Letters to the Editor
hlc3333
Published Letters: 22 Editor's Choice: 1
-
this will be hard for me to do
[Read the article: California exits are looking up for Clinton]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"If you really ARE against what's been going on these last seven years, you bite the bullet and vote for the Democrat, whoever takes it."
The more I think about, and read about it, the harder biting the bullet will be. The utter dismissiveness of Obama and his message (hope? HA!), the complete mockery of anyone who dares to challenge the democratic establishment, even if they are part of it (kennedy), and the insistance that Clinton is somehow owed all of it: she put in her time, and dammit, you better vote for her now!
Look, all you have to do is look at who has been chosen over the past years to see a pattern here. Since Carter the Dems have picked one person who won, Bill Clinton, and HRC is not Bill Clinton. Hell, Bill Clinton was a pariah in his own party towards the end of it all, and dems were hurt by his inability to keep it zipped for years after. So here we are again. Go Hillary?
I'll have to think about it...
-
wait times
[Read the article: Wal-Mart can be good for your health]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]A major contributor to wait times are patients making appointments months in advance, and then not showing up. Those appointments slots are booked, and then on the day of the appointment, no patient. It's a waste for both the provider and the patient who could have used the appointment.
Doctors should stop allowing patients to make appointments months in advance. Enable them to make appointments a week or two in advance at most, and you can see patients who require appointments on the same day.
It's not all that simple. Other factors like shortages of providers, and providers who take on way more patients than they should also contribute, but advanced access is a start.
-
enough anonymouse
[Read the article: Clinton attacks Obama for focusing on rhetoric, Obama gets long-winded]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Over and over, same old argument, and still trying to make it seem like you're more than one person. I'm going to guess the same people who would not vote for a woman, wouldn't be getting in line for a black man either.
Even if Obama loses, he'll just be one more bad pick for the Democratic establishment. John Kerry, Al Gore, Dukakis, Mondale. One winner since 1980. Obama will just be another coulda been for the Dems. Hey, we're used to it by now.
-
no issue for democrats
[Read the article: McCain: Reformer or phony?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]At least concerning the affair. Why? Because of Bill Clinton. Dems were more than willing to ignore Bill's multiple affairs, and they should not care about McCains. If there are ethics issues attached, then we should be concerned. But to fake outrage over an affair would be tremendously hypocritical of the Democrats. Bill Clinton not only lied under oath, he all but enlisted supporters in his denial. He promised the nation the charges were not true, and people believed him. That is easily as bad as McCain, so unless something more serious comes out in all of this, I won't care.
-
@LaurieNY
[Read the article: McCain: Reformer or phony?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm a democrat. I voted for Bill, so I haven't been "persecuting" anyone. My point is this: if you didn't care about Clinton, don't care about McCain. Even if Republicans lied about many things Clinton did, they also had some legitimate points that many people simply ignored, or didn't care about.
-
@ShawnWM
[Read the article: Clinton wins Ohio]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Wow. Can you get anymore insulting and dismissive? If your the kind of person Hillary has as a supporter, I think I'd be better off with McCain. But thank you for informing all us black folk where we stand in this campaign. You don't need us anymore, but hey, it was nice working with you.
-
let her have it
[Read the article: Networks call Texas primary for Clinton]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think Obama should drop out and throw his support to Clinton. Worse case scenario: she losses and he can always go with the "I told you so." If she wins, even better, as he can throw his support and money behind her and be considered an integral part of her win. She pays him back in eight years by endorsing him.
I don't think he should go for the VP though. Everyone knows the real VP will be Bill Clinton, so Clinton just needs to pick someone like Wesley Clark to bolster her position next to that little red phone she's apparently waiting by at 3:00am. Obama can distinguish himself as a Senator, and bide his time for 2016.
-
hello pot? It's kettle...
[Read the article: Some free advice for Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The last person in the world to be criticizing someone else's real estate deals is Hillary Clinton. You would think after her 10,000% profit on cattle futures, Mark Rich, and Norman Hsu, she would just stay out of that narrative, but HRC clearly believes she is beyond reproach now that "everything has already been said." Just because it's been said before doesn't mean it can't be brought up again, as we see with the Rezco story, a story vetted by the media in Illinois for years and that has produced nothing incriminating against Obama. Maybe Joe was the one who helped Hillary with her "as far as I know" line when asked if Obama was a Muslim.
Also, the messianic followers bit is tiresome and untrue. You support Hillary, I support Obama. I don't have blinders on, and I don't "worship" the guy, and for the record, I have seen just as many nasty comments about Obama from HRC supporters as the reverse. To constant claim otherwise is disingenuous. At first I had my doubts, but I will definitely vote for Hillary if she is the nominee, but I just happen to have a different preference, and opinion.