Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 228 Editor's Choice: 9
-
@ Goedel - fair enough
[Read the article: Who is the real John McCain?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]After Richard Nixon's "I have a plan..." to get the US out of Vietnam in 1968, I am rather skeptical of such plans. We did not finally leave Vietnam until 1975.
And it's worth being skeptical about. It's just that Obama's plan has more specifics and intent behind it than McCain's.
Furthermore, Sen Obama has another plan - to intensify the US military commitment in Afghanistan. That would have been like leaving Vietnam for the jungles of Cambodia!
Mm, I disagree that that's exactly the situation. We're already fully involved in Afghanistan, and were before we blundered into Iraq. And Afghanistan is actually a more dangerous breeding ground for terrorism.
So, invading Iraq was actually more like invading Cambodia after we're already committed to military action Korea, I would say.
According to a keen observer of US foreign policy, Chalmers Johnson, what Bill Clinton did in launching missiles into the Sudan and into Afghanistan may very well have recruited the 9/11 criminals into the Al Queda fold. Johnson calls this "blowback". As Yogi Berra has been quoted as saying: Theoretically, there is a difference between theory and practice...but in practice there is none!"
It's possible. But invading Iraq has given Al Qaeda worldwide prominence, and killed a million or so Iraqi citizens, 3000+ US soldiers, wounded another 20,000+ US soldiers, wasted trillions of dollars, etc. etc.
The medicare and social security specifics on Sen Obama's website are small potatoes compared with what is looming with the retirement of the baby-boomers and the decreases in the work-force size.
No, actually, the specifics cover it. Remember that even without **any** changes, Social Security is solvent until 2042, and even 2052 by some accounts. And even then, it wouldn't stop all money, it would just start paying out 80% of benefits.
So it's really only a very minor course correction that's required, even in the face of boomer retirement. The Bush administration and the GOP would rather scaremonger everyone so they can alter or scuttle the program. Something about it just burns their buns - I think partly that it's helping people who aren't wealthy just because they're citizens...
As for Medicare, ditto. Remember that with actual bargaining with pharmaceutical co's in place, Medicare costs to taxpayers could be slashed at least 10%, and probably more like 30% or more. That right there is huge.
They are certainly small potatoes compared with a $600 billion military budget and a proposed $700 billion bailout.
Sure - but it seems likely that they pay for themselves. So other budget expenditures wouldn't necessarily affect them.
It is a sad picture for those of us who were hoping for more than a change to an articulate president from a bumbling one.
It's more than an articulate president; it would be a change to a president who has an accurate worldview, doesn't make military decisions based on what he thinks are God's direct messages (how scary is that??); doesn't want to twist the Constitution until he has as much power as possible, and also has actual intellectual curiosity, an actual desire and ability to work with others, and an actual ability to listen to his advisors and even admit if he is wrong.
That's all the foundation level, you would think, for what a President should have; but that's actually been rare for the last 40 years. Bill Clinton was so successful as a President merely because he had most of those qualities. As a progressive one can find great fault with Clinton, and I often do; nevertheless the difference between him and GWB is night and day.
And I think that what we're seeing in Obama is a true moderate. A reasonable man who wants to make the US government work again. This requires concessions in areas that irritate the progressive in me very much. But moving forward does require compromise, it really does.
So I think my duty as a progressive is to fight like hell for what I want, and then if I don't get it, work with what I do.
-
@ Rambling Rose - as long as he isn't continuing GWB's policies, that's fine with me!
[Read the article: Who is the real John McCain?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As long as Obama doesn't invade a country that's no threat to us while we're already in the middle of a war, let the terrorists who actually committed 9/11 run free, plunge the country into debt so bad that China's propping our dollar (and thus has us by the short hairs), lie about Social Security to ruin it, and lie about Medicare to give away billions to big pharma - he can keep flip-flopping every day of the week, and change churches the way Madonna changes outfits.
Hey, those are my priorities - peace and prosperity. Call me crazy.
-
When McCain/Palin lose, will that also be the work of God?
[Read the article: The Word from Wasilla]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Since God runs everything, and all.
I won't hold my breath for the fundies to acknowledge that possibility.
-
@ AKA Smith - let's be clear about Biden and Clinton's separate tears
[Read the article: How Sarah Palin blew it]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Biden choked up when relating a personal story. Hillary choked up for no visible reason than that she was under pressure.
Who else teared up, on this campaign? Romney, in his Oscar-eligible role relating a story about Martin Luther King. Romney definitely didn't tear up because he was under pressure about how his campaign was going.
I do think very strongly that if any male candidate teared up for the same reason Hillary did - because of the stress of a campaign - that man would be toast from that moment on. That's not how it should be - I just think that's how men are viewed in our culture.
This is the reverse side of sexism, in how it affects men: men are supposed to be invulnerable to pressure around them. And of men are to be considered worthy of power, they can't ever show any emotion under pressure except anger.
Now I agree that expressing emotion when you're under stress is not in and of itself a bad thing.
And I agree that Palin is an awful candidate. :)
-
@ PA4McCain - awesome! Love to hear how McCain is new & different than GWB
[Read the article: How Sarah Palin blew it]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Please, educate me - tell me all the ways that McCain will do things differently than GWB, on:
- Iraq
- the Economy
- Medicare
- Education
- Constitutional limits of the Presidency
And please, link to specifics. I love details.
Looking forward,
~meta