Letters to the Editor
mikeyfil
Published Letters: 32
-
@TrueBlue
[Read the article: Clinton: "I am in this race"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm a white, fifty-something woman, started the primaries like many others, in a fairly neutral mood, liking Edwards in particular. I was bothered By Hillary's sense that she was entitled to the nomination but felt I could support whoever the Democratic candidate turned out to be. Since Super Tuesday, however, I and my white, female fifty-something friends have become progressively more appalled at Hillary's: playing the victim ("the media is too nice to Obama"); playing out the kind of tough, pseudo-macho bullshit that would make W proud; being too stubborn to admit she was wrong on Iraq (again, like Bush); threatening to "obliterate" an entire nation (again, sounds like Bush/Cheney to me); trying to change the rules she agreed to re FLA/MI (is this how she would be as President? Saying one thing, doing another? Haven't we had 7+ years of this already?); running an incompetent campaign--no money, advisors fighting with each other, no plan or vision for the campaign after Super Tuesday--kind of like Iraq post the initial bombing, no? and come to think of it, kind of like the entire Bush administration; fear-mongering with her "as far as I know" comment and her doomsday ads--kind of like the Republicans, right?;and most offensive, playing up the "elite" criticism (this, from a woman who loaned herself 11+ million dollars, doesn't even know you are supposed to tip waitresses and doesn't know how to work a gas station coffee maker) and the Rev. Wright controversy--if someone is going to criticize Obama's character for his "close" association" why can't we criticize Hillary for staying with a horndog who publicly humiliated her?--sorry, but she is not the feminist role model I want for my daughter! But the absolute worst is her playing on race by emphasizing the Wright controversy and, in effect, giving racist white voters who wouldn't be caught dead voting for a black man, no matter how capable, a free pass by letting them pretend that they were "offended" by Wright and therefore, are not voting for Obama. Hillary's inability to admit reality by changing the goalposts virtually every day, her descent into not only the gutter of Rovian political tactics but actually courting those very same slimeballs, her refusal to admit she is wrong...if I wanted a war-mongering, fear-mongering, pseudo "working class, non-elite", psuedo macho, entitled incompetent, I would write in George Bush's name on the ballot or vote for McCain. What I don't understand is how any self-respecting woman can ignore these aspects of Hillary's character and keep supporting her in the name of feminism--fortunately, there are many self-identified feminists who see through her crap and will not be voting for her.
-
say it simply
[Read the article: Tim Russert, one of the good guys]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Over at Talking Points Memo, there is a very simple message re Tim Russert, expressing sadness at his passing and sympathy for the family. Period. That kind of expression doesn't prompt one to any kind of rebuttal. On the other hand, people who print statements about Russert's "fearless" journalism and "even-handed" treatment of all sides of a debate are just asking to be corrected. There is plenty on the record to show that Russert was an administration enabler. Take a little of your own advice--if you want to keep the focus on sympathy for Russert, then do so and refrain from putting out worshipful exaggerations about his work.
-
Bloodlust?
[Read the article: McCain on Iran: Bush all over again]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Iran has a bloodlust for the United States"? "Iran cannot be trusted"? It was the US who threw out a democratically elected government in Iran and replaced it with the Shah, who tortured and murdered anyone who opposed him. Who, exactly, is the untrustwrothy party? Learn some history and stop repeating these AIPAC lies.
-
9/11
[Read the article: McCain on Iran: Bush all over again]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Why, why oh why do those who say there hasn't been an attack on US soil since 9/11 ALWAYS OVERLOOK the FACT that 9/11 occurred on Bush's watch and by all accounts could have been prevented if he and Rice had pulled their heads out of their asses.
-
Re Pakistan
[Read the article: McCain on Iran: Bush all over again]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Kufir, I think you're a bit out of date. Musharraf is clinging to what little power he has left by his fingernails. And it was his action or rather lack of action which allowed the Taliban to regroup and did almost nothing to stop the spread of Islamic fundamentalism within Pakistan itself, while alienating the country's more moderate elements by subverting the rule of law. The billions the US gave him he has basically stolen for his own devices. I still remember his speech when Dr. Khan was put under house arrest but allowed to keep the 100 million he made by selling nuclear technology to God knows who--he said, "Dr. Khan is punished enough by the humilation of being under arrest, we don't need to take his property away from him as well." !
And as for all this talk about Obama's lack of experience as opposed to McCain's what? fitness for the job? The guy graduated 894 out of class of 899 at Annapolis--a school he no doubt gained entrance to via his father's and grandfather's influence--his military performance record is full of mistakes and reprimands yet he was allowed to become a fighter pilot despite his unfitness for the position (sound familiar?)--there is some talk he is responsible for the fire on the USS Forrestal which killed 100+ military personnel. Then he gets shot down--is this the person to entrust with our safety? A guy who regularly loses his temper and whose background in the equivalent of Bush's in terms of his being handed things he didn't really deserve? A recipe for another disaster.