Letters to the Editor
Kingbreaker
Published Letters: 115 Editor's Choice: 1
-
Thoughtful analysis worth reading, whoever you support
[Read the article: A new low in Clinton bashing]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Clinton supporters keep on trying to spin this as nothing more than politically motivated opportunism on the part of their opponents. It is not. the excerpt of the articel below articulates it more clearly than I could.
_______________
The reality is if Barack Obama were not a black candidate, it is possible that the comments might not have sparked such a firestorm, but he is a black candidate -- the most high profile in our nation's history and as such the increased threat to his safety is a very real reality Americans must contend with. Though not a subject discussed at length, it is public knowledge that Obama was granted secret service protection earlier than any presidential candidate in our nation's history. And though we don't like to dwell on some of the ugly truths of our country's past, there is good reason to worry. We all know the horrible fates that befell Martin Luther King and Malcolm X, but largely forgotten are the dangers faced by lesser-known African-Americans in leadership positions.
Vernon Jordan, best known for being one of former president Clinton's closest confidantes, was the victim of a shooting at the hands of a racist spree killer who targeted minorities, while he served as head of the National Urban League. He survived. Al Sharpton, self-proclaimed activist and former presidential candidate was the victim of a stabbing that was believed to be racially motivated as well. He survived.
With all due respect to Sharpton and Jordan, their power and national profiles, while arguably significant, are not on par with that of a president. This means if their lives have been in danger, being overly sensitive to the potential dangers facing Barack Obama does not make one overly sensitive at all. It makes one a realist, and this more than anything is what prompted the highly charged reaction to Clinton's comments. She also probably wasn't helped by the timing of her remarks, which came on the heels of an equally ill-advised "joke" by former GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee about Obama ducking from gunfire. Not to mention a cover published by the Roswell Beacon depicting Obama as a sniper target that sparked such outrage that the paper ultimately removed it from its site.
--Keli Goff
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/keli-goff/hillary-oj-and-rfk_b_103717.html
-
What the hell?
[Read the article: Scott McClellan: The beatings continue]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]OMFG Joan,
WHy did you have to scratch the scab again?
Why does EVERYTHING, including Scott McClellan, somehow boil down to "The Obama campaign is nasty?" Grow up. Deal with it. RFK gate (which I think everybody has forgotten about) has nothing to do with McClellan. Yet you could not resist the cheap shot and reinforcing your image as an emotionally invested Clinton die-hard who should recuse herself from campaign coverage.
-
@Karenn2
[Read the article: Clinton wins!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Any man in Hillary's position would take this to the convention, and nobody would say a word about it. In 1980, Ted Kennedy was 600 delegates behind--600-- and he took it to the convention."
Do you know what happened that election cycle?
We LOST.
Because the party was DIVIDED!
Why is Ted Kennedy your role model? What conceivable good could it do the country if Clinton took this to Denver? Sure, a bunch of her supporters might feel an emotional rush based on vengeance, but that's about it. Meanwhile, we get more Alitos and Scalias. Not worth it.
This has nothing to do with sexism, whatsoever. Any other candidate, male or female, would have conceded tonight. I think misogyny is an awful thing. But the more you folks use it as a wedge and a tool of manipulation, the less seriously other people take it. An accusation is a terrible thing to waste.
-
Maybe the best thing that Obama could do. . .
[Read the article: The other 18 million]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Would be to talk to Hillary,
and have HILLARY talk to Hillary supporters.
Once again, why must all the responsibility for the nastiness of the campaign (ranging from Geraldine Ferrarro to the JFK comments) always and inevitably end up being Obama's fault?
Granted he is not perfect, not by a long shot. My preferred candidate was Dodd. But it *is* possible that campaign nastiness is a two-way street.
-
Does anybody take him seriously at this point?
[Read the article: Sitting shiva with Hillary]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]One wonders why lolcait ever supported Hillary, since her positions and voting record are 95% identical to Obama's.
And Lolcait is correct - she didn't coast to prominence on her biography. This is too obvious to point out, but she coasted on Bill's.
Smells like a flatulent troll in here.
-
THANK YOU
[Read the article: Democrats, put down your swords]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thank you, Mr. Conason.
This is probably the best advice yet on the current situation.
-
-- dhdOWNEY
[Read the article: Hillary's final curtain ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You do realize that there's no way to make a definitive claim about the popular vote, right?
You do realize that Obama won more pledged delegates no matter how they are counted, and no matter how FL and MI would have been settled, right?
You also realize that the DNC R&B committee was packed with HRC supporters, right?
So how exactly did the DNC hand this to Obama?
On an unrelated note. . .
Hutman, the newest rules set for DnD was released on friday. Have Fun!
-
Direct confrontation!
[Read the article: Live-blogging the debate, No. 1]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Obama called out mCCain on a lie? (Something about tax breaks for oil companies.) Keep it up, Obama!
I'm not impressed with the "confrontational" format. It seems designed to produce one liners rather than insights.
-
Good point Barack!
[Read the article: Live-blogging the debate, No. 1]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Obama is nailing him on supporting Bush spending increases! Awesome!
-
Wow! Sparky!!
[Read the article: Live-blogging the debate, No. 1]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Oabama says "You think the war started in 2007!"
-
Bridge to nowhere?
[Read the article: Live-blogging the debate, Part 1]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Dang!!!! Joe drop the B-bomb on that one!
She's trying to cram LOTS of talking points in quickly - looking rushed.
OTOH she does have that air-head prom queen gleam in here eye.
-
Nucular?
[Read the article: Live-blogging the debate, Part 2]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I bet she was COACHED to say that.
She's also talking massive advantage of the gender gap to get in the "gotcha" liners.. . . knowing that Biden can't respond in kind. . . but he's still doing a good job.
-
Schooled!
[Read the article: Live-blogging the debate, Part 2]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]She just got schooled after the "looking into the past" screed. She was staring into the lectern of shame. Sounds like she's forgetting the facts she's been coached on.
-
Transparently. . .
[Read the article: Foreign policy shift]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Terrible rebuttal by Palin on refuting Biden re: Iraq. . . last foreign policy question.
-
Read the consitution, Sarah!
[Read the article: Foreign policy shift]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Palin clearly had no clue about what Cheney said re: the Constitution!