Letters to the Editor
chhabili
Published Letters: 382 Editor's Choice: 4
-
Tom Payne
[Read the article: The knives come out in South Carolina]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You can agree to disagree with people and still retain some measure of respect and credibility. You however, take potshots at people, by name calling and churlish ire. Whatever your political persuasion, do raise important issues and concerns, but do refrain from bullying and name calling i.e. anal anonymous, who is a thoughtful and humorous poster.
-
Badger Blue
[Read the article: The knives come out in South Carolina]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You make a compelling argument on VP choices, etc.
Do you have a sense that Hillary will get the nomination? I think she will, given the vast political machinery that the Clintons have been nurturing since Bill left the office and Hillary became the Senator from NY. Running against that machinery is formidable at best. Obama is a flash in the pan and does not exhibit the rigors of a seasoned politician. He is a hollow shell in the glitz of youth and charm, more of a motivational guru than an expert on complexities of governance.
Edwards like you said, is progressive and therefor not that rigorously promoted by the DNC. I like him the best, although I am certain that he will not last too long, unless he really comes out strong against the Clinton juggernaut.
I think that we are selling Clinton short on touting the inelectability of this "divisive" political figure. I do not like her right of the center politics, but I think she can be elected. With their political gumption and team of quick response operatives, they can overcome the machinations of the "right wing conspiracy." Besides, who knows how the women are going to vote in those Red states. She is only divisive because the media has deemed her that. And look what the NH women had to hand the MSM (thanks anonymous).
What do you think?
-
damned if you do, and damned if you don't
[Read the article: The knives come out in South Carolina]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I have received a couple of emails from Walter Shapiro, who wrote this article and he doesn't see how misleadning his article is in terms of who started the snarl in the debate. This to me puts a spin on Hillary as the instigator of nastiness and Obama who had to fight back. The media is in thrall of the charismatic Obama, more syle than substance, more rhetorix than meat and more charm than depth.
As for Hillary, I am quite perturbed by the double standard that many hold toward her. If she dishes out, she is a bitch, if she does not, then how is she going to stand up against McCain. My god, it is quite evident that Hillary can dish it out AND Hillary can take it too. Can't say that about Obama, who runs to mummy every time the big kids beat him up.
And what is there to be discouraged about? The world is full of nastiness. Kerry lost because he was too nice to stand up to Bush and the swifboaters, Dukakis lost because he was too nice to counter the Lee Atwater attack ads, Gore lost because he was too nice to ask Bill Clinton to stump for him, and was too nice to ask Joe Lieberman to run as his running mate, that sent scores of some of you to vote for Ralph Nader that spoiled the election results.
We want our leaders to be strong, forthright and yes, at times mean and nasty. Bill Clinton won the first time around with George !, because he did not allow any of the attack machines to undermine what he said. He won again with Bob Dole as his adversary and came out on top.
So let the Clintons play their game out. If you want morality, go to church. I have not seen anything that the Clintons have done illegally. Much of the snarling is inuendo about this email and that mailing which did NOT come out of the Clinton campaign. Here again is the hand of right wing politics and I am afraid, many of you have been suckered again. I am not a Clinton supporter but will vote for her gladly after she gets the nomination.
Apologize for the rant
-
Anonymous - how many of you are there?
[Read the article: The knives come out in South Carolina]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You wrote
"I'm also referring to Billary--the tag team couple (who run together and stay together on a ticket) who helped coin the phrase "wag the dog."
ummmmmm. The term was not coined during the Clinton administration. "don't let the tail wag the dog" has been around for a long long time.
There are a few "Anonymous" posters on this forum, with many differing views. Is it possible for you Anons to come up with a different handle, such as "ABC" or "XYC" or any noun that is not proper so we can distinguish one anonymous poster from the other? Heck, even I am anonymous, so your privacy is intact.
-
Barak Obama says his supporters may not support Hillary if she wins the nomination
[Read the article: The knives come out in South Carolina]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]He said this on television. He said that if he, Barak wins the nomination, Hillary's supporters will vote for him in the general elections. However, his supporters may not vote for Hillary, if she wins. I see two possibilities here for this paragon of unity and change:
1. If Bark loses the primaries, he may run as an independent, thereby assuring Hillary and the Democratic party a definite defeat.
2. Barak will not actively support Hillary in her bid for the presidency, although he is certain that Hillary's supporters will vote for him should he win the primaries.
So much for the "uniter" and not the divider, the "healer" and not the one inflicting the wounds.