Letters to the Editor
-
@ MaddieP
Frankly, I couldn't agree more. I never felt ill will toward the Clintons.
As a Vietnam Vet for peace, I campaigned for Obama in the Senate primary and Senate general, going round to VFW and vet meetings. He worked with vets in IL and helped get some of the best comprehensive health care for vets in the country.
Coal miners love him here, he pushed for the clean coal power plant in Mattoon.
When he threw his hat in the ring, I was lucky enough to be in the VIP section at his announcement in Springfield.
Again, I had no problems with Hillary, I'd just been with Obama longer a knew him better.
Truth is, in the beginning I didn't think he had a chance.
Hillary is great, hell all the candidates were great. But Obama tapped into something.
It was a close race, but its over. If the shoe was on the other foot, I'd be here today saying Barack put up a good fight but now its time to get behind Hillary as our nominee.
It doesn't appear any of her supporters on these message boards is willing to do that.
-
Uh oh
You worked for Daley?
And Obama has worrisome ties to that corrupt administration?
I think she would be wise to stay far and clear from anything anyone from Daley's campaign says...although Obama is beholden to them for bucks and getting his career off the ground...not to mention the fact that Obama has deep ties to all the skullduggery that Daley govt. has been up to...
No, I would not pay you any mind if I was Hillary...or Obama...the Daley people are tied in to the hazards awaiting Obama as a result of Rezco trial...
-
You gave me a good laugh...
In light of the MSM writing Hillary off based on the fact that Obama is maybe 60 delegates closer to nomination, this post cheered me up:
I'm in no hurry for her to "concede" defeat in a razor thin election
Particularly as Obama Dukakis is obviously destined for a landslide loss.
-- ShawnWM
Thanks, Shawn...amidst all the ridiculous nonsense among the chattering classes, some truth is told...
-
There are no far left Democrats -- or liberal elected Democrats
Far Left : Green Party
Middle : Democrats (and if you look at their policies on energy, banking, trade-- they are to the right of Nixon, drift right much folks??)
Far Right: Republicans - because they drifted to the land of religious nut jobs. They use to be fiscal conservatives, and have unique policies on trade, energy and banking -- but the Democrats adopted all of those positions -- so they went for Social Issues, and on all other matters Global companies are always right, and can do no wrong.
Democrats haven't been left for more than a decade -- think NAFTA -- but, but say universal health care, gay rights ....yes yes they've been saying that for a long time but they don't actually have any of these things... and if they really wanted them, they would have them by now... Say pander to the voters for me, hey the Republicans tell their voters that abortion will be illegal -- if they meant it , it would be by now. Each party panders, no one wants to believe the wool is over their eyes.
-- Sorry about the rant, but damn quit calling Democrats Liberal. There maybe liberal democrats, but they are not in office. They are voters who keep hoping by voting Democrat over and over again, some day they will get a different out come - not a reality based form of thinking, almost as bad as faith based.
Try something really radical -- think outside the box, sorry meant outside the two party system.
-
Obama Dukakis explained
Obama Dukakis is obviously destined for a landslide loss.
Really? You're going to have to explain this one to us.
Can you?
If you're not just indulging in partisan snark and have something to say, please do. But drop the gratuitous name-calling. It undermines your credibility.
-- walter_map
Earth to walter_map--I know it is hard for Obamabots to accept reality, as are Bushbots, but take a stab...:
There is nothing partisan in this comment...it is history that Obama most assuredly is ready to play out if he becomes nominee...who does Obama appeal to in party? Intellectuals and African Americans...a coalition which Dukakis had in 1988...you remember 1988, don't you...? Dukakis in his tank? Obama with "bitter" comment or Rev. Wrong, who isn't going away...? Well, Obama doesn't have the broad enough appeal beyond youth vote, who are notoriously lax in following through on voting in the fall, and African Americans, a group anyone with a brain would know would be for Barack no matter what Bill or Hillary ever did or said...and there is nothing wrong with them being loyal and excited for their candidate...yet they and the limo liberals Obama are only what he attracts--NOT white women or Reagan Democrats...who make up much bigger percentages of the electorate than either of his core constituencies...without the groups that really will sway the election, a Democrat can't win...it's what did Dukakis in...it also is a fact that America has never elected a man as liberal as Obama...I challenge any Obamabot to name me won true liberal who has been President in 80 years...and no, FDR was not a liberal, so don't try it...
Now remember saying Obama Dukakis is not only telling the truth, but undermines no one's credibility or is not name calling...just a fact...deal with it.
-
Memo from Obama HQ
So, what did the memo say? Something about making nice to angry Clintonites to prompt them to unite around Obama now that the slice and dice phase is presumably over? It can't be coincidence that there are suddenly so many messages popping up on the Net to the effect that, well, gosh, Hillary really isn't all that bad (but she still needs to go away).
The vitriol towards Hillary and her supporters in the past months here on salon at times has left me almost breathless. We're not talking about strong disagreement, but verbal onslaughts so nasty they've made my eyes swim. Well, no matter: the smearing of the Clintons as race mongers (among so many other things) is not going to go away, now or ever. Nor are all the really sexist diatribes. Admittedly, not all Obamaites have sunk to such depths. But enough have, such that this whole primary season has left a rather bitter (there's that word) taste in many mouths.
By the way, my previous post was hardly espousing right wing talking points, as some of you have claimed; it was pretty clearly a look at how Obama is going to fare among voters on the issue of pride in country, one of his many weaknesses as a candidate. And I did not bring up the MO 'pride' speech. I instead referred to her statement to the effect that this is a mean, nasty country. And she did say something very close to this. Her further meaning was (as it has often been), that only her husband could save us from ourselves (oh, please). Is there really any use in denying that this is the kind of thing that sticks in the minds of voters - and turns them off?