Letters to the Editor
-
@ Hutman
You misunderstand ljwalker. She is not saying where was Obama rather than being at the Compassion Forum. He was there. Rather she is saying where was he on abortion. Having now read the transcript, I would say that that is a pretty good question. He did go 'round and 'bout it when he answered.
In contrast, Clinton simply affirmed that it was an individual decision that should not involve government intrusion.
In other words, at least in the context of this discussion, Clinton was more direct and unequivocal.
-
I sincerely doubt it.
Though it is the opinion of the Hillary Clinton campaign, and therefore (unsurprisingly) Ms. Walsh's, this won't spell the "doom" of Barack Obama's campaign. If anything, the non-issue of his "bitter" comment has allowed him to speak with even more depth on the economic problems facing the most embattled Americans.
Pulling his phrasing out of context is the only way this can be used against Obama, because he made the comment as part of an in-depth answer on why working-class Pennsylvanians shouldn't be spoon-fed campaign talking points, but instead be addressed as thinking individuals capable of understanding substantive issues. As a result, I'm not sure how anyone could consider this an example of Obama being highfalutin, or of pandering.
Consider also that while Ms. Walsh's champion of the people, the upright Hillary Clinton, chose to take corporate client after corporate client and earn top dollar as an attorney while Barack Obama chose to work with the most impoverished citizens in Illinois for little money. He struggled with student loans like an ordinary, college-going American and certainly didn't spend the last few years earning in excess of $100 million.
I'm sure that if/when Hillary Clinton wins in Pennsylvania it will be touted by Clinton supporters like Ms. Walsh as evidence of a stunning comeback, despite the fact that Hillary has led in every poll in that state since the two-person primary race began. The Rev. Wright smears will be repeated ad nauseum (scary black man!) and we'll be told time and again how "out of touch" Barack Obama really is, all evidence to the contrary. And in the end, Hillary Clinton still won't get the Democratic nomination, just as she wasn't going to get it before Wright, before Bittergate, before any of Clinton's attacks. The attacks that will do more lasting harm to her standing with the party than to the object of her scorn.
-
Got it, Joan. I won't blame San Francisco for Obama's "Bittergate."
http://www.authenticgop.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=SNOBAMA&Category_Code=shirts
-
Joan -- know your guns
Joan -- you do not take a hunting rifle into a duck blind either -- you take a shot gun (like Cheney used to blast his "friend"). At least Obama's mistake gets you six quick shots at that moving duck -- your hunting rifle's bolt action would slow down the fun.
-
Reporter Duplicity
Joan,
I wish someone would address the issue of the SF blogger who got into the private fundraiser because she was an Obama supporter.
As a retired print journalist, I was always alert as a reporter and as an assignment editor not to use dishonest ploys to get stories.
There are times it would be simple for a reporter to misrepresent himself/herself in order to gain the confidence of a source. If I had been the Huffington Post editor, I would never have used the Obama quotes, as they were collected under false pretenses.
The Internet is a great thing for getting more news, but lowering our ethical standards as journalists shouldn't be part of it.
Thanks.
Robert Bruce
(formerly a Bay Area resident)
-
@Maureen: Fester's charger is currently getting new shoes
Maureen, I tend to stay out of the primate dung flinging contests, and there is a lot of dung created by both sides. You don't strike me as the type of person that needs rescuing from anything, but I'll keep that in mind for future posts. If someone says something stupid (beyond the typical taunts), then I'll step in. Otherwise, have fun.
California is a beatiful place to visit. I highly suggest it. It also has a complex history due to centuries of Spanish influence and the more recent immigrants. And we shouldn't forget the Chumash either. The California that Steinback wrote about has largely sunk beneath the waves. There's a different conception of time out there. 20 years is old. Out East, a few hundred years is old. I'm sure in Ireland, some would consider a couple hundred years as yesterday.
And I'd rather have my back scratched than my belly rubbed, just to set the record straight.
-
If you think Bittergate was good
Just wait till they unveil Shittergate next week!
-
Alternatives to Salon?
There are columnists I disagree with much of the time (Traister), and columnists I agree with much of the time (Greenwald), but the fact that they remain thoughtful and intellectually honest writers keeps me coming back.
But I've begun to realize that Joan Walsh rubs me the wrong way much of the time, and reason isn't because I tend to disagree with her, but because I find her frequently intellectually dishonest. This article about Obama's "gaffe" was a prime example; anyone who reads his comments in context, in their entirety, cannot honestly believe that they were "patronizing" or delivered as a form of condescension. That they've been read that way by much of the mainstream media is an indictment of the idiocy that passes for reporting and commentary in that sphere these days, but I look for more from Salon, and for Ms. Walsh to jump on that weak bandwagon so enthusiastically has seriously tainted my longtime respect for this publication.
I've noted other letter-writers in this thread who appear to agree with me, and a number of them have indicated that Salon is no longer their first choice for alternative news and commentary.
My question (for everybody) is: where do you go first now for the kind of intellectually honest commentary that used to be Salon's hallmark? I'm looking for a new first choice...
-
Joan- why is Obama's use of "bitter" important and Hillary's use of "massive retaliation" not
Hillary just promised "massive US retailaton" against Iran if Israel or any other nation claiming status as a US protectorate is attacked.
And yet you trifle over bitter-gate, and basically call Obama uppity ("above it," "above you," or "above us") for being a black guy with the audacity to attend Harvard.
(I guess Hillary's attending Yale, career as an professional First Lady,and patronage positions at the Rose Law firm and in the US Senate don't get your working class Irish hackles up because her fat ankles, overbite and canning factory worker demeanor bring her back to pedestrian levels and insulate her from any charges of "elitism.")
Hard to see why Eliot Spitzer lost it all for consorting with honest whores while Hillary and Stephanopolis get a pass from the editor of Salon for consorting with neo-con whores.