Letters to the Editor
Uberbah
Published Letters: 89 Editor's Choice: 1
-
you guys seem to be forgetting something
[Read the article: California Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Bigots already played the gay marriage card in 2004, getting initiatives on the ballot in conservative states to bring in voters. Voters that then gave Bush his second term. But most of those measures passed, and gay marriage is illegal in those states. So what is going to bring them out this time?
No, I think that "gay marriage" will join the other Republican boogyman, along with libruls and socialists. The same kind of boogyman they've tried in three special elections this year for the House and have gone 0 for 3.
But yes, it would have been nice if they had held off on this case until December of this year, after Obama gets elected but before he takes office.
Regardless, the best way to handle this is to deal with the Republican BS head on, as usual. Ask if these marriage bans helped out local economies or fight Al Queda. Ask when Republicans are going to do something about the divorce rate and adultery, which is a far greater sin in the Bible than homosexuality - while pointing out all the Republican affairs and the fact that Massachusetts has the best divorce rate in the country. Ask what the real difference is between the gay marriage bans of today and bans on inter-racial marriage 50 years ago.
Avoiding Republican attacks and ceding issues has only resulted in defeat for Democrats. Challenging Republican attacks got us our current majority in Congress.
Let's challenge them on gay marriage.
-
but Kate, Obama will win New York and California reguardless
[Read the article: Obama: "We have returned to Iowa with a majority of delegates"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Go ahead and rummage through your bag of stale pro-Clinton talking points, but she's done. And has been for two months now.
-
Arthur, here's some math for you
[Read the article: In Iowa, Obama reaches toward victory ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7arCYI0a-lU
Oregon is 90% white, same as Kentucky. Income is lower than in Ohio, and it has a larger manufacturing base than Ohio or West Virginia. And tonight he won it in a landslide.
Obama doesn't have a problem with "working class white voters". Appalachia has a problem with Obama.
-
Clintonball
[Read the article: In Iowa, Obama reaches toward victory ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvin_and_Hobbes#Calvinball
http://youtube.com/watch?v=eWSl6bEisUA&feature=related
This episode of Clintonball is brought to you by MCE, once again showing us how Clinton supporters move the goalposts as fast as McCain flipflops on the issues. Landslide losses are a giant problem for Obama, but a non-issue for Hillary. Losing the "white working class vote" is a problem for Obama in states he was never expected to win, but not for Hillary in states that were favored for Obama. Broad support among liberal Democrats (i.e. the people that donate $$$ and get out the vote) isn't a sign of Hillary's problems with the party base, but of Obama's elitism.
-
Angela, we've got math. You've got myth.
[Read the article: In Iowa, Obama reaches toward victory ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This race has never been 50-50. Obama has always had the lead. For much of the race (until March 4th) there wasn't a single day where Hillary gained more delegates than Obama, who's had the pledged delegate lead since Iowa. And when Hillary had her supposed "big comeback" with Texas (where Obama actually won more delegates), Ohio and Rhode Island, she actually only picked up four more delegates than he did that day.
Angela, you have the right to your own opinion, but you don't have the right to your own set of facts. And the facts have a well-known anti-Hillary bias. Hillary supporters calling Obama arrogant is a ginormous case of the pot calling the kettle black. He's had this race locked up for a full three months now, ever since Wisconsin. Barring a dead girl or a live boy, there was no way Obama wasn't going to be the nominee. And yet Hillary and her supporters decided that splitting the party over a 10% chance of winning was well worth the cost.
-
Karen and Kate: puffing up Hillary's sinking balloon with hot air
[Read the article: In Iowa, Obama reaches toward victory ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Karen, if superdelegates not following their districts is a problem, why wasn't it a problem when Hillary was getting so many endorsements from those superdelegates before their states actually voted? And where's the Clintonian talking points that superdelegates are "independent" and "free to make their own choice", eh?
And Kate, your speaking nonsense about Florida and Michigan. The states knew what the rules were in advance, and decided to break them anyway. Know who voted to penalize them? Harold Ickes, one of the top operatives in Hillary's campaign. Know who threatened Michigan with the same penalty in 2004 for pulling the same crap? Top Hillary operative Terry McAuliffe. Know who agreed that these primaries wouldn't count this year? Hillary Clinton.
You guys are playing Clintonball so hard that your turning into the left's version of wingnuts: the rules don't matter, facts don't matter, and the only thing consistent about you is your inconsistency.