Letters to the Editor
-
@ NYAmiga, paid shill?
"Can't stand it
what a bunch of spineless ninnies, weak-kneed women pandering to a peacock's verbal plummage. As long as women settle for the back of the bus, nothing will really change.
What's next? Burkas on sale at Wal-Mart?"
I AM SICK AND TIRED OF YOU AND OTHER "FEMINISTS" TELLING ME HOW I CAN VOTE.
Excuse me if I was against the damn war from the start and don't feel like supporting a candidate who DID support the damn thing.
I am not voting for someone because it's "cool" or "hip". I'm an Ivy League-educated feminist working on her doctorate. I can think for myself. What a fucking insult. Now seriously, back the hell off.
By the way, your beloved Hillary was an anti-union board member for that Wal-Mart about to sell "burkas", as you call them.
-
What states would Obama win that Gore and Kerry lost?
I'm underwhelmed with both candidates, but the enthusiasm that OTHER PEOPLE have exhibited towards Obama excites me.
"Enthusisasm" with a segment of the population that can't carry enough electoral votes to win is meaningless. Al Gore found that out when he endorsed Howard Dean because he "excited" the "base".
Obama's fervent supporters insist he can win over Red America (I guess with those endorsements from the Kennedys).
I will now ask Obama supporters to name the states that Gore and Kerry lost that Obama would win. But don't worry am not going to hold my breath waiting.
-
The feminazi boogyman
I AM SICK AND TIRED OF YOU AND OTHER "FEMINISTS" TELLING ME HOW I CAN VOTE
Just, oh, never the f. mind.
-
I Call Bullshit!
This inability to vote the lesser of two imperfect candidates is - at best - a kind of anti-intellectual naiveté – and at worst, a pretentious and posturing idealism. I know. I was there in 2000, voting my conscience for Ralph Nader over the much too “moderate” Al Gore. Gore was simply too conservative on too many issues. The robotic twin of the aw-shucks folksy Bush.
I KNEW that politics was much more complicated than simply right-left. Nader helped me announce this knowledge to my friends and colleagues. I was continually pissed of at the way progressive ideas were always subverted by a two-party system which always gave us politicians who appealed the lowest common denominators of public opinion. Was I ever smart.
But hindsight is 20/20, and the enormity of my mistake (and of all those Naderites who voted with me) has become more evident each election. Nader was, of course, always and only a pipe dream. Despite Gore’s more moderate values, it is extremely unlikely that he would have got us mixed up in Iraq – have brought us the Patriot Act – and have taken to torturing political prisoners and innocents.
If you want to see your mirror image, just look at the implosion in the radical talk-radio right as McCain gets closer to winning the GOP nomination. Absolute horror at this figure who many see as just to the right of Hillary. Of course, I take a private glee in this behavior, savoring an implosion which will only help put a Democrat in the white House – and, hopefully, endless Democratic Senators and Congressman in Capital Hill. Conversely, they love Kucinich and Nader.
So yes – I call Bullshit. No matter how you slice the political spectrum – if your ideal candidate is someone as far left as Kucinich (and the 2008 incarnation of Edwards) than the voting records of Obama and Clinton clearly show who your candidate is – Obama. By contrast, if you really are as likely to vote McCain as Kucinich – then Hillary is your woman.
But if what you really want to do is stick to your guns, cry foul, and excuse yourself for being undecided this late in the game, then you better go buy yourself some new Birkenstocks to go with that political posturing. You know where they are sold, don’t you? At the mall. Just across from Wild Oats. There is probably still some old Nader campaign literature lying around. Or maybe even some new material, as the most recent word is that he is considering running. Oh. . . is that good news? You’re worse off than I thought.
-
Me.too
I find myself in the same predicament. I don't know who to vote for. Clinton has been a wonderful Senator for my state. Obama is extremely exciting.
I think I would like to find out who they would run with as VP. If Clinton said she would run with Wesley Clark, she'd have my vote in a second. Same with Obama. Bill Richardson would seal the deal, too, either way. The person either of them choose as VP is crucial in this election.
-
still waiting ....
to hear about any of Hillary's "experience" ...
c'mon ... just one teenie weenie one? ....
-
@NY Amiga
NYAmiga, you contradicted yourself. You wrote:
NYAmiga: "This is the time for all good women to stop listening to naysayers and to those who make us feel it's somehow wrong to vote for a woman candidate because she's a woman. This IS the time to vote for the best candidate who also happens to be a woman."
Well which is it? Are you voting for Hillary primarily because she's the best candidate, or primarily because she's a woman?
(1) If you think Hillary is the best candidate, then that's all the reason you need. The fact that she's a woman really shouldn't even be mentioned. It shouldn't figure into the decision at all.
(2) If you think Hillary is not quite the best candidate, yet you think that her being a woman is important enough that you'll overlook her 2nd-best status and vote for her, then you're voting for her because she's a woman. And yes, this is wrong, just as it would be wrong for somebody to vote for Obama because he is black.
Look at Rebecca Traister. Her first choice was John Edwards. If that's her first choice, why should her second choice be based on gender? Why not choose based on who's the best candidate?
We're mostly liberals and progressives, right? Why would any intelligent liberal worth his or her salt even THINK of basing the vote on gender/race and not on qualifications? Isn't that what civil rights fought for -- a world where the most important matter was a person's qualifications and ability?