Letters to the Editor
furtail
Published Letters: 123 Editor's Choice: 2
-
YUCK
[Read the article: With Obama on the offensive, the Democratic campaigns trade attacks]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Obama is a fool to criticize Clinton and her tax returns. Anyway, who cares?
Don't go negative, either. Don't pull a Hillary, don't even go there. People want to be inspired, not scared, or frightened. Don't listen to your advisors.
It's OK to criticize her record. Just keep talking about issues-talk more about your plans, your policies, and why you should be president.
This negative crap will do Obama no good and will only damage him. Clinton's helping a lot also, to damage the nominee, whoever that may be.
YUCK. I'm really sick of this primary. Maybe we need superdelegates as referees.
-
Right On Glenn!
[Read the article: Who cares if Eliot Spitzer hires prostitutes?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Again, you nailed this one to the wall.
The Bush Administration slaughtered a million people. Where's the outrage? I call that reprehensible.
-
Tina!
[Read the article: Who cares if Eliot Spitzer hires prostitutes?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Why so against prostitution? I don't get it, really.
-
Spitzer is most likely a sex addict
[Read the article: The tragic fall of Eliot Spitzer]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This is classic behavior of a sex addict: risking all for the thrill of acting out.
This leads to criminal behavior, lying, leading a double-life, becoming a hypocrite, etc. It isn't pretty. Believe me, I know all too well the consequences of out-of-control behavior.
Spitzer should resign for the simple fact that in order to get his life together, to heal himself, and enter therapy, therapy which will take years to complete, he will need the peace and quiet to concentrate on himself and his family. Nothing is worse than trying to deal with your personal issues while everyone is painting a scarlett "A" on your chest.
Spitzer, in my opinion, is not a criminal. He's an addict, and deserves compassion. For his own sake, he needs to join a twelve step program and get a sponsor, to be surrounded by other men who know what he is going through. He should also get a therapist right away, there are some really good ones out there who specialize in sexual addiction.
You are not alone, Eliot!
-
@ Airflow
[Read the article: The tragic fall of Eliot Spitzer]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In my experience, and I've seen HUNDREDS of guys get caught with prostitutes by their wives, the wives DO NOT stay - they move out or their husbands move out. That isn't to say that there isn't some sort of coming to terms later, sometimes there is, sometimes there isn't.
With wealthy, powerful,famous husbands, I don't know, I think the marriage dynamics are different. HRC stayed by her man, as do many wives of male politicians.
The poster who noted that ego-mania is a trait of politicians - I agree! It's also true from what I've seen, that many sex addicts are very ambitious, intelligent people, very driven. Perhaps the two go together.
-
Yes, we will never know
[Read the article: Mirror, mirror on the Wall]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Rebecca writes:
It seems pretty clear that some people -- many people, if the amount of coverage this angle of the story has received –- are taking this very personally, projecting on Silda Wall Spitzer a reflection of their own experiences, fears and concerns.
Yes, this sums it up. Personally, I really don't think about it, and it's absolutely none of our business. I'm shocked and appalled that so many feminists discuss this, as if they know the dynamics of THEIR marriage, while also simultaneously accusing Spitzer of sexual slavery and human trafficking. Give me a break! And start living in the real world: some prostitutes choose to do this work; and, some wives choose to stand by their man. No harm there.
-
Way to Go, Glenn!
[Read the article: House Democrats reject telecom amnesty, warrantless surveillance]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]YOU ROCK!
Keep up the great blogging. Without your insight and time spent poring over recent results and news articles, we wouldn't be "in the know" and therefore wouldn't have been able to put as much pressure on the House.
-
Americans are dumb-fucks
[Read the article: Our "black Monday" for oil]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Americans deserve everything they're getting: a $3 trillion war with decaying infrastructure, schools, and a massive re-distribution of wealth which is turning the clock back to the 1890's. They vote for the Chimp and his Republithugs, twice, while drooling at their TV's eating nutritionally devalued food, becoming diabetic in the process, which in turn, increases their reliance on a healthcare system which is increasingly leaving them without health insurance, which in turn causes more and more bankruptcies and increases poverty. They are so stupid they have voted themselves off the island, in favor of oligarchical societies which outlaw political parties and any form of democratic rule.
Americans have to be some of the dumbest bunch of idiots the planet has seen. The era of America as a super-power is OVER. (This is a good thing) From the ashes a new society should be re-built.
-
Joan, you're wrong
[Read the article: Was Obama's speech enough?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Joan writes:
...deserved to be compared to Wright, a public figure who's built his career around a particularly divisive analysis of American racial politics. It is easily the most tin-eared thing I've ever heard Obama say .
Reverend Wright has not built his career around a particularly divisive analysis of American racial politics. Did you hear Obama's speech, or read it? Reverend Wright is also a product of his time, just like Obama's white grandmother. Obama explains this, at length. Wright doesn't peddle this crap for political gain, say, like Falwell did, or Pat Robertson does. He doesn't have a TV show spewing his stupid remarks every week.
Every time Walsh takes one step forward, she takes two back. Joan is becoming too much like the right-wing pundits she claims to detest: she more and more thinks someone is "disingenuous" that is, lying, simply because she says so. I don't see any evidence, Joan, that Obama is lying, or insincere. You, like so many of your colleagues, have become so accustomed to parsing and analyzing to death someone's words that they then take a meaning not intended by the speaker. Even Ferraro was a victim of this, with endless loop re-play.
YUCK.