Letters to the Editor
-
Maybe its just me
I used to take a hard line against people in Salon (ok Joan Walsh and Tim Grieve) leaning towards a particular candidate in my own opinion. Part of my reason for this is that you guys do have the ability to affect a large number of people with your work here and your discussing really pertinent issues that affect a lot of people. I forgot the important things about this and any other types of published writing, and that is that I as the reader have to decide for myself what I agree with and disagree with and it is all opinion in some part and not necessarily the way things are.
I could not in good conscious project my own opinions at you guys (like who you may or may not be supporting) on the one hand and then attack you for projecting your perceptions out at me so to speak. Both instances deny each of us the freedom to think and express ourselves and I will not do it anymore. Debate, good or bad, has been limited enough in this country and I for one will welcome (whether I like them or not) the differing opinions I see here.
-
Glad you commented on some of the commentary
I've been reading Salon for about a year now but only started to read and publish letters a couple of weeks ago.
I'm glad you decided to make a comment on some of the commentary.
I don't know if it's always like this, but if it is it's pretty weird. Who has enough energy to support this level of vituperation on a daily basis?
People often talk about Bush's Manichaean world view, but I'm not sure it's any more black and white or good against evil than a lot of letters that appear on this and other sites posted by Obama partisans. I feel like if they don't pull back they're not going to have anything left by the time the general election rolls around.
But it's a free country.
"Ah, sweet bird of youth..."
-
@KcM
It is you who needs to grow up. Go back and read some of your own comments. There is messianic rhetoric in there about Obama, no question. And some of his other supporters are much worse. Ignore this trend at your peril. (Or ignore me, I'm fine with that too.)
-
Columnists are supposed to have opinions, right?
Perhaps I'm holding on too dearly to the good old days, when news was news and opinions stayed on the opinion page, but I have no problem with any Salon columnist offering an opinion or even making an endorsement. Columnists (and bloggers) are supposed to have opinions, and are supposed to be given more leeway than their colleagues in the "news" departments.
So Joe, Joan, opine away. And if you do have the chance, feel free to take a red pen to some of the bias that does show up where it shouldn't on this site (hint, hint: Walter Shapiro).
-
Cythera.
Yeah, if it's all right with you, I'm just going to ignore you.
I know what I've written here, and none of it could honestly be construed as having a "messianic" view of Obama.
I do think he's a wonderful opportunity for the Democratic party, tho. No question. And one the party dismisses at its peril.
-
@KcM
I urge other readers to go and peruse KcM's commentary on Obama. The hero worship, the projective fantasy, the claims that he is the living incarnation or embodiment of progressivism (the Word made flesh)--it's all there for you to see. Don't take my word for it. And this is hardly the worst that the Obamabots have to offer--so if you can find this strain even in his more reasonable supporters, it is a cause for alarm.
-
Here, check this out--a sample of KcM's messianism
KcM wrote: "Obama embodies the progressivism he stands for. Rather than drone on in the denatured technocratic policy-wonk of 12-point plans (all the while securing checks from America's largest corporate donors), Obama speaks in the language of shared national purpose and a common citizenship. (The 12-point plans are there too, but he doesn't dwell on them like the Clintons do. Bill could make statistics seem exciting, but it is a *very* rare gift.) "Without vision, the people perish." Like no candidate since perhaps Bobby Kennedy, Obama is offering a vision of a progressive America, rooted in our founding ideals and our best civic impulses, that is rallying Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and -- most importantly -- formerly disgruntled and disenfranchised non-voters to his standard. This is no small thing."
Translation: In our Fallen world of sin and policy wonkism, Obama comes as a savior. He is the living faith of progressivism. Like Christ militant, he rallies believers to his "standard." There is even a Biblical quotation to help us grasp the implications. Messianism pure and simple. There is more in the other letters--read and shudder!
-
Salon
Goodness, Joe, where do you think you are? Salon readers are some of the meanest. Look what they did to Deborah Dickerson. I think you're pretty good almost all of the time. And my candidate dropped out, sorry to say.
-
I don't believe you Joe
Sorry, just too clear of an intentional bias. Your writing is slanted to the Clintons with no doubt possible to the reader. I am not seeing much out there that isn't slanted, to your defense.
This is going to be a difficult two week stretch and people on both sides know it. Joe, you're probably a nice guy, but either admit it or write about something else. This article is silly. Your criticisms of the Clintons appear instructional even here, as opposed to your opinions on Obama(and fabrications i.e. Europe Commission?) which seem as though you're grasping. If there's nothing really there, why bother? (i.e. Greenwald's Huckabee/Obama comparison).
I think Joan Walsh or someone higher up must pay y'all per Obama slander or pro Clinton piece. That's the only rational explanation, given your statement that you're not really biased.
-
yes, it's an "odd" democratic field indeed.
I hoped against hope that Hillary would decide not to run ... I knew it was damn near unthinkable that she would gracefully bow out (for the party, maybe) but given her "negatives" I hoped.
I hoped Gore would run again... I suspect Obamamania will thwart any last ditch August draft...
Imagine if Hillary had not run and this campaign had been between Edwards and Obama and the other worthy contenders had been able to get a word in edgewise ... Face it, the medial loved the "demographics" of a Clinton-Obama contest and everyone else was pretty much ignored ages ago.
Early on, last summer, I realized Obama was a god-send to Clinton by providing another "frontrunner" OTHER THAN Edwards to spar with -- as long as they spent their time talking to each other (and they have SO MUCH in common), Edwards wouldn't be able to get a word in edgewise.
I'm growing increasingly concerned about TeamObama's support for congressional and state governorship races ... ultimately, I think ... for better or worse... the grownups are likely to "chose" Clinton by default and I think the endless "squabbling" (while red meat for the Obama "base") ultimately will alienate whatever "undecideds" remain from the "new guy."
That's my guess this week. Unfortunately, none of this has to do with anyone's stand on "issues," just the horserace.