Letters to the Editor
-
Read it again.
The argument that the media is not covering the issues is getting tired. For one, every vote each candidate has ever cast is recorded and at your fingertips, and I bet you know where to get it. But you're reading Salon. You're looking for something other than lists of data, no? Understand that I am just as quick to blame the media (is Salon considered MSM?) for any brief wave of nausea I feel - even if bad shrimp is the true culprit. But this particular article is an example of valid social commentary, not to be lumped together with the Springeresque three-ring-circus of expensive haircuts and bad tipping.
Though not gospel, I found this article to be thorough, thoughtful, articulate and progressive. I agree that politeness for its own sake is a symptom of racism and sexism, and hinders real progress. These issues of race and gender DO need to be addressed and this election raises the opportunity. Great time to get down and dirty, as Kamiya says.
-
ENOUGH!!!!!
There is no story here. And we've already heard the non-story a dozen times. The media is creating a controversy out of thin air. Do some real reporting on real issues at long last. Shame on you Kamiya. Shame on you Salon.
-
this article
makes the silly and unfounded assumption that race is a more telling factor for ill treatment than sex. But that doesn't take into account the simple fact that approximately 232,010 people are raped or sexually assaulted every year, and the overwhelming majority of those people are women. Women are almost invariably the victims in domestic abuse cases. It isn't that non-whites aren't discriminated against: It's just that the daily discrimination and victimization of women is so routine that it isn't even discussed.
Women are frightened to go outside by themselves at night. With good reason. This means black women too.
I find it hard to believe that racism is a greater evil than sexism, when sexism is universal and insidiously "normal" whereas racism is rightly confronted, and being called "racist" is so insulting that we hesitate to honestly criticize people of other races. The author of this article imexplicably finds this fear to be evidence that racism is worse than sexism. I see it as evidence that it is socially acceptable to degrade and devalue women, whereas it is not socially acceptable to be seen as racist.
-
You are distorting what Gloria said and you know it
in essence Steinam was saying that sexism trumps race? She said NO SUCH THING, she said racism is conscious and sexism isn't and said as much in your article. How dare you! As a liberal San Franciscan that has been supporting salon since its inception, i can say this is the last salon article I ever read
-
race vs gender
What we a seeing from the Clinton camp has nothing to do with race or gender.
The Clintons are proving once again that they are the most polarizing and divisive politicians ever to draw a breath.
Only the Clintons can get males and females fighting one another. Only the Clintons can get blacks fighting one another. Only the Clintons can put another Republican in the White House. Only the Clintons have proven time and time again that the only thing they care about is themselves - not the country, not the party, not the election - only themselves!
-
Isn't it ironic, donchya think?
And this is real irony, not Alanis Morrisette irony.
I am just incredulous how a candidate who is promising "change", a "new kind of politics" and a "broad consensus" has played out the campaign in the way Obama has.
It either points to incompetence or talking out of both sides of his mouth.
He has kicked at another minority and tried to have it both ways by crying "foul!" anytime he is criticized. Even things he brought up (his drug use) is off limits. Him and his surrogates conflate anything Bill and Hillary say as racist, which is so far from reality; they've been fighting for civil rights since the 60's.
Based on this performance, then it clear that he can change the tone of Washington. Because if he can rise above a primary like he has, then he can rise above a general....
*crickets*crickets*
Look at the supporters he's gathered. Inspired on one hand, hyper-sensitive, snarky as hell and extremely judgmental about his biggest rival: Hillary, on the other.
Sure, I'm supposed to believe that Obama is able to change the tone; he makes it seem so easy with the way the primary has gone so far. And with you passionate Obama supporters trailing behind and busily building that broad consensus, why I just fill up with warm fuzzies knowing and seeing how you hate Hillary more than republicans at this point.
Obama compares himself to the American icons MLK Jr. and JFK. For someone who hasn't done the hard work that they have, it clearly shows that he doesn't execute what he preaches very well. Do we have Alpha Male syndrome here, again?
I'm still searching for that "change" and "broad consensus" that must have occurred in the Senate after he joined in '05. It must be self-evident, right? I'm just puzzled how the Republicans managed to stand by Bush's extremely unpopular policies and obstruct the congress, considering 'The Obama' was staring at them in the face and inspiring them to reach across the aisle to sensible progressive policies. I'm also puzzled by the diving approval numbers of Congress, since Obama is there and must have produced all that positive change.
Look, I just listened to the book on CD 'Don't Know Much About History' and candidate smearing is as American as apple pie. It goes back to Hamilton and Jefferson. My hope is that we can stomp down this dangerous authoritarian streak the republican party has exposed and reverse the damage, and progress beyond it.
But I see the way Hillary has been treated, and pedestal Obama has been put on because his rhetoric is Lakoff-like. But Obama has been the biggest disappointment of them all. Not only is his rhetoric using us to get votes, but I am very sure that he can't really pull it off! It's a system that he cannot break and he has shown he's not truly willing to break it.