Letters to the Editor
blacktop
Published Letters: 151 Editor's Choice: 4
-
Sexism not at fault as Clinton sinks
[Read the article: My last word (for now) on sexism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That there is pervasive sexism in America is true and undeniable. Whether it has had any impact on Sen. Clinton's tragically inept campaign for the presidency is the question. For me the self-inflicted damage she has wrought far outweigh the sexism that may infect some news coverage of her and her campaign.
Voters have rejected the distortions, exaggerations, and flat-out dishonesty that has characterized Sen. Clinton's campaign and its core messages. No accumulation of 3:00 a.m. phone call advertising or Tuzla sniper fantasies can cover the fact that her experience as first lady did not provide her with relevant or significant experience to become president. Arguably her service in the Senate could have been used to bolster that claim, but wierdly she has de-emphasized that period in her career.
Similarly, voters are increasingly unpersuaded of Sen. Clinton's claims to being a champion of working class concerns. She served on the board of Walmart, her tax returns reveal her to be a millionaire 100 times over, but more importantly she currently retains in the inner circle of her campaign Mark Penn, who blithely lobbies for the Colombian Free Trade Agreement and for the rapacious mortage lender Countrywide.
Sen. Clinton's botched and inexplicable vote to authorize the war in Iraq continues to be the most significant stain on her career. She refuses to repudiate this vote and is unable to clearly explain why she failed to read the NIE and other documents that could have guided her prior to that vote.
The Clinton campaign's repeated race-baiting is another serious strike against her. Her allies, husband, and staff have regularly raised the issue of Sen. Obama's race and his "Wright problem" in the context of discussions of electability. This, my friends, is bigotry, pure and straight up.
It is now painfully evident that Sen. Clinton has failed to strenuously and efficiently manage her campaign, which raises serious concerns about her ability to manage the nation. She started this race as the prohibitive front-runner, with more name-recognition, more money, more staff, favorable press coverage, more big name endorsements, and better poll numbers. Through sheer ineptitude, she has squandered her huge advantage and now finds herself losing the race for the nomination.
The fault is not with sexism, but with the specifics of Sen. Clinton's flawed character and limited abilities.
-
McCain is wrong on so many fronts
[Read the article: McCain's bizarre reluctance on the new GI Bill]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Wrong on international facts (see Iran/Iraq/Shi'ia/Sunni), wrong on empathy (no need to help failing homeowners, just Wall Street bankers), wrong on taxes (let's lower them for rich people), wrong on Social Security (how 'bout that privatization idea, huh?), and wrong on education benefits for soldiers.
How is it that this man is leading any Democrat in any poll?
Let's stop all the horsing around in the Democratic primary race and get the word out about "Maverick" John McCain's dangerous positions on the issues that matter to most Americans.
Somebody needs to wake up the bedazzled media and the snoozing electorate.
-
Victimhood has not worked since the middle ages
[Read the article: Hey, Obama boys: Back off already!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This balanced and nuanced article addresses many issues that characterize the more extreme supporters of both Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton. The fact that both candidates have several significant flaws permits their detractors to latch on to those traits to the exclusion of the many positive positions and attributes that both display.
When the primary season began late in 2007, I was proud and excited to have two such stellar candidates vying for the presidency on the Democratic side. I felt I could easily support either Clinton or Obama were one to become the eventual nominee.
However the balance has tipped decidedly in favor of Obama as the weeks of the campaign have worn on. I was distressed by the Clinton campaign's unsubtle attempts to inaccurately limit Obama's appeal to a just-blacks phenomenon during the South Carolina primary. I was disturbed by the shallow argument that Obama's ability to translate his complex thoughts and multidimensional world view into compelling words is somehow a dangerous flaw rather than a necessary skill of leadership.
This month the outrageous statements of Obama's pastor have been revived in a revolting whispering campaign to influence super delegates against the senator. Most recently, Obama's penetrating analysis of the way that pandering politicians use wedge issues to distract voters from the real concerns of the nation has been unfairly characterized as "elitist." The Clinton pattern has been sadly consistent: when Obama has been most enlightening and uplifting, he has been derided for treating us as intelligent adults.
I am a woman only three years younger than Sen. Clinton. I would have been eager and proud to support her for the presidency as it is long overdue that a woman be elected to that office. However, her behaviors, political positions, and wierd self-inflicted wounds have turned me against her and confirmed me as an ardent supporter of Barack Obama.
Sexism has absolutely nothing to do with the position of most people (men and women) I know who support Obama.
-
Who benefits from calling McCain a 'centrist?'
[Read the article: "People see him as a centrist"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It is vastly interesting to try to unravel why some Democrats and members of the media persist in this obvious falsehood about John McCain. What do the Clintons get from aligning themselves with McCain in their attacks against Barack Obama? Why would Bill Clinton wish to emphasize the friendship between his wife and Sen. McCain? Why would Sen. Clinton underline her odd belief that only she and McCain have somewho crossed the commander-in-chief threshhold? This unseemly coziness between the Clintons and McCain should send up huge red flares to anyone who considers her/himself a Democrat. We know that the Clintons have been right-leaning triangulators for years, but yikes!
-
Why the surprise?
[Read the article: Radio silence on Bush's torture admission]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The chattering classes (as opposed to the actual voting public) are much more interested in Obama's completely inconsequential comments about bitterness in small town America or about Clinton's latest claims to pistol-packing prowess than they are in actual important stuff like torture or war or economic calamity.
Now maybe if we could get a video clip of Rev. Wright admitting he tortured little girls on an airstrip in Bosnia, then we could get some media attention on torture.