Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

oxymoron

Published Letters: 355
Editor's Choice: 32

Saturday, August 9, 2008 11:08 AM

There have already been a lot of "oh, grow up America" posts

But where have you heard any outrage except among the "chattering classes"? Let me point out (again) that Edwards has already been rejected by Democratic voters. MOST of them have moved on. except for his rabid partisans who want him to have a role in a possible Obama presidency--and that, now, is unlikely to happen--not because the general public is unwilling to forgive, (they expect politicians to be politicians) but because the Democrats won't want to deal with it.

My boyfriend, who is sort of a Rino, had no idea about any of this and was interested in a mild way when I told him about it. But he thinks it will neither help McCain nor hurt Obama.

Sunday, August 10, 2008 08:04 AM

@ Nancy Crozier

Margaret Trudeau? Sure, she was the WIFE of a Canadian politician, but I think she counts...

I don't think there is anywhere near the amount of "outrage" among the general public as everyone here seems to think there is. My boyfriend, who is a Republican tho sort of a RINO really, knew nothing about it until I told him about it, and he associates with the "great unwashed" every day--construction-type guys who have little or no college, quite often a DUI or drug arrest, and also quite often one or two children with women to whom they are not married. Democratic voters have already rejected Edwards (twice!) and moved on. It seems to be the press finally forced to pay attention, and the betrayed Edwards supporters who are yelling the loudest about what they perceive that "the masses" (aka the stupid racists in Ohio or Michigan or Pennsylvania who don't know what's good for them) are interested in. I think if the masses really believed Edwards, and thought he would have benefited them in some way, they would have voted for him, and they would cut him some slack now.

The main problem, as I see it, is not that Edwards screwed around, but that he put the woman on his payroll. Whose money lifted her out of poverty? And while HE says that he wants the paternity test, she says no way? Who's paying her for that?

Sunday, August 10, 2008 12:30 PM

2 Americas

Those who can afford to put their bit on the side on the payroll, and those who cannot.

Edwards was soundly rejected by the very people he purported to speak for. Maybe they did see themselves in him, and knew him better than the progressives who lionized him?

It IS just sex--which means it IS just sex. Why not keep it zipped until you've gotten to your goal? Seriously.

Sunday, August 10, 2008 01:53 PM

Having heroes=bad idea

I stopped having heroes at a young age, when I realized they were all people and all had feet of clay in one way or another. We don't need heroes. We need people who will do something WITHOUT requiring an orchestra following them around playing "Hail to the Chief". "Hero" requires a certain complicity by the person you are making a hero of.

BTW, the reason I'm posting so much on this thread is that I am laid up with a foot injury. Olympics and gossip. I actually do have better things to do when I can use the fraking foot.

Sunday, August 10, 2008 02:20 PM

@ AKA Smith, 2 down

VERY good point.

Monday, August 11, 2008 09:02 AM
Original article: Blow blows up race race

Umm, Libertyson?

The good news? It's not universal. The places where this latent racism still holds sway and people are likely to harbor these feelings without admitting them is largely in the Rust Belt states. Hence the reliance on the "new" swing states, particularly those out West. In places like Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada this attitude simply isn't as prevalent.

How do you know?

Accusing whole sections of the country of latent racism isn't a good idea if you want them to, oh, I dunno--VOTE FOR YOUR CANDIDATE! That's why I bailed from DailyKOS--every time a state went for Hillary Clinton, all the comments I saw were basically along the lines of "everyone in is a stupid racist who doesn't know what's good for them."

Oh yeah, that's productive.

These states have gotten ZERO from the politicians they have elected in the past, and are probably much more cynical about politics than all you wide-eyed progressives out there. Hillary Clinton spent time TALKING to the people in these states about SPECIFIC policy ideas, not holding giant, uplifting rallies. They had an idea of what they might be getting from her. Obama has to make his policies specific and talk to people the same way--show them that he knows what their problems are, and he has some ideas about how to fix them.

And yeah, some of them are stupid racists. Betcha there are lots of stupid racists in every state of the union.

Most Active Letters Threads

738

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
688

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
343

America's regression

It's almost impossible to find a nation with as many torture advocates as the U.S. has.
329

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame
203

The poster boy for progressive self-delusion

Read Hayden's 2008 Obama endorsement to remember the way the left sold our centrist president to itself

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon