Letters to the Editor
melthough
Published Letters: 1336 Editor's Choice: 103
-
Pages from the Republican Playbook
[Read the article: "Present" tension ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Since 1996, I have been listening to Democrats lament the fact that:
1. Republicans frame the debate. They write the talking points, set the agenda, put Democrats on the defensive.
2. Republicans follow the "11th Commandment," putting Party loyalty before almost everything else, and in this way they build coalitions within their Party and with a few "moderate" stragglers so they can work together as a group to push forward or (more frequently) block legislation.
It has always troubled me a little bit that Democrats admire Republicans for being able to do these things. But that is why I am a writer instead of a lawyer, athlete, executive, or politician.
In this campaign, we see that Hilary Clinton is hated for being so good at the first thing - framing the debate, putting Obama on the defensive, and generally being "Rovian." Now (NOW) Obama is being derided for the second - building coalitions within his party and with a few "moderate" Republicans in order to block legislation that Democrats don't like.
I guess we all have to decide for ourselves which one seems more like the way you want the Democratic party to be. I am trying very hard and with very little success to ignore most of the little bites and scratches in this tooth-and-claw campaign, and I will vote for either Clinton or Obama with a clear consicence in November. But, for my part, after watching Pelosi and Reid inaction (that's not a typo), I would like to see more coalition-building than debate-framing, especially since debate-framing is so often done in a dishonest way. I don't like that either is necessary, and I am still torn, but I will probably be pulling the lever for Obama. Hopefully, though, both candidates will bother to campaign in Vermont even though we're on the same day as two big swing states, and I'll get to hear them both in person before March.
-
@Buffalonian
[Read the article: Clinton senior staff going without pay]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I admire your enthusiasm, but I think your point would come across more clearly without the campaign pitch.
-
I am going to watch this later, but
[Read the article: At least they didn't remake "Jeremy"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]a music video is even less likely to sway my vote than are the Republican trolls who bait Obama and Clinton supporters into fighting with each other on every goddamn thread just so they can jerk off to it.
(Hint for Obama and Clinton supporters: stop calling each other names, because Republicans are the only people who are amused.)
-
AKA has a point, dataguyx
[Read the article: "Present" tension ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It doesn't matter where the negativity and name-calling come from, or how much truth is in a given scandal or controversy. Negativity does not sway people from one candidate to another. It only makes people cynical and suppresses voter interest and turnout. If you really want to help Obama, you will get a lot further by being positive. Especially since he's supposed to be the inspiring candidate of hope. If you want to spread his message, at least stay on message.
-
GAWD
[Read the article: "Because I love America ... I have to now stand aside"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think I am going to lose my lunch. What a crock of offal.
-
I am glad Clinton is still in the game.
[Read the article: Clinton fundraising hits new highs]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]But it sorta sounds like Slackie, as usual, pegged the success of the sympathy thing.
Alex, you do not mention whether Clinton's intake includes the $5 million from her own bank account. Could you please clarify?
-
SocandTwigs
[Read the article: Clinton fundraising hits new highs]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Have you ever even READ Salon before today? Most people of your ilk think Alex (like Tim Grieve before him) is an Obama supporter, not a Hilary supporter. If you actually look through the history, you'll see that positive and negative stories on each one of them go in waves, all including a counter-wave from people in the comment threads who start shrieking about how obvious it is that War Room is campaigning for one or the other.
It's incredibly boring.
And did you really just call someone DITZ HEAD?
Are you in sixth grade?
-
OBviously,
[Read the article: Your baby, your "baby brain"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]our brains are only required to help us form mated pairs, and once we start breeding, we no longer need them. This explains why the smartest women always attract the most fertile men. It is also obvious that human evolution has strongly selected for women who, upon becoming new mothers, completely forget all the things they hated about new mothers while they were still pregnant.
And now I'll remove my tongue from my cheek and point out that it doesn't take much to increase the risk by many, many times of something that barely anyone has a risk for to begin with. Not that that is of any comfort when you're a pregnant, strung-out insomniac staying up nights Googling for Anxiety Porn.
-
Strike that
[Read the article: Clinton fundraising hits new highs]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sorry, I missed the "online donations only" line the first time through.
-
cythera
[Read the article: Clinton fundraising hits new highs]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think this is the first time I have ever noticed agreeing with you. What the hell kind of "thought experiment" is that? I am none of the above, and there are a LOT of people I would never vote for. None of them, as far as I know, are named Clinton.
-
Jesus Christ
[Read the article: Waiting for New Mexico]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Joan, can you please ask your editors to start deleting posts by the drive-by right-wing spammer?
-
Because you are an irritating pest who is taking advantage of Salon
[Read the article: Waiting for New Mexico]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]And it's not "censorship" unless the government does it. Salon is a private organization.
Anymore questions?
-
Chill, dataguyx!
[Read the article: Waiting for New Mexico]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Chances are he is being paid by some Republican. And he is certainly a troll, which means he thrives on your anger. He's going through and spamming every single thread about Obama or Clinton, and it's not all anti-Obama either. Don't let him manipulate you. Seeing you get hot under the collar will just turn him on.
-
"Even liberal Salon will not suggest that we as individuals need to be responsible and change our behavior."
[Read the article: No climate for old men]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ummmm, apparently you have missed the many features and the entire weekly column dedicated to consumer environmental awareness. You also seem to have missed the fact that switching all your bulbs to CFs (which I have done) and riding your bike (which I do) and recycling everything you can (which I do) and reducing your intake of packaging (which I do) will NEVER BE ENOUGH. Industry will need to be on board, and since they won't climb up themselves, the government will have to force them onto the train. Do you have a problem with that?