Letters to the Editor
bdop4
Published Letters: 263 Editor's Choice: 10
-
McCain/Huckabee and Vice Versa
[Read the article: Giuliani's Florida: Firewall or retirement home?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]EMStoveken wrote:
"As for the ultimate result of this nightmare, I am seeing a McCain/Huckabee ticket or if Huckabee proves himself as receptive to being as shamelessly puppeteered as W, a Huckabee/McCain ticket.
This would be difficult for any Clinton or Obama ticket to beat. It wraps up the die-hard 30 percenters. It wraps up the Christian Fundamentalists. It wraps up the Hawks. It wraps up the born-again rapist vote. It secures the NRA vote and the anti-abortion vote. Throw in the independents who are turned off by Hillary's polarizing effect or the wishy-washy do-gooders who could be convinced that Obama's flirtations with the nose candy makes him a dangerous libertine, and you have a deep need to mobilize the disenfranchized, radical and sideline sitting cynic votes."
Put them side by side and it looks like a lot of people. Fortunately, many of these sub-classes describe the same "die-hard 30 percenters," so I don't think the actual percentage from this coalition is as high it appears.
The big variable here is the under-30 vote, and Obama appears to be bringing a lot of them to the polls. These people are finally realizing that they are the biggest victims of the Bush/Republican agenda, and it won't matter who's on the Republican ticket if they come out strong this year.
-
@ Anonymous
[Read the article: Barney Frank on the regulation warpath]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So people need to hire a lawyer to get a mortgage? Are you serious? Did you hire a lawyer to get your mortgage? Are you a lawyer? Lawyers without financial training can't understand a lot of the terms in these deals. I'm sorry, but that viewpoint is just unrealistic.
Regulation is meant to prevent predatory lending, which means targetting a certain class of consumers with a lure (initial low interest rate). They prey on everyone's desire for a home, knowing full well that there is a high probability that the borrower will be unable to cover payments at the higher variable rate when it kicks in.
The solution is simple: judge a borrower's ability to make payments on the higher, variable interest rate terms.
-
LA Debate
[Read the article: Will the Democratic presidential candidates adhere to their rhetoric?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This issue desperately needs to be brought up at the upcoming debate in Los Angeles on January 31st. The event is sponsored by the Politico and you can submit questions to the candidates online at http://dyn.politico.com/debate/.
I urge everyone to submit a question on this issue to all the candidates. If enough people do it, hopefully one will get through.
-
My Post on John Edwards' Campaign Site
[Read the article: Will the Democratic presidential candidates adhere to their rhetoric?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"At this moment, Harry Reid, the DEMOCRATIC Senate majority leader, is trying to push the Senate FISA amendment bill through congress which grants retroactive immunity to certain telecom companies for allowing unlimited and unfettered access to EVERYONE's electronic transmissions without a warrant as required under FISA.
It seems to me that this issue exemplifies what John is fighting: corporate interests that shamelessly subvert our government and the rule of law.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a small nonprofit, has filed suit against these companies and has compelling evidence against them. But the telecom lobby seeks to eliminate any chance of making these companies accountable under the law through a legislative pardon via retroactive immunity.
Chris Dodd has vowed to filibuster the bill, but desperately needs help to bring this unconscionable act to the attention of the American people. Like John, this issue has gotten no serious coverage by the media.
John Edwards should make this a prime example of why he is running for President. He should call out all Democratic senators, including Sen.s Clinton and Obama, and demand that they immediately take action to eliminate any provision for retroactive immunity in the Senate FISA bill.
This is not an issue that can wait until January of 2009. This needs a show of leadership RIGHT NOW.
I can think of no better way for John Edwards to show that he is the leader this country needs than by taking action against the telecom companies who are using Harry Reid as their proxy to avoid accountability under the rule of law.
The next debate is in Los Angeles on January 31st. Between now and then, everyone should urge John to make this a campaign issue. People should also urge The Politico, who is sponsoring the debate, to include a question on telecom retroactive immunity by posting a question at [a link to http://dyn.politico.com/debate/).
I truly believe that through this issue, he can show voters that he is the leader who can reverse the tide of corporate power that rules this country today."
-
I Saw Nothing
[Read the article: Is Obama getting "testy"?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If that was testy, what was Bill Clinton's response to a reporter's question a few days ago regarding the challenge of the "casino caucuses?" Bill was in the guy's face big time. And you know what? I don't blame him.
I think candidates need to be more testy when asked STUPID questions by moronic reporters. They might be more careful next time.
-
FWIW, My Email to Dianne Feinstein
[Read the article: Jay Rockefeller's unintentionally revealing comments]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The phone has been constantly busy, so I sent the following:
"I just want you to know that I am deeply, emphatically opposed to granting retroactive immunity to the telecommunications companies who provided the Bush administration with unfettered access to customer data in violation of FISA.
Your amendment, while proposed with good intentions, removes the ability for the truth to be heard in a public forum. The FISA court, a secret body, will not allow for a vigorous cross-examination by the plaintiffs and is prone to rubber-stamp any arguments made by the telecoms and the government.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, should your proposed amendment fail to pass, it is imperative that you join Sen.s Dodd and Feingold in actively opposing complete retroactive immunity as set forth under the SIC amendment. Failure to do so would be to betray your constituents, the Constitution and the rule of law as implemented under our system of government."