Letters to the Editor

• the logic of age=wisdom?

  [Read the article: How will it all end?]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  Ana by your logic then you should vote for McCain because he is older than Hillary and hence has more 'experience.'

  But the real trump card that exposes your underlying support is her position on Iraq and it is one I disagree with. I was angered at her support of Bush and her more recent support behind the Kyl-Lierberman amendment. Hillary won her second term because the Republicans didn't bother to run any one of substance (strawman).

  I'm a New Yorker and I don't like Hillary. As SlackieOnasis has pointed out her campaign is/was run by people I really don't like and her unabashed support of Israel also sickens me. But she is not alone in that department as the majority of both aisles are in bed with too many PAC's for my liking.

  But opening page 8 of the letters today made me aware of my own bias

  an anonymous of reason (not the hate filled obama is a loser anonymous) wrote to realitycounts. I had threatened and joked that I would vote for McCain over Hillary but one sentence he or she wrote made me see my own dark reflection. I will push for Obama but should Hillary win, well "the election is too important to waste."

  Am I all warm and fuzzy over Obama? No as someone who supported Dodd and Edwards he has me by default, his record or non-record on key votes disturbs me but since I've been examining his career and record I've begun to understand what I think is his strategy.

  No black man could win without being someone trying to unite and lord knows regardless of the deep social and economic divisions in this country we need some of that, his 'hope' message is an echo of the propaganda that Reagan used to get elected. Reagan made people, not me, feel good about the 'US of A' and after Watergate, the Oil Crisis, Iranian Hostage Crisis, etc it worked for him. Deluded we are. The Republicans would tar and feather him as 'LIBERAL, LIBERAL, LIBERAL' and so he has avoided that pitfall by what "appears" to be his voting record, still too middle of the corporate highway for my liking.

  He is just as much in bed with corporate interests as Hillary, his health care package is not as good as hers but at the end of the day when I stack pro v con. A health care package by Hillary isn't enough to sway me now, as I said her war votes, her packaging of self, her triangulation puts me off. More importantly she will galvanize the right not because she is a woman but because she is Hillary and even though the subtext of such is the fact she is a strong woman that engenders such hate, just the mantra of Hillary will make rise the evangelical hate machine.

  They will try and succeed in some states to use the race card against Obama but the publicly acceptable level of such racism is fading fast and the spotlight will fall heavily in disfavor of racial attacks because most people consciously like to believe that "we" are beyond that (truth of that is another thing entirely).

  At the end of the day I think, it is my opinion that the US would be better served by a President Obama than Hillary. I think, my opinion is that a President Hillary would give us another 4 maybe 8 years of Rove, Gingrich republican shit.

  But 4 distasteful years of more Rove politics is preferable to 100 years of war McCain.

  Permalink Monday, February 11, 2008 06:57 AM

• obamamaniacs and clintonistas

  [Read the article: Paul Krugman criticizes Obama supporters]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  both make me sick and they are both really good at spouting crap in the like of my candidate is wonderful and the other satan incarnate

  but overall I see more Clinton supporters on salon spewing venomous, near rabid like foaming of the mouth and only hurting themselves as having any real worth to actual 'dialogue.'

  case in point

  eeave 1 on page 2

  I've never seen such ugliness as on blog sites written by Obama supporters. What you get is a string of slander and then the phrasing "Go OBama!!"

  but then follows with this-

  Obama's appeal is to LATTE LIBERALS.

  HE IS TOO LAWYERLY.

  Mr. Obama has received NO NEGATIVE PRESS at all.

  Senator Obama does NOT resonate with the base of the party.

  If Obama people want our support in November, they need to clean up their act.

  supporters are supposed to shout 'go hllary?' and Clinton's record is that she is a lawyer too but isn't?and Krugman's wasn't negative press? he doesn't resonate with the base then who are these bad obama people nd how dare they vote? I think you're off base on that one or it wouldn't be the horse race it is now. and I'm a latte liberal who needs to clean up my act? forgive me but I don't remember myself slandering you as anything like a 'latte liberal'. Before you shout in uppercase letters about cleaning up acts, you should pluck the beam from your own eye first and clean yours.

  or this nugget

  p.a.mb.'s reference to Obama as BHO, maybe it's just me but the H in BHO since this is the first time I've seen it in this context here isn't too subtle a reference to his gasp horrors middle name and its one of those dirty muslim names "Hussein". Oh horrors, we can't have a president with that kind of name. Talk about under the radar in attacks? Nope.

  I'm a reluctant Obama supporter but honestly I have seen more irrational invective by anonymous and non-anonymous clinton supporters by far.

  Supporters of any candidate spewing venom is a turnoff to their anointed one, you want me to support Hillary then give me reasons beyond the shopping lists of experience and accomplishments as I don't shop there and aren't convinced of the brand. I've got my own set of issues with Obama but so far he offers more IMHO than Hillary.

  Permalink Monday, February 11, 2008 08:59 AM