- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
There, now that I've gotten your attention, will you please read the following message:
---------------------
Joan Walsh: "We're reporting the news fairly ... I think Salon will stand out for its fairness ... I think it's a fair question..."
I think it's fairly fair to say the fair-haired Joan Walsh is having a love affair with the word fair.
But that's just me quibbling at Walsh's word choice. Let's move on to more important things...
Joan Walsh: "...[it's fair to ask] why I'm more disturbed by Obama's more vicious supporters than Clinton's. I'll give it some more thought."
Please do! Because if memory serves, you have said nothing, nada, zilch, zero about the antics of Clinton supporters. And they do engage in some zany comic hijinks at times.
Joan Walsh: "On first reflection, I think it's that Obama says he stands for a new kind of politics, but his slash-and-burn supporters are the worst of the old politics."
Hillary Clinton also says she represents change. But Clinton freely uses questionable old-school political tactics. Her supporters do the same. I don't see you criticizing them. Instead, you say, "The GOP will do things 1,000 times worse than that." And that's it.
So you're simulataneously complaining that some Obama supporters aren't following Obama let's-be-positive example, while defending Clinton for her negative tactics.
Can you not see why people might find this objectionable from you? Especially while you repeatedly assert that your editorials are "fair"?
I also note that you rarely clarify that the so-called slash-and-burn Obama supporters do not represent the majority of his supporters. Or what percentage you think they do represent. Many of your statements have served, rhetorically, to lump all Obama supporters together, even when you're talking about just the negative ones.
I am not making this stuff up. Go back and read your own columns.
Joan Walsh: "I also think even some of his nicer, more well-meaning supporters represent another dead-end kind of old politics: the politics of liberal self-righteousness, where we know we're better than those benighted supporters of those other guys (or gals), and that cheers us, even if we can't convince a majority we're right."
This is the part of your message to Carol Richards that made me most want to respond!
Because what you've done, here, is to invalidate both the bad-behavior and the good-behavior Obama supporters in one message!
In Joan Walsh's world (according to your statements), Obama supporters are damned if they do, damned if they don't. If they're negative, they are contradicting Obama's message. If they're positive, they're just being self-righteous.
Really, Joan?
I mean.................really?
You haven't allowed for any middle ground at all!
Your message just boggles the mind.
Joan Walsh: "And I say "we" because, honestly, they/you are my people: San Francisco by way of Madison, Wisconsin kind of people (but yes, the dad from Ireland/the Bronx sent off to the Christian Brothers does mix everyone up, including me.)"
Um, okay. Whatever. We all have family histories. Mine come from all over the place too. Heinz 57 as they say. I even have some Cherokee Indian blood. It's kinda cool and all, but I try not to make too much of it. Prior to their existence on other continence, most of my family is rooted in the northern midwest -- Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia. Factory workers, school teachers. I dunno what kind of "we people" that makes me. You seem to want to reduce me, and other Obama supporters, to some sort of de-facto group of condescenders who can't be trusted due to background or something. Sorry, but I just don't get it. I do hope you will go and reflect soon, like you said you would.
Joan Walsh: "I'm just trying harder this election to see the other side. And honestly, some Obama supporters are making it a lot easier to see the other side. I promise to develop these thoughts at greater length soon."
Which other side is that? That implies that you are on a side. Which side are you on? You never say.
