during the first few months of primaries, to the point that most of the states he won then were either caucus states that favored his constituents or open primaries that encouraged republican meddling to fuck with the supposed front runner. I really don't think any of that's even up for debate. But the same time, once Obama did become the front runner, the exact same thing started to happen with regard to Clinton - especially in PA. There are layers of manipulation here that are consistent and adaptive, and they have been a part of our politics for years now and we should not have such a hard time seeing them.
Similarly, the percentages of C/O supporters unwilling to support the other as nominee - 20% or 25%?! It hardly matters who has the bigger figure, or when - it's a problem shared by both sides that unchecked will prevent the Democrats from winning in November.
Let's just say that again: it's a problem shared by both sides that unchecked will prevent the Democrats from winning in November.
Many, many Clinton supporters feel that their candidate has been given a raw deal by the MSM and that, at best, the Obama campaign has blithely profited from that institutional and quite personal sexism. Obama folks: it doesn't actually matter if you disagree. Someone else said it earlier - it's not about winning, it's about losing gracefully, losing in such a way as to still be able to stay at the table.
The fact is, the burden is on the Obama people to make this work. That's what happens when you win this kind of fight. It's not a war. No one's being conquered. No one can afford those casualties, or those scars. But if it's put in those terms - if these Clinton supporters are treated, again and again, like idiots or goons or worse - then enough of them will (stupidly, cutting their children's noses off to spite their own faces) walk away. And Obama will lose, by losing this last battle. Really, the only way McCain can win is if Obama loses this last battle within the Democratic party - the point being that it's a battle that can only be won by forgiveness and patience and generosity. That's the drag of winning a primary fight this close. You actually don't get to do an end zone dance.
Without the lowered expectations from the Gibson & Couric interviews, there's no way Palin's performance here would impress anyone but the diehard base. Biden was substantial, knowledgeable, and generally adroit. And the two instances Joan mentions were absolutely slam-dunk. He absolutely nailed the Cheney issue, and then she absolutely blew her opportunity to seem genuine and compassionate, and instead came across - take your pick - as an unfeeling robot, or someone so desperate to remember her next line that they ignore what's really happening.
And my god am I sick of personal family anecdotes offered up in the place of actual policy.
I don't think excuses the outburst, but it's well worth watching, the degree to which Serena Williams was royally screwed by bad calls in the 2004 US Open.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtkKdCeQgQM
Also, the Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez incident is, to me, pretty understandable, and the same sort of fucked-up-ness.
The best solution would have been for the judge to overrule the footfault call, then dock Serena a point for the outburst and leave the final point to be played. And frankly, though Clijsters had the edge in the match, many of the games were very long and closely fought, with both of them coming back from 15-40 to win ... so, yeah, anything could have happened, and it sucks tha Clijsters didn't take it all the way.
But yes, Williams behaved badly - understandable in the circumstances, but still over the top - and paid a fairly hefty price. With luck, this will spur the Open to extend the challenges they have for where the ball lands to something like a foot-fault, which would have settled the whole damn thing.
I have no problem with what Biden said at all - as someone said above, we should be grateful that someone is speaking the truth at a time like this. Democrats need to realize that the entirety of Obama's agenda rests on keeping the House, and defeating Republican momentum now.
You focus on all the gaffes, but this is exactly what (good) Vice Presidents have always done - been a little too blunt in public when their boss, for the sake of decorum, can't be.
I could do without War Room parroting beltway self-involvement - there's quite enough of that on the networks, thanks.
Rock on, Joe.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
