Letters to the Editor
Eileen Potocnak Arnold
Published Letters: 12 Editor's Choice: 4
-
Obama has played the exact same game as Hillary
[Read the article: The GOP attack plan for Hillary Clinton]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]With due respect to the earlier analysis that Obama is claiming to be an outsider and that the game of politics needs to be changed, perhaps some stark comparison is in order.
NOTE: I have always stated that Hillary is potentially too polarizing to be able to win the presidency to anyone I have discussed politics with, to be clear about my opinions.
Hillary Clinton received her law degree from Yale.
Barack Obama received his law degree from Harvard.
That is exactly the same Ivy League insider game, as far as I can tell. What you do after law school truly determines whether you choose to play the insider game.
Regarding job credentials since their graduate work:
Barack Obama worked with civil rights law, voting rights, and law regarding community organizers. He was a faculty member of the University of Chicago Law School. He was in the Illinois State Senate for three terms. He is a first term Senator for Illinois in Congress. His wife is a lawyer who has worked on marketing law and intellectual property law, as well as having been a salaried board member for a corporation that is a large supplier for Wal-Mart.
Hillary Clinton worked with children's rights law, patent infringement and intellectual property law. She was a member of the Watergate impeachment inquiry staff (no jokes, please - I am being serious regarding her credentials). She was a faculty member of the University of Arkansas School of Law. She worked as a full partner in her law firm while she was the First Lady for the state of Arkansas. She was the First Lady for the US for 8 years. She is a second term Senator for New York in Congress.
Therefore - given age differences and spousal job differences, if I look at those credentials on paper, dispassionately - there is no particular difference I can see regarding someone being an insider in the political process between these two individuals other than length of time. Since Hillary is approximately 13 years older than Obama, the length of time is not unexpected and does not prove or disprove anything. Arguably, both have been in elected positions for the same length of time. Both their spouses are lawyers and have either been involved in politics or in positions of power in corporations.
Hillary has been in politics longer than Obama - but as earlier stated, that has to do with a 13 year difference in age and her husband's choices. One could argue that Obama has comparable issues with his wife having been a board member that had to resign her position when he made a critical comment about Wal-Mart due to corporate politics.
I think the "change" issue with Obama is a catchphrase, like anybody else that runs for president. I believe the evidence shows no appreciable difference between either candidate regarding whether or not someone is playing the "insider game" vs. someone coming from "outside".
In a much shorter statement - Obama is just as much an insider as Hillary. As far as I can tell, to believe otherwise is naive.
-
I feel badly for Sarah Palin's daughter - but not for how the Republicans handled this
[Read the article: McCain: No, really, we vetted her!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sarah Palin isn't helping her party's "abstinence-only", "family values" platform very well right now.
A direct quote from the Republican Party platform:
"We renew our call for replacing "family planning" programs for teens with increased funding for abstinence education, which teaches abstinence until marriage as the responsible and expected standard of behavior. Abstinence from sexual activity is the only protection that is 100 percent effective against out-of-wedlock pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS when transmitted sexually.
We oppose school-based clinics that provide referrals, counseling, and related services for abortion and contraception."
There are more people than I could probably count in a day if they were in front of me that are going to say the following: abstinence-only programs don't work, Sarah Palin's daughter is living proof of that statement, and federal funding of birth control and prevention of sexual diseases (through types of birth control) is critical for teenagers.
Obama doesn't have to say a word. All he has to do is watch everyone else say it - they are already saying it now.
Being pro-life is not the issue. If that's Sarah Palin's (and her daughter's) opinion, they are perfectly entitled to that viewpoint and there is nothing wrong at all with it.
However, Ms. Palin putting her daughter in harm's way by allowing her to be potentially exposed to chlamydia, HIV, herpes, etc. by teaching her abstinence-only sexual education? That is not exactly looking out for your child's health if you don't give them critical information other than "don't do it". I wouldn't dare let my daughter past the age of 9 (and believe me, she's past that age) without the knowledge that could literally save her life someday.
What were Sarah Palin - and the Republican Party - thinking?
-
Paging Margaret Atwood - your office called
[Read the article: Zombie feminists of the RNC]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The second I saw "The Handmaid's Tale" referenced, I literally got a chill down my back and my stomach knotted. For anyone who hasn't read this book, I urge you to rent it from your library or buy it. The book won two awards and was a finalist for a third award.
I read it when it first came out in 1985. While I consider Margaret Atwood a brilliant writer (as do many others), I kept thinking in the back of my mind, "No - the US could never turn into a evangelical Christian state that requires women to be subservient to men. It's too far-fetched." Ironically, one of the main characters in the book (a woman) helped found this radical religious state from the remnants of the US, yet found herself removed from her position of power and "imprisoned" to act out the role of the subservient wife after the takeover.
Now, I read this article...and all of a sudden, Margaret Atwood seems like not just a great writer, but one of the most prescient women on the planet.