Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
Any doubts about the Clinton campaign's South Carolina message were dispelled by the ex-president's ugly remarks Saturday.
The letters thread is now closed.
  • In the interest of full disclosure

    Given that I've been posting my impressions of internal debates in the Democratic Party in my state on this and other UT threads, it might be a good idea to say straight out that I'm an Obama supporter. It might also be worth saying that I have a great deal of respect for Hillary Clinton, and nothing about that respect is grudging. If she turns out to be the nominee of our party, I'll support her without reservation.

    As for Bill, it does surprise me that he -- of all people -- should suddenly have developed a tin ear on the subject of race. To be honest, I think that his passions have overruled his good sense. In that, he's not alone. If nothing else, it's an indication that the stakes for us as Democrats are as high today as they've ever been.

  • Fake Outrage

    I agree with the other writers on this being fake outrage. It seems the media hates the Clinton so much they will do and say anything to destroy them. Seems everthing they say is racist now according to the media. They seem to want to keep them off their game and constantly defending themselves. Its an old trick and Americans buy this crap so easy. Obama is a cynical race manipulator in my view and he is using black people to do it. Why don't you stop getting outraged over every little thing and overstating its inportance. That statemnt in SC about Jesse Jackson was not racist. You are dividing your party by this irrational behavior. This division being created may not heal at this rate.

  • *snicker*

    Barry and Hilly can go on fighting over their toys and throwing sand at each other. I'll be voting for the grown-up, thanks.

  • This isn't fake outrage

    It has to do with a calculated effort by the Clinton's to make Obama appear as if he is the "President of Black America." The cynical intention is to exploit the racist vote. It's pretty explicit,

  • I'm outraged ...

    I agree with the other writers on this being fake outrage. -- sienalake1

    I don't agree. I'm outraged about the fake outrage about the "fake outrage".

  • onepersonsopinion...just to say, but Glenn is a big boy who speaks clearly...

    Han-shan looked like a tramp. His body was beaten. He was principled and looked at the times deeply.

    The path to UT's place is laughable, a path, but know horse, donkeys, or mule track guide...A cart or a horse won't find it. The money minded will never find it.

    There are converging gorges--hard to trace the many twist.

    Jumbled cliffs--unbelievably rugged. A thousand green grasses bend with slippery dew. A hill of pine trees make a shrill sound that may confuse a first time troll. A trek there to UT can be disastrous. The wind hums and there is no shortcut to understand a way there or back home.

    The weary body may ask, "How do you keep up with the daily news?"

    In a tangled cliff GG chose a niche-Place---

    There are many birds, but no short-cut trails for fakes.

    What's beyond the place? Jagged rocks for trolls?

    A winner will pass, and then comes a Spring to refresh.

    `

    When some people read Glenn they say he is dang crazy and not much to look at...---dressed in drab-rags. huh, a lawyer. gads. What good can come from one who is a student of written laws?

    Some 'folk' don't get what he says and keeps hidden in the heart under the breast-rib-cage, and some murderous ilk don't comprehend how depraved they have become. Politic'o will worry as red/brown earthen dust is tossed upon the grave?

    Well, days and months slip bye and a lifetime can be spent in vocations of folly. I'm happy to read here. I can't believe I'm tolerated...heh.

    If the heart was right--you'd get it, it's said. I peer and peer while I can and hope to never disappear. I'll turn the 'gadget' off and purify my ears. I'm very sleepy anyway.

    A fog may roll in and we may feel bleak if Hillary wins? O, my/me. Mercy.

    I ask, "Who is losing?"

  • Kennedy's to endorse Obama

    Caroline Kennedy wrote an editorial in the New York Times, endorsing Obam and comparing him to her father, now the post claims Sen. Kennedy will also endorse Obama. Shailagh Murray writes "Kennedy's decision came after weeks of mounting frustration with the Clintons over their campaign tactics, particularly those with racial overtones. Kennedy expressed those frustrations directly to the campaign but was reportedly infuriated when Bill Clinton yesterday compared Obama's South Carolina victory to Jesse Jackson winning the state's much smaller caucuses in 1984 and 1988."

  • doug in india

    In your first update, you ask the question: "Had the Obama campaign dismissed his loss in New Hampshire by casually suggesting that it's unsurprising that he lost given that the state is predominantly white, would that have been an appropriate comment to make?" But essentially, that's exactly what the media said about the campaign. The number of times that the "Bradley Effect" was drummed out as an explanation, or at least talked about as a plausible explanation, was remarkable, even on Salon.

    False equivalency. Embarrassingly false equivalency, in fact. The media's pontifications are not the same as the ruminations of the the opposing candidate's spouse or direct surrogates. As we all painfully know, the media entertains every manner of boneheaded idea and possibility, often entirely independent of the efforts of the actual candidates or politicians.

    Obama and his campaign went out of their way to disagree that the "Bradley Effect" had happened in New Hampshire. Obama repeatedly chalked up Hillary's victory there as a result of a strong campaign and organization.

    Glenn is absolutely right that if Obama had made similarly trivializing remarks about New Hampshire, people would be apoplectic that he was being racially divisive.

  • Shameless Race Pandering Bill

    Sure Bill, clearly Senator Obama is another Jesse Jackson. As I recall, Senator Kennedy and Caroline Kennedy endorsed Jesse the day after he won South Carolina in 1984 and 1988. After blacks put you in office in 1992 and 1996, when you lost the majority of the white vote to Poppa Bush and Bob Dole, respectively, you pull out the race card in a cheap political ploy to marginalize Obama as the "black candidate." Shameless. So shameless. Well, the endorsement of the "black candidate" by Senator Kennedy must really hurt. I love it.