Letters to the Editor
Dubmanny
Published Letters: 63
-
Bummer for Obama
[Read the article: Why Jeremiah Wright is so wrong]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Full disclosure: I'm roting for Hillary in this primary process but still would support Obama if he gets the nod. Still, I feel bad for Barack about all this. I happen to believe much of what Rev. Wright says about the moral duality of a country that can fight to save continents and act generously and nobly but, at the same time, can enlsave its own people and brutishly invade other countries. There is more than a kernel of truth in what he says. The context and timing of this episode is what is really distrurbing. Does it appear to anyone else that Wright was insulted apout Obama's distancing himslef from Wright in the race speech and that now Wright is throwing Obama under the bus by referring to him as just some "do whatever he needs to do to win" politician?
In any case, Obama's unifying message is taking yet another hit. He didn't deserve this and I think it is really bruising his campaign.
-
Carol Richards has done it again, God bless her.
[Read the article: Why Jeremiah Wright is so wrong]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ladies and Gentlemen, direct from the Algonquin Round Table, please welcome, Salon poster, Carol Richards! Once again our Carol has used her wit and delicate biting satire to make her points about Joan Walsh. Carol doesn't insult our intelligence by saying things overtly and direclty (that's no fun, anyway). C.R. will draw you in and if you get the joke, you know what I mean. If you take the bait and are exposed as a partisan hater, we'll, we just can't explain it to you. You probably wouldn't undertsand anyway.
And Carol's not just candy for the smarter-than-thou Obama crowd, she's a legitimate genius. She teaches us why we can't vote for Clinton and she unmasks all the weak failed pretensions of nuetrality of Salon's Clinton-backing columnists. Sure some well-meaning people are made foolish and stupid along the way, but that's not as important as holding up a mirror up to those misguided blunt-edged pseudo-Republicans. Carol's not saying that the Clintonistas are dumber (the beauty of it is is that she's not saying anything, capeche?), it's just that we Obama supporters are a bit more perceptive and have the ability to understand nuance, that's all.
-
Both of these "religious" Democrats are sad and regressive
[Read the article: The Democrats' God problem]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If they were really were about "change," they would denounce all this religious mideval hocus-pocus and start worrying about what is real. It seems like many of Founding Fathers (full of secular diests, skeptics, etc.) were more modern than this curent lot, what this their vitriolic, conspiratorial pastors and fluffy statements about being imbued with the holy spirit. Can we Democrats please be progressive?
Obama's pandering use of a racially inflamatory but politically expedient local mega-church to make his own political gains is disgusting. His covering for this racial arsonist Wright is both stupid and chilling. Clinton should also use stronger statements to disassociate herself from religion and it's poison and use this instance to do something truly righteous and corageous for all of our benefit. Instead she'll take the bait and run further under the cross.
Change, schmange. What a joke.
-
Quandry for Obama
[Read the article: Breaking the Democratic deadlock]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]He has to debate Clinton again.
Problem is, Clinton has more mastery over the issues, the intricate details and her policies are more well-formed than Obama's. The debate could expose Obama and take him outside of his comfort zone of giving uplifting speeches to admiring audiences.
If Obama does not debate, he's seen as ducking Clinton and running out the clock. He is losing momentum to Clinton and he's seen as sitting on victories that came a while ago. If your biggest argument to become the leader of the free world is a mathematical delegate advantage gained months ago, your candidacy can be seen as fairly weak. Lst thing he needs is to back-in to the nomination while losing more than he wins.
But, if he does debate her, there is a real chance he'll get thumped again. Clinton knows this and will bait him until he gets on the stage with her again.
Obama, keep in mind, also has a much bigger war chest so he could continue to carpet bomb N.C and Indy with TV ads (just like he's hammering us to death with his ads on this site).
Rough spot for Barack right now, no?
-
@ Villemar
[Read the article: Breaking the Democratic deadlock]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Chill out. Things are tough economically for other people, not just you. No need to go postal. My eyes are still hurting from your last anti-Clinton screed.
I've heard people here comare Hillary Clinton to Karl Rove, George Bush, John McCain, Dick Cheney, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, etc. She's been called both a Nazi and a Neo-Con, a racist, and a Fox News operative. Even a Republican.
Be serious, you all don't believe that?