Letters to the Editor
-
In the Wake of to Tell the Truth about Tuzla..
Here's what Hillary's better half had to say today to underscore Hillary's grasp on the issues: "You know, I don't give a rip about all this name calling that's going on."
-
@ zenhead
"Obama frankly doesn't have the experience. "
Would you elaborate on this statement, please?
What are your criteria of "experience" and how does Obama fall short?
(The follow up question is whether you're sure your criteria are sound.)
-
Attack on Hillary
It looks like the Obama camp has stolen the GOP plan ahead of time. Obamaniacs are already claiming that Hillary is trying to "steal" the nomination. The Obama camp will stop at nothing to become President, and with good reason.
His carefully manufactured image, assisted immensely by the MSM, will only last for a short time. If he doesn't make it to the Presidency this year, they can't keep the image burnished enough to sell him for Prsident in the future.
His lost Ill. Senate records may not become an issue this year, but they sure would in a future race. Course by then his US Senate records will help sink him.
-
Hillary will get thrashed by repubs if she wins the nomination
The GOP has been dying to run against Hillary. They make no bones about it. 66% of republicans feel she is easier to beat than Obama.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/104554/Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Likely-Win-Nomination.aspx
If she wins the nomination, expect to see documentaries like "Indicting Hillary" or "Hillary!Uncensored" played over and over again. They will talk about the hundreds of thousands of dollars in illegal campaign donations she has received. They will bring up David Rosen, her former campaign director indicted on federal charges of filing bogus financial reports with the Federal Election Commission. They will bring up her status conference set for April 25, 2008, when the Paul v Clinton trial will be set. They will air out all her dirty laundry...whitewater, travelgate, billing-gate, Castle Grande, cattlegate, and on and on...
-
@Weeping Nordic Goddess
When you run into one, it's everyman's duty to take them on, unless they are a wimp and good for nothing.
-
Salon's Bias
Salon is a liberal .com. I have seen several posts which claim that Salon is biased toward Hillary Clinton and against Barack Obama. Joan Walsh's columns are mentioned as proof.
As a former elected official and conservative southern populist, I am very quick to notice media bias. And I do not see any deliberately pro-Hillary Clinton stories in Salon. On the contrary, like the remainder of the media, Salon has gone overboard to be "fair" to Barack Obama and his campaign.
There are exceptions, but the pro-Obama posters are the most vociferous "attack dogs" in this Presidential Campaign as a group, and among the most venomous and biased individuals I have read anywhere on the web, about any subject. Many of their posts are among the least objective, and "true believers" statements to be found anywhere.
Their faith seems to be based primarily on oratory, but in fact, among the most effective orators and monsters of the 20th century were Vladimir Lenin and Adolph Hitler. Image is not reality, and to take image at face value has sometimes had monstrous consequences.
Everyone has their own idea as to what "change" means in the country. Chances are very good that the moment Obama begins to define what he means by "change", voters will abandon him in droves. That is why he is not about to tell us. We will have to wait until he is elected to discover Obama's real agenda. And that might be too late, as it was in Germany under Hitler and most assuredly Russia under Lenin.
-
@rphillips111 You're comparing Mein Kampf to Audacity of Hope?
Brilliant! Hilter wrote his book in jail while Obama wrote his while a state legislator. The parallels are obvious!
-
reply to Fester
Unlce Fester, my post entitled "Salon Bias" did not mention Mein Kampf nor The Audacity of Hope, a title Obama took from one of Reverend Wright's sermons, I think. I mentioned "oratory", which is speeches.
I think we might learn more about the real Barack Obama from a study of Saul Alinsky, including his writings, than from Obama's speeches. Alinsky promoted joining a socialistic agenda with liberal religious institutions to "change" society: like the Obama/Wright relationship and Wright's church.
-
A better plan
Would be to just sit back and let her do what comes naturally to her. That would leave more money in the coffers for the McCain swearing-in bonanza.
-
Changing society
Thanks for the reference to Saul Alinsky! Everybody wants to change society and remake in their own image of perfection. We've had other great speakers like TR, FDR, and JFK, and made it through. So throwing Hilter and Stalin in there is a bit much for me. Especially with the checks and balances in our system that still work after 200 years. Not exactly equivalent to post 1918 Russia or Germany post WWI.
I know most people find this boring, but I think the fact that Obama taught constitutional law at U. Chicago to be significant. I think he will turn to the founders to seek guidance, not socialists; although many of the founders viewpoints are not now popular and polls bear this out. And I'm one of those types who think that the middle class in America is set up to be hosed due to large structural economic reasons that may not be in the US soveriegn interest long term.
Here's an always non-definitive wikipedia blurb about Alinsky and Hillary:
Alinsky was the subject of Hillary Rodham's senior honors thesis at Wellesley College, "There Is Only The Fight...": An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.[8] Rodham commented on Alinsky's "charm," but noted that “one of the primary problems of the Alinsky model is that the removal of Alinsky dramatically alters its composition." [8] Later, in her 2003 biography, "Living History" Clinton notes that although she agreed with some of his ideas, "particularly the value of empowering people to help themselves" they had a fundamental disagreement: "He believed could change the system only from the outside. I didn't." [8] Once Hillary Rodham Clinton became First Lady of the United States, the thesis was suppressed by the White House for fear of being associated too closely with Alinsky's ideas.[9]
http://letters.salon.com/news/feature/2008/03/26/hillary/new/form.html