Letters to the Editor
-
Right Wing Media Chooses Clinton!
Every neocon right-wing pundit that I am aware of, wants Clinton to win. Of course, Ann Coulter is leading the pack, followed by the NY Times conservative op-ed pundits.
It has been well documented that they all believe they can beat her; and I agree with them. Very, very seldom is it when I agree with them.
She has done nothing in her life except accrue a lot of vile baggage and been the wife of Bill as he plowed through the throngs of women in his path.
Oh yes, she did get $500 million in earmarks for NY. Must be worth something!
-
In exactly the same boat.
Had John Edwards held on for one more week, this would have been easy.
As it happens, my wife and I both filled out our California absentee ballots yesterday, sealed them in their envelopes and prepared to express them in to the County Registrar.
She said "Aren't you going to ask me who I voted for?"
I said, "I went Obama, what did you decide?"
"Hillary," she came back.
Knowing we were just going to cancel each other out, we decided to save the 30 dollars in overnight delivery fees and just skip this primary.
Were Edwards still in the race, we probably both would have gone for him.
-
you nailed it...
This is a brilliant article, the best summing-up of the dilemma I’ve read so far. Way to go!
-
Great Column
What you are describing is what hundreds of thousands, if not millions of us, are experiencing today. With only hours left before I must finally choose, I think I've finally made my decision.
Yes, Clinton has the experience to hit the ground running, and I find it incredibly hard to not vote for her.
However. Most of the time, men and women seek the office of President. Of all the past US Presidents, there have only been a few times in our history when the office has "sought the man." Washington, of course. Lincoln, a most improbable choice, is another.
Something in my gut says, or simply hopes, that the office is seeking Obama. How else could such an improbable newcomer get so far? The stakes are high. Go with the head, or the gut?
How could I ever vote against hope?
-
Undecided voter
Why would you vote for either one? Both are extreme leftist, who's goal is ::: to raise taxes, force more control over you freedom of choices in your life, impose more rules & regulation on you, heavy into INCOME REDISTRIBUTION, force national health care (even as UK stated, they would not treat certain types of health problem as they had run out of $$)etc
Why would an citizen vote to raise their own taxes, raise the cost on everything, pay higher taxes for less choices? Why would citizens vote to lose their choices in life?
-
Thanks
Thanks for writing this--now I don't have to (and I couldn't have said it better). CC
-
To Moontaurus -- about videos
I agree with your point that it's important to see that everyday people are spontaneously pouring out passion and creativity in support of Obama. It's a very good sign. But you don't need to bash John Kerry to make your point. FYI, here's a link to a video that I, as a "random person," spontaneously made as a tribute to the 2004 Kerry campaign. Many people were inspired by John Kerry and the campaign, and there's no need to dis our experience to boost Obama, since he isn't running against Kerry (in fact, Kerry is one of his strongest big-name supporters).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyYmWgXhnRI
-
Yoohoo, Rebecca!
I just came back from casting my vote for Hillary, the best candidate who can beat McCain in November.
How about you? Have you decided yet? Are you going to let us know who you voted for?
-
Rambling Rose 22
"Hillary has been fighting for you as a woman"
If she fights for me the way she fought for her fellow women named Juanita, Gennifer, Paula, Kathleen, et al, I'm in big trouble.
Hillary fights for one woman and one woman only: HILLARY.
-
emotions
i just had a flash, a lot of the same people who are voting their feelings are the same type that in 2000 voted for bush because either they thought bush was more likeable or that gore was a inviromental nut case,i guess that worked out well didnt, yea 8 years of disaster under bush and al got the nobel prize,i wonder what it would have been like if people had voted on the experiance insted of the likability factor. .
-
Miss Hillary
was sure she OWNED the presidency.
this is why she is crying.
pretty arrogant, really.
-
Why NOT to VOTE for Bara
My first choice was John Edwards. Since he dropped out, I am forced to
choose otherwise. This is a difficult decision because of the following
reasons: I think Obama is a star but does that make him a great
politician? I am not convinced yet. His policies are too broad and he lacks the experience that's needed to fix the sorry state of this country, rebuild our reputation in the world and deal with the black hole called the Middle East. There is no time for a learning curve here. Hillary at least has been more specific re: her policies and has 35 years of experience including 8 years in the White House. In major ways, the Clinton years were some of the most productive for this country in its history. Primarily, turning Reagan's deficit into a massive surplus and giving more needed attention to the poor and middle class. However, what it really boils down to is who can beat John McCain or Mitt Romney----white men. In view of middle America's (more than half the population of the US) racism and religious fanaticism,
who has a better chance of beating a white man?...a white woman or a black man? I think a white woman has a better chance. I believe middle America is more racist than sexist therefore I am voting for Hillary. My only reservation concerning the Clintons is that they are also in bed with the corporations. If we truly want to change this country then the corporations must be significantly reigned in. It is the corporations behind Iraq, behind are dependency on fossil fuels, behind our lack of action re: global warming, behind our crumbling infrastructure, behind unemployment/poverty, behind illegal immigration, behind outsourcing etc etc. If we impose strict limitations on corporate power, this country can once again be called" the greatest nation on earth." I just hope Hillary has the guts and foresight to do this...and choose Edwards as her Attorney General or VP.
RE: OBAMA FEVER EVERYWHERE: I am continually hearing how people are MOVED by Obama. It's wonderful to be moved and inspired but this country is not a Hallmark Card. People are relying on their feelings instead of logic.This is how BushCorp worked. Play on people’s feelings—namely fear. Look what was done—the most effective President since Roosevelt as far as his goals accomplished. Although Obama is offering a much different platform it is this kind of emotionality of the masses that allows leaders to control and manipulate. Obama is a star and a great orator but then again so was Hitler.
AND THIS FABULOUS STATEMENT FROM A FRIEND:
Do we accept Barack Obama as president on the authority of Oprah, the
celebrity talk show host? Expertise not in government but entertainment, she is recognized for her talk show and conglomerate– entertainer, producer, and business woman.
Barack is vying for US president, chief government executive and supreme military commander, with legislative but no recognized executive or military qualifications; he is not running for President and Celebrity-in-Chief of the United States of Entertainment.
Oprah speaks personally–a friend and fundraiser for Obama; three years
known and three million dollars raised.
Oprah encourages us to substitute Barack’s life experience for professional qualifications; character, vision, wisdom, and record as community organizer; IL and US senator suffice. She knows he “is the one,” timely and ordained for America.
But does she divine and apply the same hiring standard to pilots, doctors, lawyers, and teachers; unnecessary are professional qualifications and competence, but likable people with life experience suffices? Working in a soup kitchen, voting on a referendum, supporting the local incumbent–it proves competent the FA-18 fighter pilot, heart surgeon, criminal defense lawyer, and physics professor…the next US president.
But she may reply, “That’s how people are hired in Chicago; it is right for America too!”
Oprah generates a fictitious idealized Utopian savior-president image and identifies it with America; she projects Barack Obama into this image and recommends him as that image; she asks Americans substitute her judgment of Barack’s so-called wisdom for standard professional credentials; she attempts to persuade America to accept her judgment in place of reason.
Common standards used to assess professional competence, especially with respect to the powers and duties of the US president, apply to Barack Obama no less than to any; projecting Barack Obama into a fictitious presidential image and recommending him based on it is sophistry.
Permalink