Letters to the Editor
-
Obama's drug use
That was brought up by Obamana himself.
In his book.
More revisionist history from the press and the Obama ostriches.
-
do any of you Obama...
supporters think that all this praise from Rush and Kristol are going to signal a new era of love and peace in this country?
Do you really belive that Obama is a uniter and not a divider?
Obama is now more likely to get the nomination, but just wait till you see what will happen after that.
They want to get rid of Hillary.
They remember what they happened when they tried to beat Bill.
They know Obama will be a pushover.
I want a Democrat who is one tough SOB in the WH and that ain't Obama.
-
No one can tell Bill to shut up
What this fracas, and others, tells me is that no one in the Clinton campaign dares to tell Bill to get on message or shut up. I assume that means Hillary can't either.
Can anyone imagine that any senior member of one of Bill's Presidential campaigns would have dared to wander so far off message? And on such sensitive points?
If no one can tell Bill to shut up, that means that he is in charge. And that sucks for Hillary.
By the way, I can still recite the main points of Bill's nineties campaigns. What are Hillary's? I've been watching her ads, listening to speeches, and I'm not quite sure. Readiness? The litany of a thousand programs?
It will be amazing if they pull off New Hampshire, simply amazing.
-
Thank you, Bill.
I'm so happy that the Clinton campaign is finally starting to point out the media narrative on the Ascension of Barak Obama. I never once see Obama actually answer questions. "Hope, hope, hope, change, hope." That's it. Where's the media scrutiny held to the rest of the Democratic candidates? Salon, which I must say I usually agree with 100% of the time, is one of the most ardent supporters of the pro-Obama, anti-Clinton media narratives, as exemplified in this war room article. Give us a break.
CNN.com just had a picture of Obama talking to supporters in NH where his entire head/shoulders was surrounded by a nimbus of white light as dust floating around seemed to morph into pixie glitter, only for me to switch over to Salon to find another graphic of Obama shooting "magic" from his fingertips in front of the American flag. You people ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
-
@Jadedlens -- Tee Hee!! / Is Salon A Hillary Lovefest, or A Hillary Slugfest?
Jadedlens wrote:
Salon, which I must say I usually agree with 100% of the time, is one of the most ardent supporters of the pro-Obama, anti-Clinton media narratives, as exemplified in this war room article. Give us a break.
Ok, I'm sure that the Salon staffers are sitting around, scratching their heads, sipping at their lattes, and thinking "WHUH?"
Jaded -- have you been reading Joan Walsh's blog posts, or Broadsheet, or Debra Dickerson, or anything else but Tim Grieve? Because there is a really vocal contingent, of which I am one, who have been taking Salon -- and Joan in particular -- to task for the constant and steady drumbeat of Hillary worship and passive-aggressive Obama-bashing that has gone on regularly at Salon for months.
Right now, I really do feel for Salon. Because it does seem like they're damned if they do, damned if they don't. I actually have appreciated that Joan et. al. seem to have somewhat gotten the message that the overt Hillary campaign advertising -- aka, articles -- weren't going over well, and that we readers at least demanded some semblance of coverage for the other candidates, and less of the passive-aggressive attacks to bolster Hillary, and it appears that they've listened.
Tim, well he seems to be walking to his own beat, and may not be a Hillary worshipper.
You want more a Hillary lovefest? Head over to Broadsheet or Joan's blog, and you'll certainly find much more of it.
-
firenze419
"Tokenism refers to a policy or practice of limited inclusion of members of a minority group, usually creating a false appearance of inclusive practices, intentional or not."
Or you could take Barack Obama's candidacy as a sign that America is gradually becoming more inclusive. Obviously racism is a significant problem in American society, but I don't see how we are going to end up with a more inclusive society if whenever an African-American is in a position to succeed, they are denounced as a token.
"Typical examples in real life and fiction include purposely including a member of a minority race (such as a black character in a mainly white cast, or vice versa) into a group. Classically, token characters have some reduced capacity compared to the other characters, and may have bland or inoffensive personalities so as to not be accused of stereotyping negative traits.""
It's hard to think of someone who may very well be president of the United States as having a "reduced capacity*." Do you really think that the Democratic party - which sorely wants to win the White House in 2008 - is going to throw it all away on a misconceived bit at "affirmative action?" I could see this argument being made on the cabinet level, but for the president of the United States?!?
Actually, don't most politicians cultivate bland or inoffensive personalities in order to get elected? How would you characterize Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, or John Kerry?
"Instead, their difference may be overemphasized or made "exotic" and glamorous."
In general, the people who spend the most time talking about Barack Obama's race or his "exotic" name are the people who don't want him being elected.
"He has said nothing to earn my vote. He has done nothing to change my mind. He's a nice man, but other than that I've seen nothing that makes me want to vote for him over Hillary. And yet the democratic party and America in general seem to be dislocating their collective shoulders in order to pat themselves on the back because they voted for a black man (who's conveniently not African American)."
To many people, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are not terribly different candidates. For a lot of people, what it boils down to electability and who's running a better campaign. A lot of people would say that Hillary hasn't done or said much to earn their votes. Some people are just tired of the Clintons and they want something new. Yes, the idea of electing a black president may be considered a bonus - just as electing a woman president may be considered a bonus with Hillary - but it's truly insulting to suppose that Obama's race is the only factor that is guiding people's support for him. But also, how is a black man ever going to be elected president, if every time whites throw their support behind a black candidate, they are accused of consdescenion?
*Or if you are referring to Obama's lack of experience, please remember that lack of experience was used as an issue against Hillary Clinton in her senate campaign in 2000 and against John Edwards as a vice presidential candidate in 2004. When Hillary is touting her "35 year record," she is padding her resume. She has been in the senate for eight years; John Edwards was in the Senate for six years. The only reason Clinton gets so much credit for experience is her marriage. I think some of this talk about experience may also be about youth. Barack Obama is going to be 47 years old this year; Bill Clinton was 46 when he became president. Did the callow Bill Clinton do such a bad job as president?