Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
Obama won Oregon. Clinton won Kentucky. In Iowa, Obama skipped a victory lap and had gracious words for Clinton. So what's next for Democrats?
The letters thread is now closed.
  • @Eric Berry Re:Walsh

    "Walsh sneers at the idea of Obama holding forth at his "Columbia and Harvard reunions." You don't think there's some race-based resentment there?"

    How on earth can this be race-based resentment? If anything, this represents anti-elitism. You're really stretching to claim that this is race-based, and it continues to hurt your candidates case. As I've stated elsewhere, the single largest reason I'm voting against Obama is the way his campaign and his supporter's have distorted facts to label Clinton and her supporter's racist, in order to use race to his advantage. The day I decided I couldn't vote for Obama was the day Jackson claimed that Clinton faked tears for votes but didn't cry over Katrina. You are doing the same thing here, by claiming racism in an attempt to diminish Joan Walsh.

  • From Joan Walsh

    HealThisNation, I wasn't going to jump in here, but I have to. You're pretty close to right. It's not that I think Obama has to lose, that Obama IS Stevenson or McGovern, but I do think there are reasons to worry about that. I think it's early enough for him to reach out and widen his coalition. What worries me are his supporters who say he either doesn't have to -- yay, creative class! yay, elites! -- or that he can't, because of racism.

    Truly, on the last point: I wouldn't be in this line of work if I thought America would never elect a black president. I don't know what I'd do instead, I've never thought about it. I know racism is a problem; I think we can overcome. I think there are some racists who'll never support Obama, and I admit: We don't know how many. But I also think there are some cultural issues around his campaign, and the way he's campaigned, that mean he is missing an opportunity to reach out to voters who wouldn't reject him because of race, but who are still skeptical. I also worry about another contradiction in pro-Obama arguments: For a long time, he was more electable than Hillary because he was this post-ideological, post-racial candidate who'd appeal to all groups, even independents and Republicans. Now, some say he's being really severely harmed (maybe 50 percent of Kentucky voters won't back him? all of West Virginia?) by white racism. If white racism is that pervasive, then it's tragic and despicable, but then clearly Obama is not an electable candidate in 2008. So which is it? I feel like my optimism about Obama's ability to overcome at least some, and maybe most, of the cultural skepticism about him in Appalachia and elsewhere, makes me a better Obama supporter than the people here who are insisting it's all racism. Does that make any sense?

    In terms of my family: My father supported Eugene McCarthy. I still have his "McCarthy/Lowenstein" button. But when McCarthy refused to campaign for Humphrey after the nomination, he mailed him a Nixon pin and said: Glad your candidate won! My father didn't like Humphrey on the war but thought he'd been decent on other issues and was better than Nixon. My father, of course, was right. I do get that pragmatic streak from him. I was just turning 10 the summer of 1968 and I remember it better than some things that happened last year. It was formative. Make of that what you will.

    I really appreciate your trying to fairly grasp with my motivations rather than calling me racist, a liar, a Republican, or just a dried up old Hillary hag, like too many alleged Obama supporters have in these threads.

  • PUT FAILTH IN THE MODERATE CONGRESS AT YOUR OWN PERIL

    "@burlydee

    If Congress does it's job, McCain won't have a choice about nominating a moderate SC justice. The Senate has to confirm his choice. The best he could do would be a recess appointment, and Reid figured out how to prevent those by not technically recessing.

    -- jebldmm "

    What have they done since 06? Anything they "promised"? Anything? they barely can put a hold on the illegal spying program. they have jailed or seriously question nobody. Nobody.

    they don't have a strong majoirty that's true. But still. Zero backbone. teh coward moderates are like the gop. Will not take a stand for nation unless they are assured they will win. They refuse to risk for their country, as we do as the troops do.

    I wouldn't bank on the congress doing what they say they will. Obama is a differant story. He cannot fail, as the first minority president. He can't fail, and those around him will not allow him to. Try as teh gop will to sabotage, it will onyl quicken their irrelevance. The american people are keen to their treason now. they are walking on eggshells. Believe me. their is a resaon. they refuse to jail their criminal leaders. they refuse to acknowledge reality. It is a risk/reward game. The risk is irrelevance for thirty years. for some reason that outweighs doing the right thing. We must force the gop to pay the price if they won't force their leaders to for them.

  • wow. the crux of the anti-obama "democrats"

    "If white racism is that pervasive, then it's tragic and despicable, but then clearly Obama is not an electable candidate in 2008. So which is it?"

    so there is still racism in america, so it's the black guys fault. Rather than forcing change, on the racists. I don't think it's a white black thing. I think it's an old people vs young people thing. We can't live in 1955 forever. Screw those who would try and force it. The year is 2008. If you hate american freedom, if you hate (out of many we are one), you are not an american. Just a fascist living here. And those how defend and appologize for the fascists will share their fate, whatever that may be.

    Are you with the democrats, or george bush? That is the question. What is bush's approval's? 20%? Yet you fear that 20% and mock and talk down to the 80%? your choice. In for a rude awakening, come nov. the gop is done. Peopel that still fear them are republcain cronies in disguise.

  • HealtheNation has a point....sort of

    Joan,

    You're not a racist or an old dried up Hillary hag. You're just blind to the privilege race has afforded you and consumed with the disadvantages you've been dealt by gender. Same as Ferraro, HRC, and Steinam.

    I support Obama because I think he is brilliant and he can win! If fact, I thought the same of HRC until she went low class during the campaign. Obama will win a close election even without the racist vote...but I can assure you that in his second term when all these 14-17 years are able to vote he'll win in a landslide.