Letters to the Editor
-
The Superficial: Diamonds or Pearls?
The Drudge/Limbaugh assault on Clinton's appearance is simply one more line of attack in a race for power that serves only to distract from the urgent issues before us.
Looking at the serious flaws within our election process, how is this attack on Clinton more important than the stifling control over the electoral process by the major media, who select "frontrunners" from which the masses are to choose, and legitimize their selections with architected polls? How about the influence of corporate and industry interests who are simply buying future government contracts, tax breaks, or executive access with cash? How about the voting process itself, with one party seeking to stack the vote by documenting and presumably enabling illegals in the polling place, while the other party seeks to suppress properly registered voters in targeted precincts? How will we feel after the 2008 election, when new voting machines purchased for millions of dollars prove incapable of producing an audit trail, simultaneously tempting and protecting fraud?
Is this attack on Clinton more outrageous than an attack on religious affiliation, adolescent drug use, haircut costs or the assertion of a UFO sighting? While it probably fits somewhere along this continuum of distraction, all of these serve only to subvert real policy discussion.
We are a nation indebted by trillions of dollars to foreign interests due to our massive overspending both foreign and domestic, and we are watching individual liberties in place for hundreds of years slipping away weekly as the government demands we fight needless "wars", like those on terrorism and drugs. Faced with all of this, we find more time to talk about wardrobes, hair products, and celebrity endorsements than about fixing the broken, hated nation are handing our children.
-
Hey Traister
Nice piece. Let's face it (no pun intended), Limbaugh and others mocking Hillary's tired face are scum. But you said this so much more eloquently than I just did.
What I don't understand is, Who exactly is Matt Drudge, and what is his motive? Drudge is the origination point for so many red herrings, nyah-nyah "gotcha" gossip items posing as news, dirty-politics talking points and other diversion tactics. Why? What does Drudge get out of this? Is he just another right winger? Is he fed this stuff by darker forces? Or what? I'd really like to know what his backstory is.
Anyway, the idea of Limbaugh asking "Do we want to see a woman age?" is just cheap and insulting to all people, men and women alike. What does it say about Limbaugh? What does it say about Limbaugh's view of long-term monogamous relationships? Could it be that it is Limbaugh who can't handle the idea of a woman getting older? (His marriages haven't worked out too well.)
Who would want to watch Limbaugh getting older? I wouldn't. And if Hillary at 60 has her share of not-looking-so-good days, what about the 70-something year old John McCain? Will foreign leaders who visit him notice the bulge of his Depends undergarments?
Who wants to watch Fred Thompson's ego get more and more haggard? Who wants to see Mitt Romney's self-serving mercenary politics as they age and calcify into full-blown opportunistic extremism? Who wants to listen to Joe Lieberman as his voice gets more and more like Elmer Fudd's? Who wants to hear Giuliani talk about 9/11 another nine-hundred-and-eleven times, or Mike Huckabee dodge yet another question about his belief in the upcoming apocalypse?
Who wants to watch Bill Clinton become feeble? Who wants to see Dick Cheney's lip droop even more curmodgeonly? Who wants to see Barack Obama's ears poke out more and more Howdy Doodyishly, or (gasp) the very idea of John Edwards eventually losing some of his hair? Who wants to see ANYBODY get old in an unflattering way? Life's tough enough as it is without having to face the fact of aging and mortality -- let's shield ourselves from it 24/7 and watch nothing but an endless loop of Jessica Alba talking about kittens with Scarlett Johansson.
Seriously, the idea that this was Matt Drudge's "top story" is sick. Why is Drudge even relevant? Can't we do better? Why are people turning to so gossip-mongering ass-clown for news leads?
-
Very Well Put!
Hell of an essay Miss Traister- you isolated the issue, the flaw in our society, brilliantly.
However...
Go Obama '08!!!
-
It's Agnes Moorhead -- Samantha's mother, Endora, on "Bewitched"!
http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/protectedimage.phpimage=Bex/Bewitched1_endora.jpg
She was a witch, too!
Damn! Who you gonna call?
Hillary "Bewitched" Clinton?
John "Love Child" Edwards?
Barack Hussein (No fictional middle name needed) Obama?
"President McCain" is sounding better all the time...
-
You Had Me Until . . . .
For a while I thought that this was a fairly thoughtful article until I got the the cheap shot a John Edwards. For you to simply dismiss hims because he's younger and white is chicken-shit and short sighted. He's a damned sight better candidate than Hillary no matter how unfair this flare up about a photograph is. Maybe if the media would stop focusing on the two way dream matchup and try to actually cover the race and help the people decide who is the best candidate, he would actually get mention in more than snarky asides.
-
pathetic
As Ms Traister pointed out, the photo of Hillary does not reveal her to be behaving foolishly, making a fashion faux pas, or saying something stupid.
She is being accused of aging.
It's old-time misogyny. It's a page from the Caveman's Book of Dirty Tricks, and it would be laughable if it weren't still so true.
Did anyone see the Dr Who episode with David Tennet taking down the (female) British PM? Here's my paraphrase of the script:
Dr Who: I can end your administration with a word.
PM: (incredulous splutter)
DW: No, wait. In six words. (leans over to the P's aide) Don't you think she looks tired?
(cut to press conference where the PM is hounded by reporters, trying to assure them she is quite well, in perfect health and not considering retirement....)
Perhaps the electorate will recognize the ham-handedness of these petty "reportings", but we're talking about the people who voted for W twice.