Letters to the Editor
sorenreport
Published Letters: 79 Editor's Choice: 7
-
Character flaw?
[Read the article: The Democratic duel of the race]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Who doesn't have them? But by deliberately buying into the Republican strategy of hurling insults at any opportunity, Edwards has completely lost any respect he may have garnered by focusing on those without power in America. "Smiling and snarling" is the way one Salon poster put it. And I'm supposed to vote for that?! He's the good guy?! And Chris Dodd - my former favorite - is doing the same thing. Sure, he doesn't think it's fair that so many people claim they will never vote for Hillary - but he's gonna bring it up anyway in a lame attempt to reach double-digit numbers in the polls. Oh, right, he's the uncalculating candidate.
Good for Bill Richardson and Kucinich for defending Hillary against the personal attacks, but it's an absolute disgrace that they felt the need to do so.
So, let's see. Hillary is a carpetbagger (a comment straight from the Guilliani campaign before he pulled out of the NY Senate race), has bad character (just as Romney says, those Clintons are terrible people), is responsible for NAFTA (wait a minute, she wasn't even in the Senate back then), opposes lifting the SS cap (hmmm, I swear she said no such thing), voted for war in Iran (it was non-binding, folks), is supporting Mukasey for AG (oops, she came out against him - foiled again!), etc. It's retchedly hilarious to have holier-than-thou posters accuse Hillary of all sorts of dasterdly deeds - and then lie mercilessly to try to make their point.
The ridiculous comments against Hillary are reaching ever-higher levels of hyperbole. Democrats can't be so stupid that they themselves would trash someone who has a pretty good chance of winning the nomination. Hillary is running a fairly centrist campaign. Why? Because to win a national election, you have to appeal to a broad range of people - not just your sycophants. But I am getting the sneaking suspicion that many of the anti-Hillary posters are simply Republicans in disguise. Or maybe Democrats are that stupid.
-
One more thing . . .
[Read the article: The Democratic duel of the race]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Did you know Hillary killed Vince Foster, too?
Sorry, couldn't resist. ;)
-
Didn't Richardson come to her defense?
[Read the article: Boys against girl?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Seems like if Richardson thought they were all piling it on - and they clearly were, including the "moderators," as all the media outlets have reported - then indeed they were piling it on. So, Tim, the title of your post seems disingenuous. It's not "spin," it's the truth. And if the "guys" feel a little guilty about it, then maybe they should. And, yes, this is good practice for when the Republicans go after her (again and again). Americans love a fighter and Hillary is one of the best. That's why she's been so successful.
-
She was at WELLESLEY, for cripes sake!
[Read the article: "Boys against girl," Part II]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]And she talked about gender issues - why is this a suprise or a mistake? Sexism - just like racism - is alive and well in America. And politics IS an old-boys network (a white one, too). Why should she not point that out? If Obama went to Howard University and pointed out that racism plays a role in politics (see successful Republican strategy), would he be so accused of opportunism, of using his "blackness" to get ahead, of playing the race card? I have no idea why Obama is sinking to these levels. It is truly unfortunate.
But, honestly, Tim, this "boys vs. girls" thing (your words by the way, not Clinton's) is a lot of drama for nothing.
-
Good ol' anonymous sources
[Read the article: Clinton: "They're piling on because I'm winning"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]From the AP article:
"Clinton's advisers, speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss internal matters, said there is a clear and long-planned strategy to fend off attacks by accusing her male rivals of gathering against her."
I know I always believe anonymous sources, especially when they are saying something bad about their boss. Would her "advisors" really say such a thing to a reporter?
-
Edwards is truly pitiful
[Read the article: Edwards refuses to say whether he'd back Clinton]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Even so, if he gets the nomination, I will vote for him. But honestly, what a jackass.
-
It was a good question
[Read the article: On the fake campaign trail]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Maybe the candidates are tired of getting asked the SAME thing over and over. In this case, it wasn't a softball question, so I don't see the relation to the Jeff Gannon scandal. And I'm sure candidates do plant their supporters who ask the easy questions, just as they pack auditoriums with their supporters who cheer their every word. Didn't Obama do that last weekend? It's called frickin' campaigning! Funny how the focus is on the question and not on her DAMN answer. What was it? Was it good? Bad? Triangulating???
-
I don't have a religion
[Read the article: Mitt Romney's ominous verb]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Does that mean I'm not free - but the church-goer sitting next to me is free? Confused as to how this would work . . .
-
Not just for you, Al . . .
[Read the article: Al Gore on the unhappiest of anniversaries]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That "unwelcome verdict" was also the death knell for American democracy - if you think about it - since it ushered in the Bush era of unwarranted war, unmanageable deficits, theocratic interference, and the denigration of the constitution by those sworn to uphold it. A sad day for all of us.
-
Polls don't make sense
[Read the article: Who is the most "electable" Democrat?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This poll is simply wrong. In no other poll does Edwards hold such a lead. He's dropping steadily in New Hampshire, as the race between Hillary and Obama tightens (down to 16% in the latest AP poll). And have you seen his new commercial?! It's all about how WRONG the Democrats are. Just what the country needs. A candidate who doesn't differentiate between the two parties (After all, Al Gore was just like Bush, remember?)
-
Nothing romantic about drug adiction
[Read the article: Flirting with disaster]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Alcohol too. Almost been there and certainly have seen my share of incredible people lose their talent and in some cases their lives because of it. Can you imagine if Billie Holiday and Jimi Hendrix had lived longer than 44 and 28 years, respectively? With Winehouse, I get the feeling she will either be a flash in the pan (mainly due to the abuse) or end up like Anna Nicole Smith - another woman we watched self-destruct for our entertainment. And Winehouse will simply not have the legacy of a Holiday or Hendrix. It's quite sad. When an addiction reaches the point of self-abuse, you really need professional help.