Letters to the Editor
-
@ AKA Smith
I love reading your posts. You are one of, if not the most informed and thouughtful people commenting on these threads. You raise such intelligent comments; you give people food for thought; you offer the wisdom you have without sugar-coating it or apologizing for it!
You are a real feminist and a woman after my own heart! It is so hard these days to be a real feminist. The right wing really took over the definition of the word, didn't they?
Maybe once Hillary Clinton is president we can take back what we know and believe in our hearts about feminism. At the very least, her candidacy is forcing us to reexamine our beliefs and attitudes regarding the state of women in this world. I think this is wonderful. I don't think we have had such a revival of feminism since the mid-70s and 80s when we had to confront people and groups like Phyllis Shafley, the Moral Majority, Eagle Forum, and...Ronald Reagan.
You are like Obsidian: beautiful yet tough and practical, with an ability to reflect that back.
Thanks, AKA Smith!
-
@ LBS
Hillary Clinton is the only Democrat who didn't vote. Of course, her vote wouldn't have made a difference (a super-majority of 60 was needed); however, on a symbolic level I find this disturbing.
(I suppose I point out here that there are actual reasons one may not support Clinton. A dubious record concerning war and civil liberties is one of them.)
First, you said 49 senators voted? 37 voted yes; 8 voted no; and 4 didn't vote, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, both of whom are on the campaign trail.
Second, Obama has quite a few NVs, too, on issues that I think are equally important: implmenting the recommendations of the 911 Commission Report, a No Confidence vote on AG Alberto Gonzales, and expansion of SCHIP. Aside from this, he has the fourth highest missed/NV record in the Senate, right below Joe Biden, followed by John McCain and Timothy Johnson.
Clinton's record frequently gets "cherry picked" without looking at the whole picture.
Obama is far from perfect on war and civil liberties, having voted yes to reauthorize Patriot Act, and no on two amendments to withdraw troops from Iraq.
-
@ KcM Thursday, February 7, 2008 11:57 AM
WOW! It's always so wonderful to have a white man telling women and blacks all about our history, thus ensuring that we will be forever grateful for your lessons and wisdom.
We've really gotten far listening to you and having your views of our history forced down our throats for so many years.
And what you "do" know about our history and struggles is miniscule because you have never been there.
Do us a favor: take your white male progressive, latte-drinking attitude and paternalism toward blacks, latinos, and women and shove it. We don't give a c*** what you think!
There are a lot of us who are using our college degrees to make real change.
-
@ davedavis February 7, 2008 11:23 AM
Obama's money came almost entirely from people like Diane, donating similar sums, while HRC larded up by maxing out big donors.
If she runs the country like she runs her campaign we're doomed. She started off with an unbeatable hand, and has managed to play it to a draw! She had more money, more party support (still does in terms of endorsements), more name recognition, and more press opportunities than any candidate on either side.
FIRST POINT: Check Obama's fundraising. A huge chunk of his money has come from "individuals" (like employees, family members, friends) in some pretty jazzy corporations and Wall Street firms. PACs by another name are still PACs, even if the money does come from an entire line of family members.
SECOND POINT: Oh, poor little Bama Bear. He's such an underdog... What a load of c*** that is.
THIRD POINT: What a misogynist you are...
-
MSNBC's relentless campaign against Hillary Clinton
I congratulate Joan Walsh. I have been following her comments on TV and in Salon. She is very fair in her comments, especially against MSNBC pundits who have gleefully written the orbituary of Hillary Clinton and anointed Barack Obama as the saint of the century. Needless to say I never watch MSNBC anymore. Yesterday I saw Schuster asking again sarcastically the same question to Mark Penn about the comments on Obama'suse of cocaine. Why bring it again? MSNBC has launched its own campaign against Hillary. Hopefully the public will prove them wrong. This is an example of the media going awok during an election year. If Hillary is nominated you can expect a tsunami of criticism in the year ahead. They should be investigated for unfair coverage of the press.
-
to akasmith
Please allow me to talk to your post to doloresflower...
By your own posts, you demonstrate that your support for Hillary Clinton is embedded within your own feelings of femist activism. I beleive that is fair and honest. You also beleive her to be the best choice, I also beleive that is fair and honest.
Now if I may...
You posted the fight never really ended. Which one? Your own feminist path? Our collective feminist path? Bill and Hillary Clinton against the Right Wing Machine? Or are they all embedded into 1 large fight? Because I do not beleive the future of feminism or our own experiences with sexism roll into an obvious vote for Hillary Clinton. For many of us, the Clinton's political fights ended the moment they left the White House. Many of us don't want to restart them for some sort of justice because of their experiences with the Right Wing or our personal experiences which have nothing to do with the Clinton's. If I was going to vote for Justice it would be for Al Gore, not the former First Lady.
I do not think the policies of the Clinton Administration are a spotless celebration. (NAFTA had more to do with the needs of the financial markets at the expense of people who work making things.) Certainly compared to the Bush Administration there is no doubt they seem absolutely celestial. But the current Administration is a historical horror story. Heck, Bush Sr. looks good next to his son.
If Hillary Clinton's public image is somewhat inscrutable, I don't ascribe some nobelness to it, a tough as nails weather-beaten sister. It's because she hasn't defined it herself. She is painted as a liberal by the right wing but her votes are clearly moderate, she was hawkish on the war, she is a former first lady as well as a politician, and is somewhat charasmatically challenged. I am not inclined to run to her side to wrap her in sisterhood to do that job for her. I am sure she is not needy. I think we have bigger fish to fry because of the current mess of a country we have right now.
A have a friend who worked with Senator Obama on a social issue that is very close to her. She is a dedicated Republican. He won her over and she has nothing but good things to say about him.
I have seen him speak twice in smallish rooms. He has always spoken out against the war's folly. He won me over and I respect his votes.
I do like Obama, I never liked George Bush. I resent being conflated with mysogynists because of my support of Obama, I resent the claims that no one has any reasons to vote for Obama other than he is some sort of rock star. He is a rock star because he is charasmatic, and his charisma is getting him the attention that charisma gets, (life is unfair that way...) but he is getting my vote because I beleive he is a better choice at this point in history.