Letters to the Editor
Majorajam
Published Letters: 275 Editor's Choice: 11
-
Krugman off the rails
[Read the article: Krugman accuses Obama of "unscrupulous demagoguery"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Is he kidding? He says nothing about Hillary's incessant attacks on Obama's plan to make the payroll tax, the most regressive tax in existence- meaning it hammers the poor and working class, and contributes disproportionately to the catastrophically unjust wealth distribution in this country- less so:
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/02/a_clinton_mailer_in_arizona.php
How progressive is that rhetoric? How well positioned is Hillary going to be to reform the tax code to make it fair now that she has parroted the worst of the right wing talking points on the subject? These are the exact arguments that Krugman has been stridently making against Obama on Health Care, except that there is even less ambiguity on the subject (Kos for one doesn't believe that mandates are progressive, and has argued that they are analagous to a regressive tax). Hillary's borrowing words straight out of Movement Conservative mouths.
How come our dear advocate, whose conscience, as one of a liberal's, is so deeply attuned to these issues, is silent here, while he takes every opportunity to pound Obama? Yea- he cares alright. About his trumped up sense of outrage, his duplicitous rhetoric, and whatever God forsaken agenda he hides.
I'll take Brad DeLong and Paul Volcker, thank you very much, to say nothing of Frank Rich, over the shrill obnoxious one anytime.
-
@cythera45
[Read the article: Krugman accuses Obama of "unscrupulous demagoguery"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Informed as ever cythera:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/4/24033/97081/188/449344
-
Electability
[Read the article: Sweet home Chicago]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Vote for Hillary = Vote for McCain...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080206/NATION/476091143/1001
Frankly, that would be an issue to me if they were equally good candidates, but that is not my judgment. As regards substance, Hillary's plan to suspend foreclosures for five years is the most naive, counter-productive and clearly pandering plan put forward in this election cycle, bar none including Huckabee's God forsaken consupmtion tax. It would DEVASTATE an already reeling housing market and financial sector, and plunge this country into systemic meltdown and crisis. That this is so obvious, proves the bone head idea would never see the light of day, (although, it will make her seem like the 'candidate for the economy' during the cycle. belch). Frankly, if this is the rancid beef, I'll stick with the bun.
-
@ncawley
[Read the article: What I really wanted to say to Chris Matthews]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yup, Hillary's done so much for people, I just don't know where to start. Especially in the Senate, not sure what she's done there, no one's ever come forward with a single accomplishment, but it must have been substantial given how much 'experience' I keep hearing about.
One thing's for certain, the shareholders at Wal-Mart were well taken care of when she was sitting on the board raising no objection while the company busted unions and bankrupted small town businesses all throughout the nation as it relentlessly expanded, (oh yes and engaged in egregious sex discrimination they're finally being sued for). Word is she cashed her paychecks though, (how did she get that job anyway? I'm sure it had nothing to do with Hubbies connections). She was great at the Children's Defense Fund where she worked for less than a year before cashing in on her degree, becoming a corporate lawyer defending corporations in suits brought by workers injured on the job and other corporate work (if she were still at her old career, chances are she'd be defending Wal-Mart against that sex discrimination suit). She took care of even more people when she voted to send young men and women off to a fraudulent war where thousands died slaughtering over 1 million Iraqi men, women and children. Certainly, she has been consistent in dolling out so much help to the people- pray she never helps you.
As for Hillary being immune to Swift Boating, sell crazy somewhere else. She's now self-financing her campaign, this coming from a former first couple that has more ruthlessly cashed in on being former President than any other in history, and it's not close, (see for example Bill's excellent adventure in Kazakhstan, i.e. coddling up to 3rd world dictators for cash). The list of scandals past and present is massive: http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=076fd56f-4aca-4683-a9d1-3c55d748946e&k=60222, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/14/us/politics/14gupta.html?pagewanted=print, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/23/185152/91/34/401675)
Oh yes, and she voted for the war before she called for withdrawl, but not before, in 2005, she stood in the Green Zone and extolled the virtues of our illegal occupation. Then again, the primaries hadn't started yet.
Yes, immune to Swift Boating is what comes to mind immediately. Let me know how the lobotomy goes.
-
@zenwick
[Read the article: What I really wanted to say to Chris Matthews]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You're welcome to your talking points, but I'm not your strawman. Your kinswoman in arms floated a ridiculous canard about how Hillary is the champion of the voiceless and immune to the Swift Boat Republican machine and I blew it up for her. If you'd like to continue along that line, I'm all ears.
Anonymous, you haven't the first clue what you're talking about. Lifting the cap on the payroll tax would make it remarkably more progressive (progressive caps work the other way- they kick in as income grows, not out). As it stands now, the payroll tax is by far the most regressive tax on the books, unless you count the lottery. Hillary has attacked Obama's plan to make it more progressive by using rhetoric borrowed directly from Movement Conservatism. By the argument of his eminence Professor Krugman, that will make it impossible for her, if God forbid she is elected, to narrow the gap between haves and have nots in this country- to achieve the indisputably most important progressive goal. Because if she tries to make the tax code fairer, the Republicans are going to use her own words against her to kill the policy. I wonder why Krugan's tremendous liberal conscience doesn't compel him to write a column about that... Hmmm...
Btw, about health care mandates: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/4/24033/97081/188/449344