Letters to the Editor
-
Once upon a time...
Let's all stipulate that too much is being made of an off-the-cuff remark comparing his own position on Iraq with Bush's position.
But why is it wrong to point out that the candidate who says he has opposed the war from the beginning has voted to fund it? Yes, yes, Hillary voted the same way, but that's precisely the point -- Obama is NOT an agent of change. He either has no record or his record is remarkably similar to that of the candidate he opposes and says represents the status quo. That's the fairy tale here.
-
The race isn't over for other candidates
Iowa and New Hampshire has spoken! Are choice is between Obama and Clinton! Salon follows the rest of the main stream media in the perpetration of this fraud.
I should also note that the 'Clinton-Obama contest gets ugly' approach is the exact same on the CNN political front page as well as the rest of the main stream media. If Salon doesn't distinguish itself from the main stream media in its coverage of this election, why should we get our news here? CNN.com does a much better job of delivering fraudulent news.
-
Obamas church and spiritual advisor spells trouble in the fall
I would recommend that everyone google the following: REV. JEREMIAH WRIGHT AND LOUIS FARRAHKAN. I thought Obama was being trashed last week, I did my research, just read about Obams's background and how Obama's spiritual advisor Rev. Jeremiah Wright gave Louis Farrahkan their highest award, THE TRUMPETEER AWARD. It is quite clear that Obama has serious racist associates and muslim affiliation. If Obama wins the democratic nomination, the democratics will not have a vaiable candidate in the fall once the republicans get through letting the world know about about the reading I just recommended. The media has a love affair with this guy and it is such an injustice for all of america.
-
Obama--no issues
When is Obama going to start discussing the issues? He needs to stop whining and to stop playing the race card. Everybody is tired of it.
-
What has Obama said on the subject?
I see several writers referring to Obama's comments on the Clinton's MLK remarks and Hillary referenced them on Meet the Press but from what I can tell Obama hasn't been the one talking about it - it's been other African American leaders who were upset. If anyone can provide something specific please do. It seems to me Hillary once again missed an opportunity to prove why she's the better candidate and instead continued to try focus on why Obama isn't. Clearly the Clintons aren't racists - but there have been too many misstatements from Hillary's camp not to consider the idea that these statements are being released accidentally on purpose. If Hillary is experienced as she purports then she should know what you say is what is reported - not what you infer. I feel like Hillary is protesting too much about the experience thing. In one of her statements yesterday she mentioned something to effect of 10 years of being a Senator - again fuzzy math - wasn't she elected in 2000? And wasn't she a partner at a law firm for several years? I'd like to know exactly how that was helping the poor, women, etc. Being involved in politics isn't the same as acting. Obama has been engaged in actual public service, whether as an attorney or in the Illinois Congress since he graduated from law school. I'm an undecided, independent voter and will support whomever the Democractic candidate is; however if Hillary doesn't stop channeling Rove and start being the good candidate she can be then the Dems will once again blow a sure thing (in winning the Presidencey).
P.S. to Anonymous Obama has already been on Meet the Press (more than once) - it is Hillary who stalled going on for as long as possible and is the last major candidate in either party to appear. . .
-
budrow; What does Obama's minister have to do with the presidential campaign??
Please elaborate???
-
Begining to wonder why the actually quote about LBJ
and the voting rights act is long gone?
It was a big nothing puffed up by a handfull of Obama supporters and rapid
Hillary haters like the Huffington Post.
Clinton has nobody to blame but herself that She has allowed it to be blown
up; and Obama hasn't exactly covered himself in glory. Edwards has tried to cash
in on this nonsense too.
The Media, instead of informing the public on a host of issues as to where the
candidates stand and how they may differ, blathers on about this nonsense.
-
It;s too late.
It's too late. The Democratic party is now torn apart. Paranoia, deliberate distortion, ignorance of the history of the struggle for voting rights and access rights, have caused an explosion in the Democratic party.
At one of the debates, when Joe Biden was questioned about making racially insensitive remarks, every Democrat on that stage, including Obama and Edwards, leaped to his defense. This week, when Bill and Hillary Clinton were FALSELY accused of appealing to racism, Obama by a combination of silence, luke-warm evasions and internal memos directing his people to continue the racism attack on the Clinton's, fanned the flames of racial division. John Edwards, who has earned the title JACKAL, joined in the slander by directly accusing Hillary Clinton of attacking the place of MLK in the history of the civil rights struggle.
To falsely accuse someone of appealing to racism is in the same league as falsely accusing someone of rape.
The party is now ripped apart. I have reached the point where I will not vote for any Democrat but Hillary Clinton in November. I am sure there are many African-Americans who now will not vote for anyone but Obama in November.
I think John McCain wil be the 44th president of the United States.
-
This Election Contest has Already Turned Into a Debate about Race & Gender
"John Edwards is, of course, still in the mix, but it is a telling symbol of change that the white male is running third."
You're right, Walter, it is a telling symbol. However, I think the problem with this election is that too many people are voting for symbols, when they should be voting for the best candidate.
This contest has been framed from the get go as a contest between Obama & Hillary because of the obvious historic change her gender and his race represent. We'd all like to break down those barriers but unfortunately, in this case, the frame about having a historic oppportunity to choose a woman or an African-American has tricked a lot of Democrats into believing that they MUST support one or the other, regardless of whether they have the best policies or the best chance to win in November.
In addition to being a historic choice between a woman and an African American man there is yet another reason why this election is continuously framed using this false choice. It was framed this way to distract all of us from seeing that there is a third candidate who also offers historic change. Unlike Hillary & Obama, Edwards change isn't what you see on the outside, it's the policies he carries on the inside. His very real challenge to the stranglehold that special interests have on our country has made him quite few powerful enemies. We've all seen how Edwards has been treated by the media and the Party insiders in this election. They are very worried about losing their "place" in society when Edwards shuts down their cushy operation that sucks the life out of the little guys.
I bet the corporate elite are breathing a sigh of relief as they watch us push aside the white guy in the contest, who actually challenges the status quo more than the woman or African-American in the contest, in favor of the two candidates who would continue the corporate white male policies that hurt so many women and African-Americans.
Are we so blinded by our guilt over race and gender that we would cut our own throats just to prove we aren't racist or sexist? We need to wake up and look at what we are doing? We've got to stop following the media narrative and have a real, honest discussion about where each of these candidates will take our country. We do have a historic choice to make in this election so let's not make a historic blunder by following the media narrative. And may I remind everyone that symbols aren't always what their cracked up to be. Instead of having a Thurgood Marshall on the Supreme Court we now have a Clarence Thomas sitting on the Supreme Court. We can't afford to vote for symbols alone, we must vote for what our candidates will do once they are in office.