Letters to the Editor
-
We need Power in the situation room
If you have seen No End in Sight you know that Samantha Power is a bastion of sane, responsible foreign policy in a world of crazed neocons, many of whom like the infamous Michael O'Hanlon populate the Clinton campaign. THEY are the ones who should be fired. Power is a brilliant, rising academic who would give valuable insight on foreign policy.
-
Part Of The Process
As a Clinton supporter, I take no particular offense at one of Mr. Obama's minions hurling pejoratives around; I'd ask the Obama people to do the same. It's part of the political process, that's all.
As for the Obama-bots wanting to run a "kinder, gentler campaign", look what that did for John Kerry four years ago when he was slimed by the SwiftBoat crowd, et al.
Hell, Hillary may, indeed, be a "monster", but, she's MY "monster" and my choice for President. End of discussion.
-
to fire or not
As I remember, Powers is an unpaid advisor. Isn't she? I don't know whether that makes a difference, but it says something about her commitment to her candidate. I don't think this is a shot in the foot, more in the toenail. And seven weeks is a long time.
-
Sun Rises In West!
"I Don't Think An Apology
Or dismissal is in order. People get frustrated in a battle and let loose every now and then. I commend her.
-- The Notorious W.E.S. Friday, March 7, 2008 08:08 AM"
Did someone hijack Notorious' identity?
-
Brian
Hillary is teaching the party to fight. If that destroys it, so be it.
-
Offensive....maybe not
This might offend some Clinton supporters, however as we have already seen posted on this board, some are not offended. The other 75 % of the US agrees with the assessment.
-
Obama needs to send out a memo
about undisciplined messaging.
-
accepting an apology...
Just once, I'd like the Clinton campaign to be completely honest and say "No, we don't accept the apology because the only time we have a good news cycle is when we can be selectively outraged."
I would at least appreciate that courtesy. If you're going to lie to me, don't lie to me like I'm Montel Williams.
-
I support Hillary, but
I think firing Power would be overkill. I'm not a journalist, so I guess I don't understand why "Statement--this is off the record" is less clear than "This is off the record--statement." It seems clear to me that she did not intend that statement of personal dislike to be published. And what she did say is SO MUCH milder than the free-verse Hillary-hating available just about anywhere else. But the spin is lame--of course this unguarded, "off the record" statement that wasn't reflects her true feelings!
-
Here's the full "60 Minutes" exchange, in CBS's version:
"You don't believe that Senator Clinton's a Monster?" Kroft asked Sen. Obama.
"Of course not. I mean, that, you know, there is no basis for that. I take her on the basis of what she says. And, you know, there isn't any reason to doubt that," he replied.
"You said you'd take Senator Clinton at her word that she's not...a Monster. You don't believe that she's...," Kroft said.
"No. No, there is nothing to base that on. As far as I know," he said.
"It's just scurrilous...?" Kroft inquired.
"Look, I have been the target of so many ridiculous rumors, that I have a great deal of sympathy for anybody who gets, you know, smeared with the kind of rumors that go on all the time," Obama said.
-
Reading the letters here tells a lot about Obama fans
Basically, the response is either "Hey, it was a mistake. Let it go. Clinton has done worse." or "Well, Clinton IS a monster, what did you expect?". The Obama campaign has been quite "Rovian" in their denigration of Clinton. They did it through "surrogates" and through inneuendo. Now, Obama says he is taking the gloves off, but I don't see a lot of difference between what he is saying about Clinton now and what he said before, when he was being "nice". When are Obama supporters going to realize that their perfect candidate isn't so perfect? If he wins, then I don't know how they will defend their hero as his vague rhetoric collapses into ugly, conflict-inducing reality.
-
Monster = Muslim?
I'd work on that meme. It's one thing to denigrate Clinton in the interests of promoting your candidate. It's another entirely to insult a religion practiced by millions of people in America and around the world.
-
What really burns me...
...is the apology.
The Clinton campaign labels Barack Obama "Ken Starr", which to some of us might actually be worse than "monster". HRC personally claims McCain is the better candidate than the leading Democratic candidate, something that I've never heard from any Republican or Democrat about their leading candidate. It is beyond the pale. But are we really surprised?
But actions, not words... remember? Why is it that everytime a question about HRC's "actions" arise, her supporters flee from defending them, preferring instead to believe her "words" on the campaign trail. So, let's look again at some of those actions:
HRC votes to authorize force in Iraq without bothering to read the NIE. Action. HRC co-sponsors a bill to outlaw flag-burning. Action. HRC votes against a bill that would make crack cocaine sentencing the same as powder cocaine sentencing. Action. HRC votes to certify the Iranian Guard as a terrorist organization, thereby opening the door for a pre-emptive strike based on Iran's harboring of the very same "terrorist" organization. Action. And, of course, HRC failed to vote against telecom immunity, failed even to show up, failed to publicly oppose it. Omission.
So, HRC votes in favor of Bush's war against Iraq, votes to provide the basis for a war against Iran, co-sponsors a bill that subverts the first amendment, votes against sentencing reform to address a pernicious racial impact, and makes no effort to protect you and I from unconstitutional government intrusions on our privacy. And the common meme is that it will be Obama reaching across the aisle?
If you oppose HRC's actions on the key issues of the day, you might want to take a look at the candidate who also opposes them. One who wasn't "for the war before he was against it". One who voted against Bush's attempt to invade Iran. One who has never sponsored a bill that subverts your first amendment rights of freedom of expression, and one who came off the campaign trail to debate and vote in favor of protecting your fourth amendment rights.
Actions, not words... remember? Will any Clinton supporter defend these actions? Anyone?