Letters to the Editor
-
to be fair though
many of the Republicans supporting Obama have been intelligent enough to read his website, listen to his positions, and they do know that he is a liberal.
But they like him and think that he and his ideas should be given an opportunity in this country anyway. What do you do with that?
-
From a true veteran of the flame wars
Krugman, like me, needs to spend less time reading blog comments and more time doing useful work.
-
I Respectfully Disagree with Paul Krugman
Paul Krugman can be wrong and I will still agree with him in many other areas.
I attended the J&J Dinner in Richmond, a Virginia Democratic Fundraiser, two days ago. As Barack Obama spoke, a dozen of so folks in the middle of the dining area stood on chairs and waved Hillary placards throughout his speech. Two hours earlier, Hillary Clinton spoke without folks from the Obama camp standing on chairs in the middle of the dining area. Believe me, for every Clinton supporter present, there were two supporting Obama. What the Clinton people did was impolite.
Really it is somewhat disappointing to see that Mr. Krugman is not interested in seeing Hillary's tax returns until AFTER the Nomination Convention. After all, last week she loaned her campaign $5 million dollars. Barack has already opened his 1040's to inspection.
In addition Mr. Krugman seems uninterested in the amount of lobbyist money pouring into the Clinton Campaign. The amount exceeds the lobbyist gifts to McCain and Huckabee combined. Obama takes no lobbyist money.
I make less than $50,000 per year and served honorably in Vietnam many years ago. Mr. Obama's idea of "no permanent bases in Iraq" makes sense to me. He joins our Senator Jim Webb in predicting in 2002 that invading Iraq would be unwise.
So Mr. Obama is personally a polite person and much less polarizing than his opponent, Hillary Clinton. The young, the middle-aged, and the old see this "man of vision" ready to go to work on DAY1. If nominated, he will win 45 states and will pull many Democrats and Independents into Congress with him.
-
The best thing on Salon
is the Obama supporters explaining how they'll vote for McCain if Hillary is nominated. Yeah man, you show em.
I vote tomorrow and at this point who cares? Somebody's going to win, and whoever that is won't be determined by some nuts on a website - including myself.
So that's my advice: go vote, then again in November. That's what counts.
-
That's an Obama supporter for you
"And you know what? I don't care if the Supreme Court DOES overturn Roe v. Wade."
Yup.
-
Sad, but true... Paul Krugman
It is the willingness of Obama supporters to make use of the Republican play book in this campaign, that makes me and my die-hard democrat family and friends question whether we will fall so easily in line if Obama is the nominee. Paul Krugman is absolutely correct in his article, it's you, the rabid supporters that do not hesitate to sink as low as Karl Rove in your attacks, that are compromising eventual win for your candidate.
-
Cyth,
I think what that Obama supporter was saying was that he or she is sick of having his or her vote held hostage because the Democratic Party's nominee is slightly LESS right-wing, and slightly MORE likely to appoint Supreme Court justices who will only approve 24-hour waiting periods, parental notification laws, mandatory adoption counseling, and partial-birth abortion bans rather than the wholesale ban Republicans favor.
Besides, what's wrong with having the legislatures decide the issue?
-
Cythera
I have now read several posts by you, Cythera, and in each one I find myself wondering how you make such expansive leaps.
I am a white moderate who preferred Edwards, stands behind Obama, and will vote for Hillary if she wins the primary. And I am an old lady who thinks she can tell when someone is being nasty. But the letters here that keep seeming the most critical, are the ones that keep saying, "see, see ... Obama supporters are rude meanies". Like yours, in fact.
I suggest that you drink less coffee or put less sugar in it, and try reading all those horrid comments that so incense you once again. I haven't found one in twenty to be inflammatory, unless you are angered every time someone says something you don't agree with. That of course, could be the problem. Here is a gauge ... I have 120 people who I daily interact with, who think I am very kind and thoughtful. If you find my comments to be inflammatory toward either Hillary or yourself, then you might be coloring them with a brush of your own making.
-
on experience
Barack Obama was in the Illinois state senate from 1997-2004 (according to Wikipedia) - 7 years. And he has been in the US Senate since Jan 2005 - 3 years. That's 10 years of legislative experience. Plus his years as a lawyer, and teaching Constitutional law at University of Chicago Law school for 11 years. Of all the things I'd like to see the president have expertise in, Constitutional law is up there at the top of the list right now.
Hillary Clinton has been in the US Senate since Jan 2001 - 7 years of legislative experience. She was the first lady for 8 years, but she was not elected to that post, nor did she hold an office during that time. She was involved initially in some policy development during Bill's first term, but there was so much Republican backlash she moved out of the spotlight after the healthcare stuff.
So...I don't understand why people say that Obama is inexperienced. He has held public office for more years, and has more legislative experience than Clinton. I am NOT bashing HRC here...she's obviously very capable and experienced and has lots of contacts. But I disagree that Obama is less experienced than she is.
-
Texas State Rep. Pete Gallego, chairman of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, has announced he is endorsing Barack Obama for president.
Oh snap.
-
@ krgmagley
>>-- krmagley wrote: However, there may be something to Obama's supporters that is putting them in a bit more of a crisis mode than Clinton's. If Obama gets the nomination I have no doubt that most (if not all) Hillary supporters will switch over to him.<<
I would not bet on this too much. Statements like this, and the willingness to use Republican tactics to slime the opposition, because you are so certain that once you win the opposition will have no choice but to fall in line, are loosing Obama's campaign a lot of Hillary supporters.
-
@ stackey-dackey, who demands that I drop it:
You said:
Stop bad mouthing, characterizing, sniping at, making gross generalizations about, the supporters and what sort of people they are.
But that's not what I am doing. I am merely quoting them. The proof of who they are is in their own words.
Stop saying I'm following Jim Jones and am ready for my kool-aid and maybe I won't be so quick to call you all a bunch of shrill old douchebags.
A lie, stackey-dackey! I won't permit you to lie about me without countering you. I never said anyone was following Jim Jones. I hate that kool-aid meme. I think it is the lamest phrase I have ever heard.
If you want to call people "shrill or douchebags" have at it. I don't think it will hurt Hillary Clinton, but it can certainly hurt Obama.
And another thing; I think, AKA, we can all go through the letters section here on Salon and find instances of where Obama supporters are mean and where Clinton Supporters are mean. If you want to quantify it, then I expect you to do a percentage of mean to Obama vs. mean to Hillary with strict definition of what constitutes as "policy disputes" vs. "character assasination."
You did read Krugman didn't you? He is talking about how supporters are actually hurting candidates. His point isn't the candidates themselves but they divisiveness. He calls on both Obama and Clinton to ask their supporters to stop being so divicive.
Don't you think that people should actually stop calling people ahrill old douchebags for instance? Apparently not. You seem to think this sort of invective is good for Democrats. Well maybe it is good for people who are working for Karl Rove. It is not good for Democrats.
So there. Just drop it AkA.
Oh dear, stackey-dackey, you amuse me. Have you noticed that I don't take my orders from you? I am not attacking Obama. I am reflecting back like a mirror what his supporters have been saying.
Let me try to explain something. When people address the issue of experience, that is a legitimate issue. When people mention war votes, they are addressing a legitimate issue. When people bring up the difference between health care plans, this is a legitimate issue.
Having a sexist free for all. Not so much.
I am going to keep doing what I am doing, at least until people start addressing legitimate issues.