Letters to the Editor
Steve1us
Published Letters: 102
-
Hillary whitewash
[Read the article: The debate through the eyes of Clinton loyalists]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Gee, Joan, those sure are some pretty rose-colored glasses you are wearing. Hillary came off great in the eyes of her supporters? I thought she looked angry (they are trying to take away her rightful place in history is my take) and was taking cheap shots. These people who think she is being "painted" as a member of the establishment and is "different" simply because of her plumbing are both delusional and hypocritical. I, too, would like to see a woman president but don't want someone whose very political existence is due to caving to special interests ever since Bill came over to the side of Tyson and Sam Walton back in Arkansas. 35 years of fighting them? Such as when she sat on the board of Wal-Mart while they screwed workers on everything from health care to ages to sexual harassment? Or by taking more money from Big Pharma than any other candidate? Or by having a "special" relationship with Rupert Murdoch and a big-time union buster as her top adviser? We don't need to "deal' with these people or ask them nicely if they will accept a smaller piece of the pie, we need to roll back the hogishness that is ruining our country. They were booing Edwards? He was the only passionate one up there. They applauded her for saying she "embodies change?" Everyone else was rightly laughing at that statement.
-
History profs think otherwise
[Read the article: Bill Clinton attacks Obama "fairy tale"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Fairy tale? It should not be forgotten that a group of history professors, led by probably the most prominent historian in the country, James McPherson, have lined up behind Obama because they believe his election would truly mark a historical change for a country that is badly in need of just that. The people aren't naive or believing in a fairy tale, or deluded. Just the opposite - they are in fact done with the kind of top-down cronyism that the Clintons symbolize just as much as Bush does. Some believe that this democracy has in fact crossed the Rubicon; Obama may not be able to alter that direction but he certainly is a better option from a tactical point of view and, as much as the realpolitikers like to poo-poo it, his connection with people and charisma is real. I saw it in person during the 2004 Senate race in Illinois and now the rest of the country is experiencing it too. We need to be inspired at this time in our history and he is the man to do that.
-
Obama in Illinois - the truth
[Read the article: Gloria Steinem on Barack Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Jackie R I live in Illinois and no Obama didn't just win cuz the repubs were wackos - he exploded in the Democratic primary just like he is doing in the primaries right now and won easily without a runoff over establishment candidates to everyone's surprise. THEN the Repubs imploded but it wouldn't have made a difference who they ran. He was going to win, just like he will do in November.
-
The winds of change Not
[Read the article: The comeback chick]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thanks to the mahjong crowd, we can now look forward to an election between a corporate-owned white male and a corporate-owned white female. Some change.
-
Rob and chickenhawks
[Read the article: Hillary without tears]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Rob from Dallas (in Paglia's post), your chickenhawk argument is flawed, as are your analogies: first, Lincoln did in fact "serve"; it was in an Illinois militia formed to stave off Indian attacks but in that time it was service so he didn't duck service ala Cheney, Rumsfeld, well the list is endless. Secondly, Roosevelt didn't serve? Shhheeeeeesh. The guy COULDN'T WALK. His sons, however, served with honor in WWII - a commitment to their country Bush's two children avoided as eagerly as their chickenhawk father.
-
maybe Clyburn's choice is soley race-based..
[Read the article: An endorsement that might matter]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]which HRC supporters can't criticize since her NH win was based on a knee-jerk reaction by women to vote for one of their own
-
you should care what "Mudcat" says ...
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]because there a lot of guys (what demographic researcher types would call the NASCAR dad) who think just like him and many think that group may play as big a role in selecting our next President as the infamous soccer moms did a few years ago. They may not be paying attention now but when the election heats up they will. The outsourcing of jobs, NAFTA and other effects of the Clintons embrace of Friedmanomics as well as the money trail going from big corporations and fatcats to Hillary that easily outpaces every other candidate, could outweigh her phony words about concern for the working man.
-
Factoidus .. yes he can
[Read the article: Biracial, but not like me]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...win ... in fact, Obama is the ONLY Democrat who can win and he doesn't need the South ... Nevada, Missouri, Ohio, New Mexico, and maybe even Florida are all winnable by Obama .. while HRC ... loses to McCain, period. Despite the mindset of people like you and the Serious Talking Heads the Democrats DO NOT need Bubba to win and if they do cater to them, then well, what's the difference between them and the Repubs anyway?
-
Obama's future so bright he needs sunglasses
[Read the article: Goodbye, Super Tuesday]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Looking down the road Obama has all the advantages: Clinton's two firewalls of (1, white voters (down in overall polls to near parity) and (2, Latino voters (their voting importance a factor in only one more state - Texas) will no longer be factors in the upcoming contests while Obama's constituencies will really come into play: educated voters (Pacific Northwest, Wisconsin, North Carolina's research triangle), blacks (Indiana, North Carolina, Chesapeake primaries, Louisiana, Ohio), and caucus goers (Nebraska). Add in the money advantage and time - he can now spend quality time in places and every place he's done that people get to know him and his numbers shoot up. Hillary has Texas and maybe Pennsylvania. Ohio is in play and most everyplace else points to Obama. Change is good.