Letters to the Editor
-
Come again?
Bill Richardson said the U.S. should cut off aid unless Musharraf steps aside and let a coalition of democratic forces in Pakistan take over, which seems a little divorced from reality. Sen. Chris Dodd agrees, telling Keith Olbermann tonight "I can't think of a worse scenario at this particular point."
Chris Dodd did not agree with Bill Richardson. What the hell are you trying to say buried in this terrible copy?
Chris Dodd did not say that "the US should cut off aid unless Musharraf steps aside" nor did he agree with anyone who did say that. He said almost the exact opposite of that.
I'm going to assume this is just poor writing as opposed to purposeful misrepresentation - the quoted paragraph needs to be rewritten to reflect reality.
-
From Joan Walsh
Margalis, I was trying to say Chris Dodd agrees it's divorced from reality. Will look at how to fix it.
-
Obama got it right
In October 2002 Barack Obama said:
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.
That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war...
I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda...
Obama got it right. Hillary Clinton voted to authorize the war and did not speak out against it. She got it wrong.
I suspect that she knew Obama was right, but got it wilfully wrong, because she saw no electoral advantage in telling the truth, thus demonstating that she is a follower, not a leader.
This is nothing to do with her being a woman. I say to her:
Senator Clinton, you are no Maggie Thatcher.
So do we vote for the candidate who got it right, or the one who got it wrong? Yes, we vote for the one who got it right, because he showed a fundamental understanding of the situation that many, most politicians woefully failed to appreciate.
Join me in welcoming President Obama.
-
What about Amy?
What's all this blubbering about Bhutto? For goodness sakes people- don't you realize that Amy Winehouse is in trouble in Norway?
-
Depressing indeed.
Must this event today serve some kind of political angle or advantage, or should we use it to shed some light on the actual policies of these candidates?
I give credit to Clinton and Biden for noting in previous debates that Pakistan was more of a risk to this nation than Iran, despite its status as an ally.
I give credit to Dodd for making a specific and thoughtful policy recommendation on the spot, calling for more time before the elections so that the Pakistan Peoples Party can run another candidate in place of Bhutto.
I would ask the author of this piece to also give some credit to Ron Paul, who talked about Bhutto's assassination on both CNN and MSNBC, noting of Pakistan: "I would change the policy so that we were less involved with their internal affairs... we've aligned ourselves with a military dictator who overthrew an elected government... I wouldn't be sending troops over there, I wouldn't be sending any more money." He added: "It's time we looked for non-intervention, and stay out of these conflicts and let them sort it out themselves."
Agree or disagree, this notion that the United States understand what the "self" means in self-determination for Pakistan is one that all other candidates seem to be rejecting. That's what I learned today.
-
Shame on Obama
I must be a really forgiving person to think of voting for a Clinton again but gee when Obama says things like that -- that's alienating. I don't like the petty way he's trying to milk the Iraq War for his own political benefit.
Let's face it -- Bhutto chose to play with some very dangerous playmates when she decided to send the Taliban in to "stabilize" Afghanistan. That decision blew up in a lot of faces. Maybe it finally blew up in hers.
I hope Hillary doesn't forget all the certifiably innocent Afghan women whose lives were turned into a daily living hell thanks to that terribly bad decision made by her pal Benazir.
And on the day a woman died for democracy,
If I were superstitious, I might argue that her recognition of the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan put a blood curse on Pakistani democracy.
Since I'm not superstitious, I'll just say "blowback is a bitch."
-
Let's call it a wash.
Is Obama wrong? Again and again Senator Clinton can highlight her years of experience and all the tea and cookies she's shared with various world leaders. But all that wonderful experience and perspective didn't stop her from supporting one of the biggest foreign policy blunders in American history!
And anyone who thinks that the current rise in terror in Pakistan is not partly related to the destabilization of Iraq is deluded!
-
An example of what's wrong with the media
Walsh devotes two sentences to Biden, the last saying "Biden is probably too far behind to benefit much from this, but you never know."
Then she devotes five times that much space to the celebrity Hillary Clinton. Walsh indicates that Biden has "wisdom," in the situation, and his reward is that he is the least mentioned of any of the candidates.
Interesting approach to journalism. No wonder we're screwed.
-
From Margalis
The added "with me" helps.
Now fire Camille Paglia and you'll be batting a thousand.
-
cheap shot
So, according to Joan, the reality is that the US should continue to support Musharraf in the hope that Islamabad suddenly breaks out in democracy. Otherwise, why is Richardson's position "divorced from reality"? He's the guy with more foreign policy experience, and success, than any other candidate. By pettily dismissing his opinion, Joan frames herself as chasing an agenda or, much worse, being a herd animal.
As for Bhutto, yes, sad she was assassinated. I guess we're all supposed to go through a period of public remorse. Do a little research before lamenting too much. Look at what she did, not at what other people hoped she would do in the future. Pakistan deserves better than Musharraf and better than Bhutto.