Letters to the Editor
-
Re: Barack Obama is not Jesus
He is not Jesus but neither is he a Manchurian Candidate from the deepest pits of Hell. The Obnoxious Obamaites and the Hysterical Hillaryites need to both settle down.
I recommend both to Obama supporters and Hillary supporters to check out his 64 page position booklet at http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf .
The former so they can arm themselves against accusations of mindless groupie slobbering and the latter so they can take his ideas into consideration instead of just getting completely mortified and apoplectic over his appeal.
-
Jameka and cythera45
I agree with you about this blackmail coming from Obama and I don't like it one bit.
I voted for Obama because I do think he splits the Republicans whereas Clinton unites them against her. I was not happy about it.
I have detected a certain meanness on Obama's part. This is not all bad in politics, particularly in government, but it is bad form here in the primary.
First of all, Obama doesn't have to make this argument himself. There are plenty of pundits and surrogates who have made this argument. HE should be talking about unity, hoping his supporters, publicly, will support the Democratic nominee. Whether they do or not is up to them, but Obama should be talking as much about unity as Democrats as well as Americans.
But, hasn't he already taken me, a Democratic Edwards supporter, for granted? Seems to me, Republicans and independents will be more important to an Obama administration than Democrats will be. Yes, I know, Obama will be better than Bush, I am voting for the Democrat because I would be happy with either. However,I am not looking forward to more bipartisanship which means Democrats lay down and get stepped all over by Republicans (see Glenn Greenwald.)
It is truly unfortunate and maybe speaks more to his inexperience and not some wrongheaded sense of entitlement. I voted for him, so that is what I am hoping.
-
Obama is Quite Familiar With Multiracial Electorates
Ms. Walsh: Let me get the obligatory compliments out of the way before the “but.” I’ve been a Premium member for several years, and truly appreciate your efforts as editor. You take way too much crap, much of it disturbingly sexist, from some trollish Salon readers in the comments section. But . . .
I am a Chicagoan, and I saw you on “Hardball” tonight, suggesting, as you do here, that Obama does not understand California's multiracial electorate. This sort of coastal ignorance, which comes across as more than a little condescending, occasionally crops up in Salon. It is annoying, to say the least, since Illinois was turning out progressive politicians before California was even a state.
Obama earned his bones in Chicago politics. The population of Chicago is 42% African-American, 36% White, 26% Latino, and 4% Asian/Pacific Islander. The Hispanic population is mostly of Mexican and Central American origin. Unlike California, however, Chicago also has a large Puerto Rican population. There is also a sizeable Middle-Eastern population. Like California, Illinois’ Asian and Latino populations include both third and fourth generation Americans and new arrivals. Statewide, California and Illinois differ only in that Illinois has a larger percentage of African-American residents, a smaller but still very significant Latino population, and a smaller percentage of Asian/Pacific Islander residents. The Asian population is nonetheless well-established and quite visible here.
The remainder of the state is not quite as diverse as Chicago, just as much of California is more heterogeneous outside of urban areas. However, numerous large “downstate” areas (what Chicagoans call anything 50 miles or more outside of Chicago) have sizeable African-American and Hispanic populations. The Naperville-Aurora area, a suburban sprawl area west of Chicago with a population of about 250,000 people, has a significant Latino population, as do many other suburbs. I used to work for several local school districts here. Several had student populations speaking over 70 different languages.
No state is quite as ethnically and racially diverse as California. But Illinois is pretty close. In fact, I doubt any other state other than California is as diverse as Illinois. Also, in terms of overall diversity (economic, demographic, rural-suburban-urban, education level), Illinois is more representative of the country as a whole than any other state. Obama got 72% of the statewide vote in 2004. Yes, he was running against an actual crazy person named Alan Keyes, but thats still a a lot of votes.
Look, the weather here is awful most of the year, and we don’t have an ocean or mountains, or topography, really. But we do have all different kinds of people, which is one of the reasons I love it here despite the awful weather. And we really, really don't like it when coastals tell us how we need to learn to be more progressive. I haven't seen any ballot initiatives to ban affirmative action or cut off benefits to undocumented workers here.
I'm not anti-California, at all. I love San Francisco and the Northern Coast, in particular. But if you are ever out this way (we gotta real big airport!), I urge you take a drive west from Lake Michigan (its a real big Lake, too!) on Devon Avenue and count how many different languages you see displayed on storefronts. Just make sure you come in June, or I can’t promise you decent weather.
-
Re: Cythera45, On Blackmail and the Newly Converted
I agree with Cythera45 that the demigod complex amongst Obama supporters can be at times grating and is perhaps unproductive. The accusation of blackmail seems, however, to miss a key point. We Obama supporters are not saying, “vote for Obama or else.” We are simply stating for the record that many of us are not only pro-Obama: We are decidedly anti-Hillary. This is a critical distinction and one that fencesitting Democrats should endeavor to at least understand. The main point is this:
Obama’s campaign has, and this should be undisputable, tapped into and brought to life an enormous new political energy in this country. For many, it is the first time we have actually felt how a Democracy could and should truly function. Having felt this feeling and felt it in the Obama camp, we look at all other candidates differently.
We have changed our standard for what we require of a would-be leader. Rather than imagining how the person will perform based on an analysis of their potential to pass particular legislation, enact a particular policy, or champion a particular ideology (an argument that is essentially unwinnable by either side), we are looking at how the candidate impacts our lives in the present:
Does this person make me feel a part of something bigger than myself, a part of a community that is truly self-governing? Can I imagine fighting for what I believe in with this person as a guiding presence, a spokesperson for the fragile hope inherent in the vast difficulties of the moment?
With Obama, many of us who never even realized that we could answer yes to these questions (who in fact would not have even known how to frame them) have found a new faith in this country’s political system, in its capacity for self-correction.
When we look at Hillary from this new perspective, this new feeling we have about the possibility inherent in this time, we are sorely and shockingly disappointed. Her canned, carefully planned policy tomes deflate us, send us reeling back to a time when politics was merely something to be mocked for its blatant disingenuity.
So, while I understand your discomfort with the religion-like complex surrounding Obama, please take a minute to appreciate where it comes from. This is the sound of a group of people discovering the possibility of democracy and it is a passionate discovery, fraught with the emotional vulnerability that any true passion holds.
The point of all of this is to say, when we tell you that we won’t or can’t vote for Hillary, it isn’t blackmail. It is a statement about where we have come to as citizens. What we have come to demand of our leaders. It is a statement that says, in this moment, we believe we are choosing between the future and the past. And if the only choice presented to us in the general election is the past, we will seek the future elsewhere.