Letters to the Editor
Drewonimo
Published Letters: 135 Editor's Choice: 4
-
Bravo xufapemu -- and here's to happy warriors
[Read the article: What does Hillary want?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thank you for the attitude adjustment. Way too many of us need to see the bigger picture and let go of our petty disputes to unite.
While I agree that Obama is the (very very likely) nominee, I see no harm in Hillary going through the remaining primaries. Obama AND Clinton are both better candidates than they were 6 months ago and I do think that going state to state, the full country is getting a taste of retail politics that only NH and Iowa used to enjoy. That it stresses out the die-hard politicos is simply too bad. It's good for the party and good for the country to have a good fight, even if it is sometimes a little messy.
Look at John McCain. He got to "unify" his party a full two months earlier. What good has that done him? No one's paying attention to him and he's generating very little heat. That nearly a quarter of GOP voters didn't vote for him in these past two primaries is significant; that it's barely mentioned and that having his primary battle over gives him very little opportunity to address this awful dynamic is even more significant.
One thing I've come to appreciate about certain politicians that I didn't use to; when they become "happy warriors." This was always Bill Clinton's strong suit. He could take a hit and he just got right back up, cracked a joke, and got back in the fight. When he was petulant and whiny, he wasn't likable and people were put off. Most of the time, though, he earned the respect of even many of those opposed to him. You had to give him credit for his willingness to keep at it, to have a sense of humor about it and to look like he was having fun.
Hillary has finally gotten into this groove. As the primaries started, she did seem at times too robotic or imperious. Then, when events didn't go her way, she sometimes seemed overly defensive and whiney. It didn't matter that she sometimes had legitimate complaints, this attitude just doesn't sell. But since Texas and Ohio she seems to have found her groove. Sometimes it's over the top but very often she comes off as someone who not going to let the little stuff get her down. I can't stand Bill O'Reilly and absolutely dreaded seeing her on the show -- but she was maginficent. She was tough without being abrasive - in other words, a happy warrior. She cleaned his clock without creating an enemy in the process. I'm willing to bet there were a number of GOP Hillary-haters who tuned in and had to admit to themselves that she had earned a bit of respect.
Obama has shown sides of this too. When he wiped the dust from his shoulders and pants and lightens up about the crap he's had to take, he's SO compelling. We see that this is a person that can take a lick and isn't going to let it rock him from his groove. Personally, as much as I love him as he is, earnest intellectual wonk and all, I do think he could stand to let the happy warrior out more. The fear that if he's too much the fighter he will be labeled the evil of all evils, an angry black man, is understandable. But if he's a happy fighter who makes it really clear that it's not about him and that, at the end of the day, the process is a long haul and the little stuff won't get you down, I think it'll raise his game all the more.
Here's to us all coming together and doing what we can to enjoy the challenge ahead rather than get all snarky, blamey and holier than thou. Forgive me for the "warrior" metaphor -- as I don't know a better phrase for this. But if we each become a bit of the happy warrior, in what will be a long and often nasty battle in the general election, we can get through it better, more effectively and be less stressed in the process.
-
Clinton supporters vs. Obama supporters
[Read the article: What does Hillary want?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Can we please get off this "Clinton supporters" always XYZ and "Obama supporters" are ABC. The supporters we are hearing from the loudest on boards like this don't represent anyone but themselves. The few that are angry, rude and uncivil do not represent the candidate nor the vast majority of Obama and Clinton supporters who, while having a strong preference, would be happy to have the other win.
And, no, this was not an invitation to say that your single strongly held preference is somehow indicative of what Clinton or Obama supporters believe. This is so "them" and "us" and childish. This race has pushed a lot of buttons, for sure, and some good will come of that. But unless we each own our own anger, prejudices and fears, we're forever going to be projecting them onto "them" and "they" and we'll get nowhere.
-
It was the GOP in Florida that moved the primary up....
[Read the article: Clinton writes to Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You can't blame the candidates for something that was clearly done for the advantage of the GOP by the GOP-controlled legislature. If I'm missing something here, please enlighten me.
Near as I can tell, a LOT of party leaders in BOTH parties really screwed around with the primary season to maximize their state's advantage. The irony is that the Dem process is potentially heading toward a train wreck -- though I personally doubt that will happen. But the upside is that, to almost everyone's surprise, the journey to the wreck has overall been better for the process. Usually unintended consequences of our screw ups rarely yield such positive outcomes like record participation and true retail politicking that lasts longer than a month and is focused only on Iowa and New Hampshire.