Letters to the Editor
politicod
Published Letters: 43 Editor's Choice: 1
-
The GOP Debate
[Read the article: The godawful GOP debate ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]CNN is a non-partisan offender. The Las Vegas debate was awful. The audience booed candidates it didn't like. Blitzer didn't feel the need to remind the audience that each of these people had dedicated their lives to public service. Almost every comment at the Des Moines Register made reference to how badly managed that debate was. CNN has diminished greatly. It is simply interested in the horse race. It is not a forum for ideas. These debates should go back to being handled by the League of Women of Voters or some other non-commercial, non-partisan group, certainly one without a horse in the race.
-
The Republican Debate
[Read the article: What you missed while watching "Chad Vader"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...was awful. CNN chose questions that made Repbulicans look like a bunch of narrow-minded Yahoos. It is no surprise that prominent conservatives like Fred Barnes are irate about this debate. However CNN is an equal-oportunity offender. After the Las Vegas debate, liberals who did not support Hillary were also irate that her opponents were not allowed to complete the answers to their questions and that the post-debate commentators were all Hillary supporters. However, this was actually worse because it really made the Republicans look like they had not come to grips with the twenty-first century. CNN's choice of questions made me wonder if they had heard of the establishment clause to the constitution, if they were aware that a good number of Americans do not believe in Jesus, or anything for that matter, and by boxing the candidates in with these questions, CNN made these Republicans look inept. One last thing, Cooper's question to Guiliani and his non-follow up should be cause to send him back to journalism school to learn how to ask a question. Another terrible performance by America's best political team. I hope they'll quit before we have to endure another evening like this.
-
Walter Shapiro's Ear
[Read the article: The Dodd and Biden show]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You heard correctly. These two are experienced with wide-ranging legislative and foreign policy experienc. Possibly one will be Secretary of State and the other Attorney General.
This is, however, a change election. The entire electorate has been traumatized by the Bush years, and no matter whom you're supporting, you probably are hoping for something new and different. That does portent well for someone with years of Washington experience. Every Democrat is on record pledging a return of our constitutinal rights, some form of universal health care, and attention to our rickety economy and the faltering dollar. In January 2009, the world will know that America is ready to engage again. The Democrats are the lucky party this time because all their candidates are solid, bright and eager to do new and positive things for America. Don't be surprised if one or both of these men finds himself in a new Democratic administration. The fact that they are doing so poorly in the polls is simply an oddity of this particular election. "Life, as Jack Kennedy reminded us, "is not fair." But you did hear clearly, these are individuals of depth and character, and I do not think that will go unnoticed.
-
Today's Romney
[Read the article: Romney: "Freedom requires religion" ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I read Joan Walsh's column, and then I reread Romney's speech. He promised to keep his religious and political views separate, and once elected he would act in the best interests of the voters who elected him as he had done when he was Governor of Massachusetts. I am not sure that I agree with Joan and Walter about Romney's message. I felt this speech reintroduced Romney as the most prominent Republican on the national stage, an articulate person who could be trusted to be president. I think he towers over his competitors in the Republican field, especially the "Christian" candidate Mike Huckabee who as recently as yesterday had not heard of the NIE report. The problem for Romney is how do you square such an open, compassionate speech with some of his recent postions, particularly on immigration. In other words, is today's Romney, presidential, intelligent, cognizant of where the constitution's establishment clause stands, the same Romney who was so anti-immigration and so petty in last week's CNN YouTube debate? This candidate in movement needs to stop, and today's speech would be a good place for that to happen.
-
McCain
[Read the article: McCain wins early newspaper primaries]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]McCain is the only adult in the Republican field, but on Iraq it's more Bush. I believe he's the only candidate on either side who endorsed the "surge." This weekend he received the endorsement of 100+ military men. Does the GOP want to go into the General with this kind of baggage?
-
GOP--Be afraid
[Read the article: GOP to voters: Be afraid, be very afraid]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I watched the Republicans Saturday night, and came way hating Fred Thompson. Does this guy have any feelings for anyone--except his most prized possession, his trophy wife. When McCain offered us the surge forever, I felt the McCain boomlet had officialy subsided. While they all dumped on Romney, at least Romeny was animated, was proud of his accomplishments and stood somewhere in the late twentieth century. I am a Democrat, and I view this group as a curiousity, but if forced to choose, I would go with Romney, the guy with the most ideas, the one who could pivot on a dime, and hopefully move back to the middle where he belongs.
-
Clinto rocks the Granite State
[Read the article: Clinton rocks the vote in the Granite State]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I am an Obama supporter, and yet I can congratulate Senator Clinto on her victory as well as the Democratic party which can now see its front runners challenge each other in a longer, more detailed campaign. One of themes of the Obama campaign is to bring more voters into the process, to excite the electorate and to expand democracy. The obverse would have happened if the campaign had stopped in New Hampshire. I think a robust, well argued campaign which continues to bring in record turn-out is good for America and good for the Democratic party. Our purpose is to field to best and most electable candidate, one who has the support of most of the party's electorate. I believe that candidate is Sen. Obama and the campaign will show that in the day's ahead.