Letters to the Editor
-
Diarrhea of the Keyboard
The controversy may or may not be overblown, but 2,010 words on it certainly is... it is easier to riff stream of consciousness ramblings than to carefully craft an idea- conversely, it is easier to read something that subscribes to the basic journalistic tenets of "economy, clarity and impact"... since I'm just a lazy reader and Salon is a professional journal, it would be good to have some actual editing to go along with the writing.
-
Asher
Why Else Are 80-90% of Blacks Voting For Obama?
It's not as if his policies are better for blacks in any way.
* * *
Which policies are you refering to?
* * *
I criticized someone else today for making similar comments to yours, to Billcap, when it was really you I should have been speaking to. "Why Else" is is a reductive statement. Are you white? Do you vote for white people? "Why Else" do you vote for them?
Do you see what I mean?
-
Also...
This whole question about his race completely lets the Clinton campaign off the hook for their complete incompetency. They had no plan for caucases, or smaller states. No plan for after Super Tuesday. The people working for Obama ate their lunch. Oh, but the ONLY reason he is ahead is because he is black.
Talk about frickin fairy tales!!
Ask yourself, why does Obama raise so much money on the internet? Because he's black? Ridiculous.
He raised more money than Clinton, out organized her, out campaigned her, but Ferraro says it because he's lucky?
It's like a black athelete traing everyday, watching everything he eats, never takes a day off and wins the race and some idiot comes along and says he won because blacks run faster. And you don't see the similarity?
The Obama campaign worked its butt off to be in this position. You don't get this far because your black, white, female or lucky. And to suggest otherwise is pure ignorance.
-
go go go
xufapemu.
100% on the money.
-
Thanks for Addressing Ferraro, but not overblown
Since I was one of the persons asking why Salon wasn't covering Ferraro's comments, I want to thank you, Alex, for your thoughtful post, although I don't think Ferraro's comments were overblown. I believe that the Clintons decided to label Obama an affirmative action candidate in order to feed on white resentment. The three day delay in any real condemnation of Ferraro's comments, followed by a "sorry if anyone was offended" weasel apology for Bill's Jesse Jackson-South Carolina comments, has convinced me that Hillary just isn't going to get my vote this Fall even if she manages to bludgeon her way to the nomination. I'll just give money to Democratic Senate candidates and hope that the Senate stands up to McCain on Supreme Court nominations.
I just can't view Ferraro's comments in isolation. Instead, it seems clear to me that the Clinton's have decided to say or do just about anything to get Hillary elected. The pattern is just too clear to me, and I didn't think so two weeks ago.
-
@ banyantree
You said: They don't have to be seriously senior, but old enough to have at least lived through some of the Affirmnative Action wars, and to have been told they were in an academic institution because of race, as opposed to intellect.
Did I miss it? Did Koppelman say Obama was where he was because of Affirmative Action? Did Ferraro?
I keep hearing this. Someone mentioned it in the other thread, but no one seems to be able to pin point it.
So, banyantree, who said this?
You, Alex and Salon, have no idea how deeply this cuts. No idea.
Okay ... but who said it? You really cannot in good faith keep accusing someone of saying that Obama is where he is solely because of Affirmation Action.
Otherwise, people will begin to think you are playing some sort of game.
-
Obama isn't in this position even IN PART because of his race.
Had he not raised the money he did, had the organization he did, won Iowa, blacks would not have supported him.
And even if he recieved split the black vote with Senator Clinton, he would be pretty much exactly where he is today.
However, if older white women were not supporting Clinton, she'd be gone by now. WHo exactly is the lucky one?
-
@ Slider
I believe that the Clintons decided to label Obama an affirmative action candidate in order to feed on white resentment.
Isolation or no isolation, you need to show where someone has actually said this in order to make this charge. Otherwise, I call bullshit. I think this is a libelous charge if you cannot substantiate it is some manner. You need to show that someone officially affliated with the Clinton campaign actually said this and for this purpose.
-
@AKA Smith
Slider believes this to be true about the Clinton's. He/she isn't making a statement of fact.
Let me start parsing your past posts for statements that aren't supported.
-
Obama who?
The truth is that if Obama were not Black, we wouldn't even know his name. How many other 1st term senators or 3rd term senators do we know? And how many white Dems could conceivably hope to have poll numbers among Black voters at the 90% range? You can't argue that being Black doesn't help him with Black people and that that doesn't have a direct bearing on this race.
Of course that doesn't mean that being Black generally is an advantage for people. Nor does it mean that Obama is ONLY Black. He is, as you have said, also youthful, eloquent, competent, intelligent, and apparently much better connected than anyone thought when he started last year.
-
@ xufapemu
You said: Blacks were not ready to vote for Obama until after white activists in Iowa supported him.
Why is this? Why were blacks not ready to vote for him? Why did it take "white activists" voting for him to make blacks vote for him?
-
Well zoereal,
He is good-looking and a good orator. Well except for his ears. He looked better in a cowboy hat. It hid his ears.
-
@ xufapemu
Let me start parsing your past posts for statements that aren't supported.
Well go ahead. Parse mine in this thread, for instance. However, when people make serious charges, they ought to provide some reasonable evidence. I believe I am within my rights on this board to ask that they do so.
Are you saying there is no evidence?