Letters to the Editor
-
re: Why Iraq tells you not to vote for Hillary
Taliesan,
At the time that he made his supposedly heroic speech opposing war with Iraq, Obama was a state senator in a district that was fairly liberal and opposed to the war. His speech was not heroic by my standards, it was a 'safe' speech that pandered to the opinions of those who would vote for him. Hillary Clinton was a US Senator in a state that suffered the worst terrorist attack in NY history. For her to ignore what many thought AT THE TIME was a legitimate threat would have been political suicide.
She also did not vote for war - she voted to authorize the president to use force if necessary - to assume that she and others who voted for the authorization knew the president was a)lying about the threat and b)totally unprepared for what would follow is not supported by the facts at the time.
-
Existential questions
Why is it OK for blacks to vote for a black candidate or a young voter to vote for the younger candidate and a veteran to vote for a war hero, but it's somehow shameful for a woman to vote for a woman candidate?
WOMEN ARE BEING DUPED ONCE AGAIN.
-
WHY VOTE FOR OBAMA?
In this mass echo chamber, Obama has become a saint, or I should say the second coming of Jesus Christ.
I just read NYTimes article, "Nuclear Leaks and Response Tested Obama in Senate," which vividly depicts a Obama who is no better and no worse than any other politician.
In one of his legislation effort, he failed to meet his constituents' demands but bowed to special interests.
No only that, during Iowa campaign, he actually made false claim--boasting that he had passed such a bill.
Finally when the New York Times confronted him (for this reporting), he could hardly explain it.
Right now, since worshipping Obama is in such vogue, this type of real facts usually used to judge a candidate, all becomes non-important. Especially in the misty eyes of young voters, Obama can do no wrong.
So I must say Obama must be a second coming of Jesus Christ. Because he has not been evaluated from a human being level or measured as another politician.
Even mainstream media doesn't do their duties any more, but becomes the loudest macrophone that drives this Obama phenomenon so quickly to its high attitude.
By the way, the link of the New York Times article is the following:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?em&ex=1202274000&en=49167536d01105ab&ei=5087%
-
@ A woman or a black man
If I get your point, it does seem like the world (and the US) could use an African American man, who is so broad and inclusive in his out look. It certainly would go a long way towards healing the fracture between America and the rest of the world. We could hold our heads high again.
But I think an even more important reason to vote for Obama, is his ability to bring people together, in this country. Electability, in the fall, is everything. And I think Obama is the one who can reach out to independent voters, in a way that will be compelling to all open minded people, just as he is now.
-
I'm coming in late to this party...
...and have neither the time nor the patience to read 511+ other posts, so I'm sure what I have to say has been said already. But I'm saying it anyway. I think John McCain will be the Republican nominee, and I do not believe Hillary Clinton can beat him. I think Barack Obama has a good chance, so I will vote for him in my state primary. If she stood a snowball's chance in hell of winning the national election, I would prefer her as the Democratic nominee. But hard reality has sunk in, and I must support the one viable Dem candidate out there. On Feb. 12, I will pull the lever for Obama and then cross my fingers and pray for all I am worth that he pulls it off. I prayed for the Giants to win the Super Bowl, and that worked out well :)
-
Perfect
This article is exactly what I've been trying to say all week and not managing to. Clearly I did not get enough sleep last night or something, but I actually got TEARS IN MY EYES at the end. Super Tuesday Eve catharsis!! Thank you!!
-
I understand your sentiment, if not your conclusions
I applaud the candid way you describe your inner turmoil about tomorrow's election and understand your sentiment on this topic, even if I disagree with your conclusions.
Yes, the idea of our first female president tantalizes. Yes, I know there is more at stake than the next four years. Yes, I will have to hold myself accountable to my young daughter if she reaches voting age and still hasn't seen a woman in the White House.
But in this particular case, the hope for an end to divisive, "business as usual" politics appeals more. The idea that we could have a president who is not only young, black, and an outsider in the political arena, but someone who is not bought and paid for by special interest money before he even reaches November.
I agree that emotion has entered strongly into my choice of Barack Obama; I agree that his rhetoric paints a pretty picture that my heart of hearts so dearly wants to embrace. I agree that, if elected, he will face an uphill battle to do half of what he has promised and to make the change that he uses as his battle cry.
In this particular case, in this particular election, I'm so ready to believe in someone instead of simply casting a vote against the other guy that I'm willing to let the opportunity Hillary Clinton represents pass for now. And besides, isn't it possible that the kind of world a President Obama would create might mean that the next Hillary--one who is less divisive, less controversial, more progressive--is only a few years away?
-
Andrew Leonard has an article today
On the economic policy advisor for Barack Obama. This short article, analyzing some key substantive differences between the two leading Democratic campaigns, has 16 letters. No offense, but this thread, based on "Who should I vote for" relying largely on intuitions, fears, hopes, love of cats, what have you, now has 517 letters including this one.
This has been a shallow election period and it isn't just the media's fault. People aren't willing to do the work it takes to analyze differences in the substantive areas. This is sad, and it bodes poorly on the future of our nation, regardless of its leadership.