Letters to the Editor
-
here are the facts
for Walter: yes, you are still an Obama shill. Yes you are.
for Barak: The Clintons have not been negative to you. They are just stating facts. It just suites your purpose to say they are negative so that is why you are saying it. Nice try.
for Timmy: Timmaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
-
The Salon staff's asinine, hypocritical double-standard on the candidates
Here's the sound that Salon's editors and writers make when somebody criticizes Hillary Clinton in any way that references her gender, or responds in an insufficiently compassionate manner to her teary-eyed moment:
-- Joan Walsh: "This is really quite telling... I am rather disturbed by the way the media has treated Hillary... This is no Clinton 'dynasty' and frankly, I find the term sexist..."
-- Rebecca Traister: "John Edwards is an Orc! He's betrayed women voters everywhere! He's sad and pathetic!"
-- Other Salon writers: "Get a load of that Chris Matthews guy! He's really losing it! We thought he was completely reasonable before -- y'know, when he trotted out Ann Coulter and she called Al Gore gay and whatnot -- but now, tsk tsk, Matthews has gone too far..."
Now, here's the sound that Salon's editors and writers make when Hillary Clinton makes uncalled-for attacks on Barack Obama, such as (1) implying that MLK Jr. was nothing without Lyndon Johnson, (2) attacking Obama's votes to fund the troops, (3) allowing surrogates to blithely reference Obama's admitted teen drug use, (4) [several other recent instances of Clinton calculatedly attacking Obama]:
-- *** (crickets chirping) ... total silence from Broadsheet ... restrained, minimal coverage ... (more crickets) ***
Note: I agree that Hillary Clinton should not be criticized or in any way ridiculed in reference to her gender, past troubles in her marriage, etc. That said, her attack strategy against her chief opponent has been offensive and makes me want him to prevail that much more.
-
@First poster
Obama has already been on Meet the Press at least twice. Russert was tough on him. Glad you could join us, we're having an election you see...
-
the facts of life
What Hillary said about MLK and LBJ is 100% true.
You better believe it or you are fooling yourself.
Technically, the Civil Rights Act was unnecessary because it is basically what the 14 amendment says.
But the Civil Rights Act gave it some teeth. There was plenty of other legislation before that should have been sufficient but it also had no teeth.
Think about it.
Aside form that, when LBJ signed it, look what he said: "We have lost the South for a generation." He was no dummy.
Because this is area where the Obama supporters are naive and blind to what Hillary is saying.
Sorry, but somebody has to explain to Obama supporters the facts of life.
This is precisely why I currently support Hillary instead of Obama, who I like, and hope one day will be a POTUS.
Got it?
-
Democrats take a stand!
Rovian tactics of smear, subterfuge, and scandal are no less poisonous to this country when they are being committed by a Democrat.
There have been a lot of smears in this campaign, but the bulk of them have been directed at Obama by the Clinton team. The Clintons are working hard to bait Obama into a debate about race. They are trying to transform him from a candidate who is black to a "black" candidate in the mould of Jackson or Sharpton.
Karl Rove would be proud at this attempt to subvert Obama's strength (his ability to transcend race and politics) into a weakness.
As Democrats, we were outraged when Bush used these tactics to corrupt the noble and heroic deeds of Kerry in Vietnam. How can any Democrat now sit by and let a good, honorable, and dedicated man like Obama be given the same treatment!
There are a lot of Democrats who reject Obama's big tent approach. Many feel that it's time to give as good as we got, to play the same game George Bush played when it's our turn. This is a giant mistake. Why would we think that the sneaky and duplicitous tactics of the Bush regime would serve the Democrats or America any better? Eight years after embracing the politics of Karl Rove, the Republicans stand poised to suffer a humiliating defeat! Eight years from now, why would the outcome be any different for Democrats if we adopt the same strategies?
The upcoming primaries are our chance to send a message to the political establishment that we viciously reject the political manipulations of the past 8 years. Right now, only a vote for Obama or Edwards sends that message.
-
Surfer-Z is right
The campaign needs vacation days. So do I. As a lifelong Democrat, it's frustrating to see the former President being attacked by someone who seems to have no respect for the Party he claims to have joined. The idea, floated in some of these comments, is that Sen. Clinton is out of line for running for President after a long career preparing for it. I don't think so. I think I'll try to stop listening to the din for a few days. In the end, I will vote for HRC for President, or perhaps for a Republican, if she has been driven out of the race. Or for some crank third party candidate.
-
i'm done.
with the clintons. and with salon 'til the election's over. i really can't take anymore.
-
Clinton Bashing
The author's preference for Obama over Clinton is obvious, and makes this article invaluable. For instance, South Carolina is not going to "determine" the race. Clinton leads in Michigan and Nevada, both of which will be decided before South Carolina, and the votes of which dward South Carolina. After that, Clinton leads dramatically in polls in the Super Tuesday states. As another example, the characterization of Clinton's cool and masterly handling of (admirably tough) Tim Russert on Meet the Press shows a laughably biased characterization of her comments as defensive. She's not defensive--She's in charge, and the Obama camp is melting down. Let's be clear--Obama's campaign is bloody on the ropes. It has adopted desperate and divisive strategies, including statements by disappointed New Hampshire Obama operatives that Obama supporters might "stay home" on election day rather than vote for Hillary. This is a campaign with the stink of death on it. I think that Obama himself is an attractive candidate--But he'd better adopt smarter campaign tactics, or he'll become an uninteresting political footnote by February 5.