Letters to the Editor
-
I'll say that again for joan, as this is her idol
"The Democratic Party can't celebrate the triumph of Barack Obama because the Democratic Party is busy having a breakdown. You could call it a breakdown over the issues of race and gender, but its real source is simply Hillary Clinton. Whose entire campaign at this point is about exploiting race and gender."
peggy noonan
-
R-E-S-P-E-C-T, find out what it means to me
Sen. Clinton is to be given respect if she takes action that is not respectable? Why?
If one wishes to be respected, one does respectful things. It's that simple.
-
@ Joan
Hi Joan.
You write: "So we need candor about race; we also need respect and courtesy. I'm hoping we get more of all of it in the weeks to come."
Once again, your approach is maddeningly passive.
You're the editor of Salon, Joan!
That puts you in a unique position wherein you don't have to just hope.
You can be proactive, if you choose.
You never wrote substantive, penetrating pieces about Obama's speech in Philadelphia, yet that was a golden opportunity to do precisely what you seem to hope happens, namely, that Democrats learn to talk about race.
Why not lead the charge?
If you'd rather not deal with Obama's speech because of the political implications of doing so, fine, but then, why not do some homework and bring serious ideas about what racism is to the table?
I and many, many others have been trying to talk about race and insodoing teach others to do so.
The finer points we've been making never seem to find their way into your essays, which suggests you're not serious about the project you seem to be proposing.
(And ftr, they're not really our points, anyway. They're actually quite mainstream and even cliched ideas among educated people or academics or people who spend time systematically thinking these through.)
The real question, Joan, is what are you going to do to facilitate a conversation on race, one that's measured and serious rather than idly provocative or titillating.
I mentioned over in Conason's thread that I believed his whole essay was based on a false premise, namely, that it matters whether one is or is not a racist and that further, a clinical recognition that one is "channeling George Wallace" is not the same as the Nurnberg trial.
The notion that pointing out a manifestation of racism is the same as a moral indictment is why we'll never be able to talk about it.
There's too much ego involved and it prevents people from thinking clearly.
Why does it matter if Clinton is or is not "a racist?"
Really, not a rhetorical question. How can that question, so phrased, be in the least productive?
If we conclude "yes," she is, then what?
If we conclude "no," she is not, then what?
What's the next step of the argument? What are we really trying to determine?
-
Clinton Voters
The hill for Obama is much higher than you think. Every Democrat that I know voted for Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. It's different this time around. I'm hearing from many life-long Dems that they definitely won't vote for Obama if he secures the nomination. They will either sit out the election cycle or vote for McCain.
Obama and his followers are foolish to have alienated and dissed the Clinton supporters the way they have. And they are delusional if they think that they can win the GE without them. As for Donna Brazile, with all of her nasty comments and emails to Clinton supporters, she's shown herself to be a total unprofessional and should be removed from her position at the DNC. She's certainly hasn't done her candidate of choice, Obama, any favors. In point of fact, she's inflicted a lot of damage on her candidate.
-
Simple explanation
There really is a simple explanation of the "rawness" of late, especially Brazille and Begala's exchange. This is a fight between Howard Dean's DNC and the Clintons' DLC. The DLC is losing and has a history of doing nothing other than pushing democratic voters towards republican candidates(see # of democrats in congress before and after Bill). The DLC is fighting for its light and Hillary Clinton is their proxy.
-
Donna Brazile
Honestly, how you can read a comment by Donna Brazile about expanding the base of the Demoncratic party as one about throwing out some of the base is beyond me. It really looks as if you wanted an one the one side, on the other side piece, so having quite approriately if very generously complained about Hillary's hard working whites, you needed something else. Balnce which rests on distorting one of the two sides is never balance.
-
I can't believe some of you people are for real.
It's his skin tone that is making so many vote for him, in spite of his absolute lack of qualifications.
That's right! He's following in the footsteps of all those other black elected officials who skated by on their skin tone. Like...
Well...
Huh.
Oh, that's right, there's the governor of New York, the fourth in the history of the nation, who was fairly elected-- oh, wait, that was due to a sex scandal.
Never mind the facts! This nation has a clear history of electing unqualified black people that must stop now!
God, it's like Margaret Mitchell is on the Salon boards.
-
Time to get real Joan....
You're reaching again Joan. Save yourself the time you spend writing your column and just say 'I want her and not him.' There is/was no comparison between Hillary Clinton's remarks and Donna Brazile's remarks. Hillary's comments were divisive -- "I don't need blacks to win." Donna was reminding that increasingly silly Paul Begala that the Democratic Party is a big tent which does not categorize people; she was not "marginalizing" anyone -- and you know that. Twisting Donna Brazile's words is beneath you Joan. I think you should take some time off and regroup.
-
Take a lesson from Donna Brazile
It's always entertaining to hear white talking heads interpret race issues. And good old Joan always gives HC the benefit of the doubt. Donna Brazile describes the Democratic party as encompassing everyone, not breaking down into factions as the Clintons have done to bolster a weak argument. The fact is, Obama could never have gotten as far as he is without white voters- slicing and dicing cannot change the figures. Furthermore, Bill Clinton got into office thanks to overwhelming support from the African-American community. Hillary benefitted from the relationship at the start of her campaign when the Obama camp was concerned that he wouldn't be able to tap into this strong Clinton advantage, their beloved Bill the "First Black American President". Remember? All the media was hammering on whether Obama was black enough while HC was the expected nominee. Don't remember? Hmmm.
But make no mistake: what is passing for exit poll voting segments (hard working white voters) is code. Let's not pretend we don't know that. For once, let's not mirror the denial of the Republicans and reach for our higher selves, in spite of the rancor this campaign has so far reveled in.
Joan, be a journalist again, not a partisan. Use your skills to speak about facts instead of manufacturing excuses for what has become an embarrassing and shameful primary.