Letters to the Editor
-
@ Garry Owen,
Thank you for raising an actual issue and an extremely important one. One of the things that is of utmost importance should the next Democratic president be able extract us from the debacle that is Iraq is that we remember our debt to the troops who have served there. What a great injustice it would be should we, in order to place the war and its memory away from our consciousness, forget that our service men and women did not start the war. A president whom we the people elected started the war. Whatever, our position at the time, in that awful aftermath of 9/11, we called upon our military perform according to orders issued.
Many will come home to a stagnating economy. I would say that, besides ending the war, saving the economy is paramount. If the economy as a whole suffers, veterans will suffer.
I don't know much about this specific issue, but I have read that many of our troops who suffer from PTSD are being discharged for trumped up reasons. This is wrong. Whatever the difficulties caused by PTSD, it should be treated no differently from any other illnesses. Those who display the beginning symptoms of PTSD should not be hastily discharged so that money can be saved.
I know that the candidates of Clinton, Obama, and Edwards (once) all have plans to insure that mental health issues be treated on par with physical health issues. In civilian life, that is not yet the case.
We need to strengthen the ADA so that it has some real teeth and so that the disabled are not treated as second class citizens compared to those discriminated on the basis of race or gender. Disability rights is an issue close to my heart.
I do know that Senator Clinton has been holding the Bush Administration's feet to the fire on many issues concerning veterans. Do you know if she is doing something about this?
-
Hillary so against all odds
Thanks for standing up for Hillary! In the media frenzy that flocks overwhelmingly to Obama's candidacy, you remain one of the few mavericks who have the guts to not go with the flow. MSNBC, CNN are so indulged in their concerted efforts, both implicitly and explicitly, to be the cheerleaders for Obama that they appear to be Obama's mouthpieces (except probably Dan Abrams who makes attempts to balance the skewed views of his other Obama-loving, Hillary-bashing colleagues and commentators from Newsweek). I thank you for this shot of fresh air amid the suffocating anti-Hillary halitosis.
-
making sense of Super Tuesday
Very well said.........however, being a Clinton supporter I really wish you hadn't told them. This is assuming they will listen, and given that if they will be able to control themselves enough to change it sufficiently. The few days following the New Hampshire win for Hillary, I thought I noticed a marked improvement in the blatant Obama bias in Chris Matthews. But this has evaporated. I can only hope this time will be the same or that it's too late and the boost for Hillary is already accomplished. Obama's exuberant bragging about how much money he has taken in will also very likely increase the donations for Hillary. I've increased mine 4X.
That said, I sincerely hope that my perception of a widening hostile destructive racial, gender, generational rift in the Democratic party is not accurate. But given the chance that it is there and worsening, I hope the Democrats don't blow it again fighting among ourselves.
It's too bad this potentially explosive decision has been placed on the shoulders of Democratic voters at such an otherwise opertune monent in American political history. But it's too late for that, we have it and it's up to us to fight hard for our candidate without being destructive. It's very hard to do, and I'm not sure we can handle it well enough.
-
"I ain't backing down in my contempt for VINDICTIVE and NASTY Hillary supporters, like you, Hon"
That's why you are part of the problem and not part of the solution. You spent much time at Broadsheet recently attacking women there who wanted to talk about the issue of Obama's past votes on abortion. You don't seem to understand that issues are fair game. They are exactly what we should be talking about. Issues, plans, records, detail -- these are all important in choosing a Democratic nominee. There are people as yet undecided, but you want to shush that discussion by shushing Hillary supporters. In particular, you seem to want to silence women who support her. From your rhetoric, it is clear that you have a problem dealing with people (women?) who have legitimate differences with you on issues. You don't get to declare a substantive discussion closed just because you want it closed. You don't get to throw your weight around to silence people here. You may, of course, continue your name-calling and your love affair with accusatory adjectives, but you will only be harming your own candidate. Moreover, people who actually support your candidate have tried to tell you this, but you have ignored them because they are women.
Keep it up. Go ahead. But you are not hurting Hillary Clinton. You know, if had wanted to invent a guy who would rally women voters to Hillary Clinton, I could hardly have done better than you. However, I care about the party, and am sad that you speak as a voice for Obama.
-
Maureen Dowd?
What do you make of Maureen Dowd? The New York Times' own Ann Coulter? These two ladies remind me of the great Sung Dynasty philosopher CHOU TUN-I (1017-1073) said: "Yin at its utmost becomes yang; yang at its utmost becomes yin."
-
There you go again
"You spent much time at Broadsheet recently attacking women there who wanted to talk about the issue of Obama's past votes on abortion. You don't seem to understand that issues are fair game. "
Yes, I did spend time at Broadsheet countering the LIES, DISTORTIONS and OUTRIGHT FABRICATIONS of liars like you, AKA.
They didn't want to talk about the issue. The women just wanted to find LIES and DISTORTIONS about Mr. Obama's record.
You can continue this process of LYING, DISTORTING, and FABRICATING. You are a divisive and unpleasant correspondent, and you are not a good democrat.