Letters to the Editor
aberman
Published Letters: 3
-
Look at the Beam in your own eye...
[Read the article: That hot new neoconservative philosopher named Plato]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Alright, so let's assume that the interviewer is correct and neo-cons/Bushies/Republicans love the idea of an elite ruling over the uninformed masses.
So which group is it that thinks the judiciary should decide that evolving standards of decency means gay marriage and, for that matter, abortion? And that relying on popular votes on the subject is wrong because you shouldn't legislate on things that are 'so obviously' (to the informed) civil rights?
-
So he's not a scientist....
[Read the article: Bjørn Lomborg feels a chill]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't understand the complaints (two starred letters) that Bjørn Lomborg is not a scientist. How many people who object to his non-scientific background also object to Al Gore's non-scientific background?
-
View from a Conservative who wants McCain to Win
[Read the article: What should Hillary Clinton do now?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I figured I'd just throw that out there so everyone knows where I'm coming from.
Having said that, what Hillary needs to do is not go positive or go negative, but be honest. It may be too late.
She may have been a radical leftist back in the 70's, but the Clintons governed more or less from the center and she has been a center-left Senator. She was afraid to campaign from where she really was because of the MoveOn and Kos groups-- the left didn't trust her and the centrists were dismayed. The politics of it was too visible for comfort.
Similarly, she was afraid to attack Obama early on because of offending the African-American vote. I find that perversely disrespectful of African-Americans. She should have called him on Jeremiah Wright a year ago. So you piss off a bunch of people, big deal. Wright's a hypocritical loon and a true leader would have forced Obama to confront the issue as soon as it was discovered, whether or not the press cared, whether or not it was the 'right moment.' Same with Ayers, same with Rezko.
She could have attacked Obama on his spectacular record of non-achievement. The guy's an expert in winning awards--- that's it. He got elected to President of Harvard Law Review without having written a single law review article. He got into the Senate without doing anything in the State Senate and now he's trying for Presidency without doing anything in the Senate.
She could even have handled the race issue honestly. As in 'It's understandable that many African Americans would choose unite behind him because of what he represents to them. Having said that, he still has to demonstrate his fitness for the presidency. And in this, I am more fit because (.....)'
I think Hillary was perhaps fearful that she could be attacked on the same things she'd attack Obama on. He has close associations with far-left nutcases, so does she historically. He has a record of non-achievement, she has less achievement that McCain. But guess what--- she'd have been attacked on those things anyway in the general. At least she'd have been in it.