Letters to the Editor
-
@SusanGSMcGee
Calm and quiet are your words, Susan.
You, I assume, subconsciously read that into the article. What Ms. Traister wrote was, "Eck's words were not received warmly by the people standing around her; one man firmly told her, "His name is Barack Obama."
That does not sound to me terribly calm, or quiet. But I may be biased. I, for one, would have called that woman out for her blatant racism, and pointed out that that sort of slander is becoming the fall back position for a slew of Clinton supporters--most of whom have spent their lives fighting against just that kind of character assassination.
Forgive, them father, for they may know what they do...
-
@SusanGSMcGee.2
Oh,
You also jump to the conclusion that the 'calm, quiet'(not) speaker is a Clinton supporter. It doesn't say that anywhere either. Isn't the point of an appearance to draw from all sides of the debate to influence the voters' decision.
Perhaps you would only go to see a candidate you knew you already supported; please don't presume everyone else is in the same boat.
-
Wow & the audacity of whining
Good good, are Obama's supporters so insecure that they would endlessly whine and cry floods of rivers about articles that do not praise-sing their messiah; even when the criticized articles are as neutral as they can be to fair- and open-minded person?
With Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, David Shuster and the entire MSNBC/NBC, Wapo's Robinson, DailyKos, Josh Marshall and his TPM, Arianna and her Huffington Post doling out hundreds of pro-Obama messages, talking points and articles every hour, one would have thought they would be satisfied with the super free pass and super free ads their man's getting. But, oh, no, they still want every media outlet out there to praise-sing their candidate. And woe betide those that commit the heretic sin of being neutral or objectively reporting the news! The Obamanuts thought police are all over them for writing any positive thing about Hillary, as they consider such journalism a slight or put-down of their candidate! As if Obama is the best thing to have ever happened to America and the Democratic party - convincing themselves he's God's gift to mankind!
Obama's supporters decry W and Fox News, but their mean-spiritedness, vile attacks on their political opponents, thuggish mentality, not to mention their intolerance of opinions other than theirs put them in the same cubicle as the O'Reillys, Sean Hannitys, Glen Becks, Rush Limbaughs, Michelle Malkins of this world. However, whatever you do, don't tell them that they are exactly the same thing and people they claim to loath; for they will never admit or see the truth looking back at them, even as they hurl those hate-filled vitriols Hillary's way.
-
Here We Go Again
Everytime an article on Salon.com has a positive article on Hillary Clinton, some of the Obama faithful practically twirl their heads a la "The Exorcist" and spew verbal pea-soup: "How DARE Salon run a positive article on her!", they seethe. Give us a break, please; we Hillary supporters aren't the enemy.
I support Hillary Clinton because I believe she has more relevant experience than Barack Obama; in this terrorist-filled, energy-starved, depleted-food and dangerous world, thats what I want in a President. That does NOT mean that I want to slam Barack Obama as evil, duplicitous, vile or incompetent...not at all; he's a patriotic, highly-intelligent and honorable man. Should he become the nominee, I'll have no trouble supporting him for President.
However, in the meantime, can we all just tone down the intra-mural rhetoric a bit? We have a very nasty Republican candidate to neutralize; that's where our energies should be directed.
-
Won't it be grand
when Obama get's the nomination and takes a second to look back on the actual states he won...Maybe his new slogan can be "From Idaho to Washington"...How can anyone be considered the front runner when the lost "California, New York, New Jersey, Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania, Florida, Massachusetts(good work Kerry and Kennedy),Michigan...Ah, but with proportional delgates who needs to win states with a population over a million anyway...Let's make sure the general election has proportional voting...That way all the swing states won't matter...
-
It. Is. Over.
And the pundits, Ms. Traister INCLUDED, are the last ones who want it to be over. This makes you money, baby. Why would you want it to be over? Sure, it's good for you and whatever state they're brawling in gets to feel all special, but for everyone else, it's pretty much just an exercise in stupidity and wasted money and time. Oh, and bloodying up the candidate--which is fuel for McCain, (e.g. "His own Democratic colleague called me more fit for office!") It'll be beautiful for him. The "kitchen sink" is a boon to the McCain campaign.
Meanwhile, Hillary is still hoping for Obama to spontaneously combust (or whatever) from outta nowhere. And no, even if he won PA today, she would not drop out. She will not stop until she is made to stop. All of this crap only makes her "march to the sea" more inevitable.
I have to content myself with thinking about how much money she is spending and losing (god, I hope it's her own) for absolutely nothing, except to eventually sully her own reputation.
It's mathematically statistically impossible, peeps. Look it up. But I know a few of her fans would be all over her successfully subverting the delegate count and popular vote with a Superdelegate coup d'etat. Cuz that's really democratic. She's such a fighter! Too bad it's only for herself. And at everyone else's expense.
Sorry, Rebecca. It's over. Been over for two months. Gonna be more over tomorrow. (Although HRC is bound to call even a 1% margin of victory an unqualified success, even though that is an outright lie--she needed 35%).
But it's not going to matter. You're going to keep it going until the last dog dies in June. And probably beyond. And you'll keep telling us how good it is for the party. And we'll keep on thinking you're completely full of crap.