Letters to the Editor
furtail
Published Letters: 123 Editor's Choice: 2
-
Clinton is SLEAZE
[Read the article: Clinton's "win-at-all-costs strategy"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There is simply no other conclusion...she is now showing herself to the world: to be pure sleaze.
Poor Hillary...what a sorry-ass candidate. Can't win at the polls? Just bribe some delegates with promises of a plum position in her administration. To hell with the pledged system and the voters!
Hillary will go down in flames, and I hope soon. The Democratic Party should roundly reject this strategy and rid itself of the Clinton scourge. She really doesn't care about the integrity of the system, or the longevity of the party; only herself and her political ambitions come first. We've seen 8 years of this from the Republicans.
The arguments that Obama "will do the same thing" or "would have done the same thing" are pathetic. There is no evidence that he is or would have. And if so, HE should be denounced and cast aside himself.
I'm really disappointed in Hillary. I would have thought she had more sense, and more scruples.
If she wins, I'm not voting for her; not if she wins this way. If she wins playing by the rules (influencing super-delegates is OK, NOT insisting on seating MI and FL delegates) I will vote for her. But it's looking very grim that reality and good sense will seize her. She's drunk with her own self-importance. If she reads history, she'll know that all such leaders die on their own sword.
-
News Flash
[Read the article: Clinton's "win-at-all-costs strategy"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Clinton campaign manager: "Senator Clinton promises to not assassinate Senator Obama before the next debate. It's time for the Obama camp to pledge the same."
A variation of this I saw on TPM. I thought it was hilarious. It pretty much sums up the Clinton campaign strategy. SHADY...
-
The REAL Controversy
[Read the article: A supersize controversy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Is not, or shouldn't be, the superdelegates. I agree with those who say "the rules are the rules" and that the superdelegates can vote the way they want. I have no problems with forces within either camp trying to influence their votes.
The real controversy is MI and FL. The DNC screwed the pooch from the beginning. Clinton has shown herself to be sleazy, by trying to have these delegates seated from non-elections in both states, despite having signed an agreement to not campaign in either (and implying that she agreed with the rules committee's decision).
The real controversy, Ms. Walsh, is Mrs. Clinton's behavior. She should strongly be rejected by both the voters and the party for her trying to cheat. It's simply outrageous, and can in no way be excused. The stakes are high, she may win the battle and get her wish to be nominee, but she'll go down in flames in November. Those of us who have principles won't vote for her. This is the real controversy you need to discuss.
I for one, would never vote for a candidate who talks out of both sides of her mouth on such an important issue.
-
For Blacks and Women, the standard is higher
[Read the article: "Name some of Barack Obama's legislative accomplishments ... if you can" ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Not surprising from heterosexual white males. I can't remember Bubba's, Bush's, or even Kerry's surrogates getting grilled like this.
It's OK to quiz the candidate himself/herself, but not really fair to go after surrogates.
I do remember Bush getting quizzed in 2000 "Who is the prime minister of Ukraine?" and other such questions, however. That's fair game.
-
Hillary isn't worthy
[Read the article: Should Hillary Clinton drop out?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Of the nomination. She wants to break party rules by seating the MI and FL delegates, something that Ms. Walsh has not addressed at all in any of her posts. This is a HUGE issue with me- one that shows Hillary's true colors: do anything to get elected.
A few posters have pointed out that as the campaign has dragged on, we see the true personality, or face of Hillary: intelligent, nasty, ambitious, a master of details, impatient. It's obvious to me, as another poster has pointed out, that she really hates campaigning, and meeting "dumb" Americans in coffee shops. Her stump speeches sound tired, as if she is sick of giving them.
Yes, she was used to having everything her own way; she wanted a coronation, and when she started losing, started getting bitchy on camera. Here in Cincinnati, she tried to rip Obama a new hole about the flyers here in Ohio (that obviously back-fired).
It is time to throw in the towel, Hillary. You have 0 % chance of winning a general election, even if somehow you manage to win the nomination. You should be kept in your pen, in the Senate, where the party can keep an eye on you. You can't be trusted to follow the rules, or the will of the people (your vote betraying the people of New York to authorize the war in 2002 and then never apologizing amounts to a character flaw).
-
Semitic does not mean "Jewish"
[Read the article: Obama should be proud to be named Hussein]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Reader-
Semitic refers to both Arabs and Jews, and also in ancient times Babylonians and Assyrians, those from the eastern Mediterranean. Thus, Hebrew isn't the only "semitic" language, so Juan is correct-he doesn't need to use the word "Jewish".