Letters to the Editor
Joan Walsh
Published Letters: 438 Editor's Choice: 15
-
From Joan Walsh
[Read the article: The Clinton vs. Obama slugfest continues]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Xrandadu Hutman, even though I feel like I've answered you before, I'll answer again, because you're such an enthusiastic participant in letters threads all over Salon. But really, it's Groundhog Day for me. The question about whether I'd work for her also seemed sincere, so let me answer it first: I worked for the California State Legislature, briefly, early in my career, and I learned a lot, but I was miserable. I have a big mouth! Politicians really don't want to employ me. Plus, I have no intention of working in a place that's swampier and more humid than Sacramento and so much farther from San Francisco. Finally, I have the world's best job. Hillary applied, and when she didn't get it, she ran for president. (Kidding!)
I stopped answering letters claiming I'm in the tank for Hillary a while ago. But I'm going to finish this answer, and then reprint it in every letters thread when it comes up again. Unless, Xrandadu, you want to do that for me?
I'm not supporting Hillary Clinton, much to the chagrin of friends and family who are. (Don't worry, I have plenty of friends and family who aren't!) I truly haven't made up my mind. I will say, though, that when MSM folks who were so wrong on impeachment, including my friend Chris Matthews and now, the next generation of Beltway smirkers, like my friend Ana Marie Cox, go after Hillary Clinton, well, I can imagine myself going into the voting booth and thinking about the way the media gangs up on her, and, yes, voting for her. Right now, that's not my plan. But I don't know.
Almost as bad are people without any class consciousness who talk about the Clintons as a "dynasty" like the Bushes. Fellas, please. I love this country, desperately, but one of its worst traits is its ignorance about class. Does it take a working class Irish Catholic girl to tell you all: Hillary Clinton ain't George Bush in any way. (The Bush-Pierce dynasty just loves you folks who don't know the difference!) You can dislike Clinton, you can think she's arrogant, you can criticize her foreign policy mistakes on the Iraq AUMF vote and Kyl-Lieberman. Certainly I have, over and over. But claiming she hasn't worked to get what she has is just dumb about class, and in my opinion, sexist. I don't know where she'd be if she hadn't followed Bill Clinton to Arkansas, but she was a Yale law school grad who worked on the House Judiciary Committee's Watergate inquiry. She had her own law career and she was a respected children's advocate, an activist with the Children's Defense Fund when I first heard of her. We can't know if she'd have wound up in the Senate without Bill Clinton, but it's ignorant to act like she didn't have her own career and credentials. Unlike legacy president George W. Bush.
I like Obama. I might vote for him. Read Rebecca Traister's piece on Michelle tonight, it's terrific. Read Walter Shapiro's great blog post on John Edwards today. Read mine from a while back, along with my Elizabeth Edwards interview. Then, go out and work for the candidate of your choice. But don't worry about me, I'm making up my own mind, like a lot of you. If you've given up on me, by all means, read Glenn. Or read Joe Klein and Ana Marie Cox! Kidding: Read Digby!
Thanks again, Xrandadu, I hope I answered your question.
-
From Joan Walsh
[Read the article: Integrity and slime, in old media and new]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]WHS, read the post. I applauded the fact that we won't get a David Brooks rejoinder to Krugman's last word. And I asked for more facts about Reagan and Philadelphia, rather than spin. I know you're disappointed in me, WHS, but it's bringing your game down. Read, think, focus, write. And breathe somewhere in there, too.
And I'll bring up Glenn's work in a context that it makes sense. I was very proud to get the Politico story on Rudy's scandalous charges to the city for his assignations with Judi Nathan on Hardball tonight. I always learn from constructive criticism, so thank you all for the interest you take in my TV appearances, and Salon.
-
From Joan Walsh
[Read the article: Integrity and slime, in old media and new]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Oh, and anonymous with the Barry Bonds jones? We decided, after much debate among Salon staff and readers, that for now, we'll keep the anonymous option. People made convincing cases for times they need their anonymity, and I respect that. I also realized we were being much too passive about not deleting offensive, off-topic, ad hominem posts. So we're moderating a bit more heavily, and I think it's working. We are also quicker to delete obnoxious, off-topic anonymous posts, and much, much, much slower to answer anonymous, troll-like, off-thread-topic hectoring. Like yours.
When you sign your name to a letter about Barry Bonds and state your point of view, I will take seriously your request for a post from me. But I tend not to answer people who aren't man or woman enough to sign their names to critical posts like yours. Just clarifying.
-
From Joan Walsh
[Read the article: Integrity and slime, in old media and new]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sorry I was MIA today, I had an all day meeting. WHS, I appreciate your looking at both sides of the Matthews/Iraq war question. dhowitz, I appreciate your thanks for Glenn Greenwald.
-
From Joan Walsh
[Read the article: Don't ignore Shtup-gate!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]virtue001, that's a silly observation -- most thinking people blame Republicans for Ken Starr's partisan witch hunt, and I remember the cost ultimately being closer to $70 million.
-
From Joan Walsh
[Read the article: Don't ignore Shtup-gate!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]By the way, thank you, sabatia. But I realize I actually got shtup-gate from my friend Bill, who is, in fact, Jewish. Credit where it's due -- at least I have an ear for a good Yiddishism.
-
From Joan Walsh
[Read the article: Don't ignore Shtup-gate!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Awww, Garry Owen, I didn't read Joe's letters last night, but I'm sure I've stolen from you before. It's the highest form of flattery!
-
From Joan Walsh
[Read the article: Joe Conason responds]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Footsore, to be fair, Olbermann was all over Wayne Barrett's Qatar story Wednesday night, the night it broke, when others (including me) were obsessed with the security-billing scandal. So I wouldn't use "Countdown" as an example of disproportion this week.