Letters to the Editor
-
Kissing and Hugging
I didn't want to give WaPo any eyeballs either, Holly, so I found their edress for letters via Google and sent them this (motivated by other letter writers' comments here):
Dear Post,
I read this morning on a site I visit every single day (Glenn Greenwald's excellent column at Salon), that an idjit in your editorial pages was worried about Edwards and Obama-- for some reason we can only ascribe to a vague, though undoubtedly deep-seated and unexplored, sexual confusion on her part. I wondered whether perhaps she had ever seen *these* photos of a couple of her heroes:
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2006/03/useless-mccain.html
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blbushliebermankiss.htm
I'm also wondering whether she knows all about how the manly man McCain calls his wife a "cunt." I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure, that neither Edwards nor Obama does that. Maybe they are *afraid* of their wives?! Or, more likely, they actually respect them.
It would be nice if you'd print one of the many, many wonderfully funny responses to your columnist's ridiculously unreasoned bilge-- responses which are readily available on various websites near you. You might also, if you were clever, ask yourself why so many people are exposed to her hilarity through sites that do not belong to the Washington Post. That is, if you aspire to be viable ten years from now.
Sincerely, [Me]
That last bit was inspired by an all-staff meeting last week at my work. There are about 150 of us and the moderator asked, "How many of you sit down and read a physical newspaper in the morning-- actually open up a paper-- raise your hands." About 10 people did. "How many of you read the news on the web?" Everyone else raised their hands. "For how many of you was this true five years ago?" About 3/4 of us lowered our hands.
I know we're a bunch of metrosexuals and all, but I'll bet even the booniesexuals find the choices on the web more appealing. White pride advocates with sexual hang-ups and no facts or historical knowledge to back up their assertions are going to remain interesting for only so long when there is complete and utter evisceration of their opinions immediately accessible to us on the web. Thanks, Glenn!
-
SueNJ97
I should have added - I remember that Glenn did cover it.
Not only did I "cover" it, I wrote numerous posts about it -- not just Coulter's attack on Edwards specifically but the more general attempt over several years to feminize Edwards. I also devoted many, many pages of my last book to this topic.
In fact, I doubt you can find anyone who has written more about that topic than I have.
Yet even as the primary is just about over, people still can't give up their "my-candidate-is-treated-so-unfairly" persecution complex, and hence you come here and accuse me of not caring as much about the attacks on Edwards as I do about the ones towards Obama, even though I've written at least as much, and probably more, about the former than the latter.
I just didn't recall that it evoked this much reaction, people simply did not believe it was as awful when it was only Edwards getting slammed.
Your recollection is incorrect. The way in which Edwards was demonized on the ground of his hair and his faggot-ness resonated here as much as any other topic.
-
Poverty & Racism
Do you suppose West Virginia being among the poorest and least educated of states has anything to do with West Virginians being racist? I think it does. We should feel sorry for them. Just as we should feel sorry for "gangsta" culture blacks who also happen to be poor and racist. There is a corelation.
As for Obama, he is above race and that's why he is successful. Good for him.
-
Yes Kathleen Parker's columns are breathtaking
I guess she is the slightly more restrained of the Coulter twins. Now the Post needs to balance that out with Ted Rall.
By the way, is it "GoodCelery!" or "GoodLSD!"? Just wondering.
-
What is the JWR?
What exactly is the JWR, and what are Mitch Albom, Nat Hentoff and Pat Sajak (???!!!) doing contributing to a site dominated by sick, sad right wing wackos like Kathleen Parker?
-
Obama
re: "His [Obama's] background and experiences are not akin to those of a first or even second) generation American."
He is the son of an immigrant father and an American mother just like millions of other Americans. You seem to think that acknowledging his history makes him seem "foreign" as if any American citizen who has one or two immigrant parents is a "foreigner." What nonsense.
I live in CA and I have seen this mentality play itself out in elections. Mayor Villaraigosa, a native of Los Angeles, is the son of an immigrant father and an American mother whose family has been in Los Angeles over 100 years. But during the campaign the media (and Maxine Waters, a native of St. Louis) characterized him as a foreigner.
During the recall election, Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante, a third generation native of the Central Valley, was the only native Californian on the ballot, but the media consistently called him an immigrant or the son of immigrants.
That's just a way to foreignize non-white Americans. Actress Renee Zellwegger is the daughter of Swedish immigrants, but the media don't call her the daughter of immigrants. They don't call Natalie Portman or Gene Simmons immigrants.
Enough with the double standard.
-
Race
Re: "Do you suppose West Virginia being among the poorest and least educated of states has anything to do with West Virginians being racist? I think it does. "
There are also many wealthy white educated people who are racist. You know, the ones who set up the racist system to begin with.
-
Glenn, if I am mistaken, then I am mistaken
Perhaps people did recognize and react to it more than I realized. However, if you believe it really resonated with people on this site, check out the thread where Joan discusses what Obama could learn from Edwards and the upshot is, nothing, he should just turn over his delegates (I'm not sure that's possible) and btw, watch out for the haircut comments. So, I think that the Republicans aren't the only ones who have a fixation.
My point was, none of this is new. People tend to think we have always reached a new low, and we haven't, the same sh*t, or just a different version, gets shoveled out every election cycle. Maybe I should just go away and stop paying attention. Because I'm getting tired of telling people that really, it's not different than what we've seen before. Is that sad? Yes. But I'm not sure why it's worse this time because it's a different candidate. That's all. And people seem to think it's worse. Personally, I don't think this is new or worse, it's just that more people have emotionally invested in a candidate this time. But I've seen lots of elections. Maybe it's just time to pack it in and stop paying any attention at all.