Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
Her campaign is nervously optimistic, but she faces a daunting delegate map -- and perhaps forces beyond her control -- in the race against Obama.
The letters thread is now closed.
  • What's the big deal about NAFTA and Canada and Obama's guy's comments?

    As I understand it, Obama has been criticizing NAFTA while quietly giving Canada assurances that he's not going to screw with it.

    There's no real contradiction here. It's not the US-Canada part of NAFTA that's messing with Ohio's economy, it's the US-Mexico aspect. The manufacturing jobs aren't going to Canada, they're going to Mexico.

    It's perfectly reasonable for Obama, or any other candidate for that matter, to criticize NAFTA's effect on American workers while simultaneously reassuring Canada that we're not the problem.

  • ncawley

    Here is my take:

    Hillary Clinton argued in favour of the war, and voted in favour of it. She hadn't even bothered to read the NIE.

    She was more bothered with whether computer games may or may not show nipples on their female characters, than about whether America should go to war or not. She has been pretty consistent on gaming. War, she hasn't shown the same degree of interest.

    Her campaign initially played up her strength on foreign policy, she then went on to call a major world leader soulless. Note: Putin was popular enough (For very good reasons) to have his say on who should run Russia next, get elected despite that person being a relative non-entity.

    When confronted with inner city unemployment, Hillary scapegoated illegal immigrants.

    Her healthcare proposal is designed to fail outright. What makes me say that? It includes a legal mandate that every American get health insurance, but does NOT include proposals on how this should be enforced.

    She would not make a good president. She would make a better president than McCain, but that isn't exactly setting the bar high.

  • @person: You are INCORRECT about Senator Clinton Healthcare Plan

    You Stated.....

    Her healthcare proposal is designed to fail outright. What makes me say that? It includes a legal mandate that every American get health insurance, but does NOT include proposals on how this should be enforced.

    My Response to you...

    1.) You obviously have not been listening to Senator Clinton when she repeatedly states the following in reference to her healthcare plan:

    "Unlike the current health system where insurance premiums send people into bankruptcy, the plan provides tax credits for working families to help them cover their costs. The tax credits will ensure that working families never have to pay more than a limited percentage of their income for health care."

    2.) The healthcare plan stated by Obama will not work, because the costs of the uninsured will be put back on us, which is not fair. It also MANDATES only Parents for their children and also offers healthcare up to the age of 25 for a parent to pay. Golly, when I was 25 I had my own job and didn't have to have my parents still insure me, so why should parents be mandated to this extra expense? (Time to grow up.)

    3.) The only way UNIVERSAL Healthcare will work is if you mandate all americans. Otherwise, we will be in the same place we are now.

  • The world asked

    how could Americans even cast a vote for George W Bush, a visibly inarticulate, coke addled son of a former CIA oprative and one term President of the United States? That Gore, a seemingly talented pol with lots more experience lost an election to dirty politics and media collaboration. OK the first time around could have been a colossal mistake, but winning a second term left the rest of the world convinced that Americans are moving toward a fascist state.

    The world outside the United States is waiting with baited breath to see if the promise of America is indeed viable in which an African American is judged not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character. They see in Obama a freshness and inclusiveness that does not bang the drums of imperialism that has left the world wary of the United States of America.

    Hillary is not the answer. She represents an old kind of politics, a politics of exclusive right to govern (arrogant dynastic rule), lobbyists writing legislation in the senate and with their surrogate Israel, keeping the Middle East in a constant state of turmoil.

    The biggest mistake that Hillary and her supporters are perpetrating on Obama and his supporters is the ridicule and mockery of hope. This kind of blatant snarkery is coming from the top, Hillary herself.

  • @Chernobyl Kid: NAFTA

    While your efforts to defend Obama on his stance as to NAFTA are admirable, you miss the point.

    What you should be taking away from the speech and the behind closed door meetings is that Obama says one thing to gain a vote, but does another thing to cover himself.

    At this point in the election process, we do not need to hear negatives about a policy he actually approves of. We also do not need to be lied to as to what he will be doing in order to save jobs in America.

    If NAFTA is an issue with Canada and Mexico, then we need to review NAFTA to see how we can make it benefit the people of America, as Senator Clinton has been stating all along.

  • @Chernobyl Kid

    The real issue with the NAFTA story is that you have a Conservative right wing douchebag Prime Minister (Stephen Harper) who has repeatedly tried cozying up to the neocons purposefully leaking this non-story (and distorting it to boot - he initially made it seem that he met with THE Ambassador to the US in DC, not the guy in Chicago) to one of the most Right Wing television stations in Canada (CTV)in an effort to affect the American Democratic process.

    I'm a Canadian, and it boils my blood. Americans should be LIVID that the Canadian PM has acted in such an irresponsible fashion. The content of the "meeting" was negligible, and falls well within the context of normal diplomatic conversations...simple assurances that it won't be an ugly fight, but normal renogotiations. This notion that the aide called it "campaign rhetoric" is a distortion brought to you by Douchbag Harper.

    Focus your anger people...it should be at a neo-con asshat, not an aide to the Obama campaign.

  • More NAFTA Nonsense

    An Obama mailer uses dubious, disputed statistics about how much the trade deal hurt Ohio workers.

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/118228