Letters to the Editor
brittonwhitbeck
Published Letters: 9 Editor's Choice: 1
-
If you're going to try and draw parallels...
[Read the article: Psycho Christians and the media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]at least use comparable situations.
Hagee's support of McCain does not equate to the personal influence Wright had in Obama's life. Influence that is clearly documented in Obama's own carefully constructed biography. McCain has never sat under Hagee's pastorship, he did not marry John and Cindy, and I'm pretty sure in the four decaded range of Senator McCain's children were any of them baptized by Hagee.
Hagee's endorsement of McCain is more similar to that of Hamas' overt suport of Obama. Those should both be fair game for attack from both sides, but don't try and play the game of guilt by association that Obama has already decried. If it is fair game, which he seems to be trying to make it so with his constant attacks on McCain's staff previous experience in lobbying, then Obama re-opens the door to Wright, Ayers, and let's not Greg Craig, they guy who's best know for representing would-be Reagan assasin, John Hinckley Jr, Kofi Annan in the UN Oil-for-Food scandal, Pedro Miguel González Pinzón, a known Panamanian terrorist, as well as the government of Panama during the reign of terror of Miguel Noriega.
Can Obama please let me know when he wants a new kind of politics and when he wants to play the politics of the past? Trying to keep up with his hypocrisy gives me vertigo!!
-
Classy!
[Read the article: What's in John McCain's medical records?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Wow, I'm amazed at how you can turn a mildly distasteful topic into downright partisan attacks and lies. I love how you happily gloss over the evidence that indicates McCain's resilience both physically and mentally, as well as his candor and even self-deprecating manner with which he addresses concerns related to his age and health. You get extra points for attacking a war hero on the fact of being a war hero. Swift boat hypocrisy, anyone?
But now to the lies: "However, they failed to note that it would have been impossible for McCain to receive such a diagnosis -- since the term "post-traumatic stress disorder" was not in use until seven years after McCain's release from captivity. The term first appeared in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in 1980."
McCain like other prisoners of war, especially those who remained in the service (he continued to defend the country after Vietnam, not turning on his comrades like John Kerry) were required to have psychological evaluations. Evaluations that were included in the previous review of his medical records. There would have been evidence in the reports of PTSD.
Can't you guys stick to policy without resorting to ad hominem attacks. Can you ever make an argument that doesn't sound like you hate the military and the brave men and women who go where you wouldn't dare, defending your right to be a complete ass. I didn't think so.
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NzdhNzE2YWFkMWM2NWE3ZmRlOTA5M2VjN2VhNzU5MjY=
-
I find it disconcerting that...
[Read the article: Who's afraid of Michelle Obama?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Kaplan tries to play the race cards even as she is denouncing it. She, in assuaging her liberal guilt, turns every criticism of Obama into a racial rant rather than taking the time to separate legitimate critiques from the inane or even sexist/racist ones.
It is a fair statement to say that Michelle Obama would have a hard time connecting with those under the poverty line when she alone makes nearly half a million dollars a year in corporate America. And who was attacking, rather marvelling at the irony of John Edwards representing the poor and uninsured when he was filthy rich and spent years bilking the medical system as a tort lawyer? Everybody but progressives.
It is fair to examine the statements that Michelle has made, past and present, and how it reflects on her view of the country. In much the same way BHO faced issues when he first moved to Chicago (did the community see him as black enough), Michelle is being evaluated with the same skepticism by the American people as to if she is patriotic enough. Cindy McCain has endured her fair share of criticism from a host of issues. Michelle is expected to receive the same.
Her views also seem to indicate a pattern or attitude, one you construed as the stereotype of the angry black woman, which seem to indicate a disdain or at the very least a disrespect for society as a whole. Her statements on America seem to reinforce the "us vs. the," arguments made by Sharpton, Jackson, and company. These themes do not bring us any closer to racial reconciliation, rather they harden the positions of both extremes and leave the rest of the country uninterested, unconcerned, or fearful of being caught in the crossfire.
You seem to think that John McCain's anger was glossed over by the media as part of his appeal. I would refer you to the archives of the Washington Post, New York Times, Boston Globe, Time, Newsweek, and a host of other media that chronicled the history of McCain's temperament including remarks and incidents from both current and former lawmakers and staff.
Your entire premise is based on a weak argument that lacks any substantive (read: factual) support. Your myopic perception of society places you dangerously close to portraying the stereotype that you seem to be pure heartedly debasing. It's not about race, it's about values. Afro-centric thinking is not putting America first. Rather than evaluating how the world fits into your self-identity, why not devote your time to integrating the two, hopefully with the inclusion of others that may not share your same story?
Let's have a frank disucssion on race. But to do so, we must be open and honest. We must enter that conversation without the chip on our shoulder. We must refrain from grandstanding every time someone has said or done (or not said or not done) something that can be manipulated into a racial issue. Unfortunately, I believe you have only failed yourself and the reader by not doing so.