Letters to the Editor
tomreedtoon
Published Letters: 805 Editor's Choice: 81
-
You're out of touch, we're out of time.
[Read the article: Live and let live]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've never been able to be angry at Mr. Kellor, even when he attempts something I don't think he has any ability to do; get angry or discuss politics. In fact, I feel sorry that he stumbled into this situation without really understanding what was making his Hush Puppies stick to the floor.
Just as Republicans demonized Democrats, or anyone else who disagreed with the Bushies, so have Democrats become irreconcilably split from Republcans. And calling them cute, slightly insulting names like the "Democrat Party" isn't helping. Worst of all, while he sees Clinton as a uniting figure, all she is doing is uniting lots of people in both parties against her. She is too tarnished, too self-interested and too easy a target for anything else.
Yet, Kellor is right. We need a uniting figure. There just doesn't happen to be one in either party that has made an appearance. That person would have to be a Democrat, because the Republicans marched in lock-step behind Bush too long to think independently. But it couldn't be a Democrat with any support for the war; Lieberman, not strictly a Democrat any more, is also too compromised a figure.
The country needs someone who can appeal to the healing process, someone who is charismatic and human, someone who thinks of people rather than inflexible ideologies. But there isn't a Franklin Delano Roosevelt anywhere in sight. If memory serves, even Roosevelt didn't look like a great figure until he was actually elected; his "fear itself" speech was a shock and a uniting moment for the country. Who could such a figure be? Obama? Clark? Dean? Will we have to roll the dice and hope for the best? God help us. Please.
-
Considerable fire about a mild article.
[Read the article: Barack Obama and the Springfield race riot]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Why are people upset about this article? It's remarkably mild, and it mostly dredges up some history and clashes it against the present. Mr. Rasenberger just dredged up some facts about Springfield, listed them next to Obama's announcement and tried to make some sparks. This is a common way to produce an article if there is nothing in the situation that merits mention. Kind of like if there was some entree sold in the Seminole Hard Rock's bar that had some vague connection to the blonde bimbo that died there.
Those letters, like a mirror, reflect more about the writers than about anything Rasenberger wrote. It might have been different if there was something about Springfield that the current administration had affected. Say, to reach for straws, that more of its citizens died in Iraq than any other Illinois town or state capital. Bereft of that sensible connection, most of the responses are about the posters' attitudes towards race.
It is still valuable, of course. It shows up how our screwy attitudes towards race will pollute anything Obama does. No matter if he is as noble as Dr. King or as venal as Don King, race is going to play a part in his political career, and it could be a very unpredictable and weird factor, because everything we do with race is unpredictable and weird.