Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
Will the black nationalists and white lefties who pushed Obama up the political ladder in Chicago prove to be a liability to his White House run?
The letters thread is now closed.
  • THE AUDACITY OF THE YOUNG - HOPE FOR A BETTER TOMORROW!!!!!

    Mr. McClelland,

    It must make you feel superior to be able to dissect the lives and experiences of Senator Barack Obama and the Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. and reduce their journeys to just being "black nationalists." It's easy to label isn't it?

    There is one common theme in the writings and TV News reports of the elitist, self-righteous, conservative, divisive, pragmatic, closeted racists, self-haters, under achievers, and egotistical reporters such as yourself - YOU FAIL TO REPORT ALL THE FACTS - JUST THE NEGATIVE PUNDITS THAT ARE DESIGNED TO DESTROY ONE'S CHARACTER, ASPIRATIONS, INSTILL FEAR IN OTHERS, AND DEFER DREAMS!!

    I ask that you please take the time to really exam TUCC (there's much more there than a Day Care, Credit Union, etc....) Please take the time to really research the history of Dr. Wright in it's entirety - yes he was born, educated in the U.S., served in the U.S. military and bears scars that you will never be able to fathom.

    Your story-telling will certainly cause some Obama backers to pause - but with God all things are possible and often what is meant for harm - reaps the exact opposite.

    When folks get upset about someone wanting to have a more transparent, inclusive, accountable, responsible, protective government for all the people by the people, I have to wonder - what are your fears if the playing fields are more level? Will your right to call people black nationalists and white lefties not be so attractive? I guess it's only the right-wingers that are to have the priviledge of name calling without being labeled anti-American.

    Edward McClelland, Ann Coulter, Russ Limbaugh, Hannity and all the elite neo-negative conservatives - what is so fearful about change, hope, and faith? Maybe you guys should get together and research and analyze each other.

    This response is not intended to be intellectual - only a pause for thought. You neo-negatives need to read, research, and listen to others that are not clones of your species.

    As a 66 year old African American female professional - I

    too like Dr. Wright have earned my scars and yet I dare to dream and hope for a better tomorrow for all the young people in this world including my children.

    I say - "THE AUDACITY OF THE NEO-CONSERVATIVES TO PROMOTE FEAR, HATRED, DIVISIVE POLITICS, AND ELITIST IDEOLOGY".

    Our wonderful country has been brought to its' knees under the elitist leadership of Bush. However, the more the common man suffers, the more young people that die on foreign soil and are maimed physically and mentally, the more people that cannot afford health care, the increasing number of people that are losing their homes and jobs, the shameful decline in our school systems, the erosion of our humane and moral values - the happier our Commander-in-Chief seems to be. He is often caught on film smiling and dancing but doesn't know how much a gallon of gas costs. Mr. McClelland what wonderful names do you have for him?

    Per Salon.com policy - letters that are excessively rude or violate the law of common decency may be deleted - based on those standards - How did Mr. McClelland's letter get published? Oh, I get it - it's only the elite that can be rude and not decent without be censored!!!!

  • What really disappoints me is Clinton and Clinton supporters

    I expect this sort of retarded crap from right wingers. It is their stock and trade. They can't attack the candidates on thier ideas so they play six degrees of Abbie Hoffman with them.

    But Democrats should be above this junk.

    There was a point in the last debate where I thought Hillary Clinton would act like a god damned human being. When Russert asked her response to the Farakan question I swear I thought she was starting to respond that she knew what it was like to be a focus of a smear campaign and that we should avoid these pointless attacks. But instead, she goes into a story about how she rejected the endorsement of an anti-semetic group during her 2000 senatorial run. Yeah, a real profile in courage from the senator from New York, not taking that anti-semetic endorsement. That really hurt her chances in the home of Seinfield and Woody Allen.

    Silly me, I thought someone seeking the highest office of the USA would show the bare minimum of leadership and compassion and treat a rival, who is bring new voters to the Democratic party and who shares nearly identical policys idea and ideological principles, better than she treats the Republican nominee that once joked that Chealsea is so ugly because Janet Reno is her father.

    I thought she would show some sensibilty and respect for the health of her party by stepping in and pointing out that attacking a candidate because of something their preacher said is not good for the healthy debate of the campaign or this country.

    That it is a distraction at a time where 45 million people are without health care, at a time where nearly 4000 soldiers have died in Iraq, at a time where people are losing their homes as a result of predatory and poorly regulated lending, and at a time where our depandence on foriegn oil not only creates terrorist threats but also creates environmental threats.

    I thought that someone who has had to put up with rumours of being a lesbian, having and affiar with Vince Foster, and killing him wouldn't remain silent because she thinks it will net her political points.

    I seriously underestimated how bitter she would be that someone who challenge her coronation. I guess her theory is that she can always run against President McCain in 2012.

    I'll tell you what through, if she really wants a continued political career she'd better stop sitting on the sidelines and remember what team she plays for.

    I'm not saying she shouldn't fight for the nomination up until the convention if she so desires. I'm just saying that she says she's a fighter, she says she leader. She needs to prove it by being willing to stand up for a rival, even if it hurts her chances at the nomination, because she knows the success of the Democratic party and the platform she and Obama are running on is more important than her personal ambition.