Letters to the Editor
wishiknew
Published Letters: 12
-
You need to make the best decision for your family; i.e. your wife and child.
[Read the article: Will my family drag us down?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"When we're all together, I feel my mom and sister constantly try to test where my loyalties lie....." That is a red flag which should not be ignored. Your loyalties are first and foremost to your wife and child, regardless of your mom's and sister's situations. And I say that as someone with Huntingtons on my side of the family and other terminal illnesses on my husband's side of the family. I know what it is to have extended family members who are in need. I have learned the hard way though that if the extended family members don't understand that there are definite limits to what you can do for them without sacrificing your present family, you'll be faced with endless and unreasonable expectations. I have no doubt that over the years you will help your mother and sister a great deal -- but for your wife's sake, set a reasonable limit now. I made my extended family's health my top priority for two years --- and then spent another two years in therapy trying to recover from it. I wish I knew then what I know now; there is a limit to how much assistance any one person can -- or should be expected to-- give. I wish you the best.
-
I didn't find it petty at all.
[Read the article: Andrea Mitchell's strange attack against Clinton]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I was glad to hear it. These events are staged for television and the reporter is not wrong to remind viewers of that once in awhile. Further, I was pleased that this morning Andrea Mitchell reported the Clinton campaign's rather belittling comments re Iowa voters and the Iowa caucus system made on the plane ride to NH overnight. Alex, I don't think you need to be quite so protective of the Clinton campaign.
-
After seven years of "Bushisms" and Cheney-mentality...
[Read the article: Heartbreak ahead for Hillary Clinton?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I want so very much to be able to listen to a leader who will pull us past and above this view of life as a 'slugfest' in which only the tough survive by doing whatever it takes to get there. We've been "led" for seven years by a message that was small-minded and mean-spirited --- and it has impacted every aspect of our lives and world, probably in more ways than we can understand at this point, having been buried under the mud and muck of Bush-Cheney ideas, policies and practices. Obama represents a change in attitude and direction. He reminds us what America is all about. After having to listen to B-C for so many years, I want to have a president to whom I want to listen.
-
Let Hillary continue her work...
[Read the article: Hillary Clinton's softer side]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]but let her do it in the Senate. She's smart, talented and certainly has some experience in government work but the polls are showing she is not what people want to listen to or read about for the next four years in the White House. I'm sure there are many people such as myself who are grateful to both Clintons for what they have done for the country but feel they come with far too much personal baggage to want her/them back in the White House. I for one am ever so weary of the all-encompassing Clinton drama -- far too much of it self-induced -- and I voted for Bill twice. I'm sorry if that hurts Hillary's feelings. If it would help her feel better, I want her to know that I admire her and appreciate her hard work but that doesn't mean she has a right to be president. I hope New York keeps her in the Senate.
-
Joan, The important word is "battle"
[Read the article: Update: Michelle Obama disagrees with me]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think Obama was referring to the fact that, all too often, those that 'wage the battle' so to speak, are unable to look up and see that progress has been made to build upon; they instead just keep battling. Understandable, but also understandable that people want a different approach after awhile. It's silly to suggest -- and I think you make a thinly veiled attempt to do so in your support of Hillary -- that Obama isn't concerned with the Civil Rights battles of the 60's or women's rights or any of the other causes fought over during that time. He's a black man for god's sake; enough of the deck was stacked against him. But Obama is someone who sees the possibililty of 'crawling out of the trenches' and taking a different approach to move forward. And that is in contrast to Hillary --- who herself reminds us that she's a fighter who knows how to fight back. But that's just the point Hillary: WE ARE SICK BEYOND WORDS OF YOUR APPROACH. She can fight in the trenches but does not know or see how to get out of them. She is too 'invested in her battles.' Go home Hillary, take Bill with you, calm yourselves down and please give us a chance to take a new approach. Will it be easy? No. We know that. But there can be a different way.
"All he is say-ing, is give [a new way] a chance.'