Letters to the Editor
-
Yet another third rail - pull them into the fold...
One thing that I wish Obama, Clinton...even McCain would talk about is a true vision of the future. There is some talk...but it is always based on "now". Even when many parts of "now" are absolutely going to end...someday, somehow.
This should be the way we talk about global climate change. Instead of arguing about the causes of the problems, we should talk about how change IS happening and how we can battle it. Once people realize that it costs A LOT to combat even small effects of climate change, there will be a consumer and market swing that forces anyone working against clean-up to change their tune.
And the truth about "rural America" is that it will eventually cease existing. This is not controversial, unless I say it "should" happen or that it will happen soon. The world's population will continue to grow, and climate change will force much relocation of coastal inhabitants in the next 50 years. I'm not sure if "urban" will replace "rural"...it might be something closer to "suburban sprawl".
It might take a couple more presidential election cycles, but I promise you that young people in "rural" America will be electing people who promise to bring "urban" life to them. Yay internet!
-
There more to rural america
The whole West Virgina is being played up by Hillary and her supporters. Appalachia doe not represnet the majority of rural America and Obama won in most of the other rural states. I don't think these voters should be dismissed. Yes they are important, but why should we ignore the majority of the Democrat base who voted for Obmam.
The truth the Bill Clinton centrist policies combined with republican policies did nothing for the undereducated, working class or poor. Hillary's is also a centrist.
-
How About A Little Honesty?
I appreciate that the letter you reprint is in response to comments from others on Dee Davis' piece, yet implicit in the reprint--"But I loved this letter so much"--is the belief/argument that Obama shares these letter writers' views (thus an "explanation" for why he lost W. VA by such a large margin). It is unjust to imply that Obama doesn't seek ways to address the issues of greatest concern to the people of Appalachia and the rest of working America. His website (never mind his speeches) is filled with progressive remedies for what ails the working classes (of which I am one). So the question remains why the voters of Appalachia aren't casting their vote for him. I'm hard pressed to believe it's due to the nuanced differences between Clinton and Obama. Frankly, I don't understand why you seek to undercut his candidacy.
-
Letter more nuanced than the original
Dee Davis' original article covered a lot of important points — many of the same ones as does the letter from little blue dot that Joan Walsh cites.
But the two writers diverge sharply at a certain point — somewhere around where Davis lists the two possible options for why Democratic candidates tend to skirt around rural America and Appalachia in particular.
It's either they don't have good sense, Dee says in so many words, or they're unwilling to face a culture different from their own out of cowardice. Those loyal Democrats are waiting to hear from their own party, and don't know why the leadership hung up on them.
It's more than a little disingenuous — a generation of Democrats remember what Davis apparently doesn't, which was the 12 years of Reagan and Bush pere during which those rustic, book-shy but world-wise, and heartwrenchingly loyal Democrats ditched their unions, their party, and their best interests in favor of a traveling snake-oil show, run by a Californian and the Yankee-est blueblood in modern memory, that brought them nothing but misery.
They ditched God-fearing Southerner Jimmy Carter and labor's friend Mike Dukakis. And for good measure, they weren't too excited about Southern farmer Gore and war hero Kerry either. (I've got nothing to say about Mondale.) To this day, they don't much like Bill Clinton overall, and still turn out for him and his in such numbers as they do because of an overriding sense of him being one of them.
Yes, it took two to open that rift. Democrats' lack of imagination and lack of willingness to engage their natural constituents on the level of ideas has crippled the party for a generation, and sometimes it seems as though some party leaders would prefer to stay wrong than to change.
But let's not pretend that Appalachia was left standing there tearily at the altar of presidential politics by a Democratic groom with cold feet. It's not somehow elitist to point out that rural America sometimes shows a remarkable propensity for shooting itself in the foot.
little blue dot by contrast has it right on the money. Misfortune and lack of education have never excused bigotry, nor should they ever. Knowing right from wrong — and knowing when you're being had — don't require wealth or higher education.
In fact one could take dot's point about slow elephants even further — there's plenty of ignorance, benighted devotion to self-destructive policies, and stubborn refusal to acknowledge the obvious to go around amongst American liberals.
If we needed any evidence, the two-bit con man in the White House now should be plenty.
-
Did anyone else notice...
The parallels between what "little blue dot" wrote and the portion of Obama's speech on race where he discussed Rev. Wright? Just sayin'
If Hillary Clinton had chosen not to exploit racial/rural issue in her attempt to derail Obama's nomination, she might have been able to give an similar speech about white racist or anti-elitist attitudes. What a shame that instead these divisions have been actively inflamed.
-
you first joan
People who live in glass houses, and all.
The gop likes to attack attack attack. But they don't like to be called attack dogs. they also don't like the shoe on the other foot. Why? Hypocrites.
Stand down on yoru assulat of obama "redneck" vote. Or whatever your calling "your" voters. I know you like to divide us and speak for millions gop, clinton supporters included.
We have choices. more of the same, change, or don't vote. your choice. If you vote based on a blogger being mean to you, or patting you on the back. You don't deserve the right to vote. I don't think you peole rrealize the severity of this election