Letters to the Editor
Majorajam
Published Letters: 304 Editor's Choice: 12
-
My point precisely
[Read the article: Hillary and the mean kids on the bus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Actually, that's what triggered this. Up until now you've struck me as not being a supporter of Hillary, so I have to say that this article, which without any substantiation asserts a pro-Obama anti-Hillary bias in the press, (ok, the latter is substantiated if anecdotally and, even in that, not altogether compellingly), and appears in the midst of Salon campaign coverage that has had me rolling my eyes for weeks. Well, pardon me for jumping to conclusions, but I'm not paid for this and therefore fairness and discipline is a grace that I can't always afford. At least you'll have to give me credit for allowing that the entry might be genuine ;)
-
L.W.M.
[Read the article: Hillary and the mean kids on the bus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]With all due respect, I think Lambert's a grade A moron, so I hope this is not one of those people you rely on. I had a go around with him on the Obama/Krugman stuff and in the very few instances when he lowered himself to speak to what I had said, he generally made asinine easily refutable arguments. If I were to venture onto Powerline or the Corner on the National Review, (or a few climate blogs I can think of), I would expect no less rational a response. That is saying something.
-
L.W.M.
[Read the article: Hillary and the mean kids on the bus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Actually, something in me doubts you are going to get far parsing stump speech rhetoric but to each seer his own. My clairvoyance only goes so far as recognizing a vote for the Iraq war and for saber-rattling against Iran, to say nothing of a ten year plan to become President that explains everything else she has done and not done in the Senate, does not a progressive make, and that political realities indicate it is him or her. Candidates don't disappoint me anymore- nor does an electorate constantly trying to outwit itself. I like to live here in the real world which is where my point of departure can often be marked with the politically like minded.
-
L.W.M.
[Read the article: Hillary and the mean kids on the bus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I could snap you in two using telekinesis with half my frontal lobe tied behind my back. Obama is talking about Pakistan in answer to a hypothetical designed to make him and the Democrats look foolish on national security- a trap the useful idiots- ehem- don't even realize exists. And frankly, he answered it correctly and aggressively, in a way that will put pressure on anyone that tries to ridicule him for it from the right (which leaves open the left for the stooges- ehem). All it says about Obama is that he is an astute campaigner, because the hypothetical is completely unrealistic under any conceivable circumstances given current or potential conditions in Pakistan...
Come to think of it, never mind. You can lead a dupe to water, but you can't make him do the right thing and dive in tied to a heavy object.
-
I can't say as I agree
[Read the article: Pop goes the solar bubble?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]A reduction in the price of PV panels from a supply shock will actually be good for the industry as a whole. By contrast, a reduction in demand for panels, for either a reduction in aggregate demand for power, a reduction in subsidies or a technological breakthrough on competing renewable energy or solar technology (there are a few of these- solar thermal, solar paint, etc.), would be very bad for the invested money across the industry. As it is, the specific news that Taiwan will start producing panels may be bad for a few uncompetitive PV manufacturers, but it will be good for everyone else and the industry as a whole (and there are many players that don't manufacture panels, from constituent parts to financing and structuring players to engineers and designers, etc. etc.). In fact, the price has to come down for PV to continue to compete with other forms of renewable technology and to take some of the pressure off of governments whose subsidies are massive for the amount of power they account for.
-
The Culture of Dirty Tricks...
[Read the article: Jonah Goldberg and Glenn Reynolds warn of "social unraveling" if Obama loses]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]and slimy attacks in the Republican party that grew up under Nixon and flourished under Rove, makes this kind of thing as certain as death or tax, regardless of Democratic nominee. There will be 527s and plenty of voter intimidation, voter id laws, and other fraud in swing states, (and the 'justice' department will get in on the act as it did in 04 & 06). The only thing the Democratic electorate controls is whether the slime will be tinged with misogyny or racism.
The problem for the GOP is that this stuff is only decisive in a close race like 2000 and 04, and this one won't be close. Obama is significantly more electable than Hillary in the general, which explains the Clinton camp's decision to attack him from the right in New Hampshire (where Independents and Republicans are a threat): http://thepage.time.com/abc-world-news-report-on-the-clinton-campaign/
Saying that, I don't think this is really relevant. Hillary's massive likability problem doesn't change the fact that by the general election the economy will be in serious recession by which time Bush's approval ratings will be substantially lower than Nixon's at the pinnacle of the Watergate scandal and the GOP will be as fractious as it has been in generations. Only if we nominate Kucinich do we stand a chance to lose.