Letters to the Editor
-
Thanks for telling me what I can and cannot be outraged about
I had to walk away from my computer, after reading Alex's "response" to the Ferraro fracas. What a load of crap? People before me have said it much better...
One thing though. I'm tired of the writers at Salon insulting their reader's intelligence. I see all the time here; Koppelman, Joan, Greenwald - acidic responses to legitimate complaints/criticisms. As much as the War Room has been filled with he said / she said BS over the last 3 months, especially the last 3 days of Spitzer, to ignore this story is an extreme example of bias, lack of journalistic integrity, and profound ignorance. This isn't a story that has traction because some talking heads keep bringing it up - I was extremely offended not only by Ferraro's statements, but the Clinton camps response. Ferraro was defiant until the end. I denounce and reject Salon's coverage of this story.
I'm sorry that Alex feels like he knows more than his readers. I'm sorry that he feels that a personal, vicious attack of this nature is simply politics as usual. I'm sorry he think my anger is overblown or a product of the campaign season.
I deal with people everyday who have Geraldine Ferraro's exact attitude, and her big mouth was a signal to the rest of the country that the Clinton campaign feels the same way. Anything to win. Vile behavior on the part of the Clinton campaign, silently condoned by her cheerleaders in the blogosphere and on Capitol Hill.
And what a loathsome abdication of responsibilities from Salon. You are no better than Fox News or the Washington Post or the Politico. You spend so much time mocking those rags, but in the end, you behave just like them.
-
@ Dr. Zachary
You say: "this isn't about racism, in the sense that HRC or Bill or GF are racists; it's about keeping the subject of race in the news, thus allowing the folks who inclinations to view the world through racist lenses...to view BHO not as a candidate who happens to be black, but as the black candidate."
What qualifies you and other posters to state with such certainty that the Clinton campaign is doing any such thing? Do you have an inside track with someone working on the campaign? Have you worked on the campaign yourself? How are you all so dead certain of this Clinton heart of darkness you so firmly believe in? And why are you so cavalier about insulting those who don't agree with you and who support Senator Clinton?
BTW, while y'all are nattering away about Geraldine Ferraro and the Clintons, much of the rest of America is getting very, very upset about Rev. Wright. The video clip is all over the Internet and the reader comments are not pretty.
In case no one has seen it: In the unabridged (Fox) version, Wright tells his congregation that Bill Clinton has been 'riding the black community like Monica Lewinsky', as the reverend does an on-camera bump and grind. He doesn't spare Hillary, on his way to eviscerating white America at length. Instead of 'God Bless America', Wright proposes black Americans sing "Goddamn America'. All in all, it's a pretty damning bit of showmanship.
Remember, Obama has described Wright as his spiritual mentor of 20 years, the man from whom he borrowed the phrase "Audacity of Hope", his 'old uncle'. His is the church that Obama has chosen to be a member of for 20 years. He was married in Wright's church, his kids attend it. Wright is apparently part of Obama's inner campaign circle.
Mainstream America isn't going to blame the Clintons for this video (and rightly so). But it is going to be very, very unhappy about what Obama's embrace of Wright's church says about Obama and his judgment, or lack of it.
-
From W. Shapiro's article "Obama heads south", written before SC primary
Fielding, who had just voted absentee Wednesday morning at the election commission offices in North Charleston, recounted that some of the people he recognized waiting in line "were on the Hillary team before Iowa." As he put it, "My own wife was one of those people who were strong for Hillary. But after Iowa hit, she realized that this black fellow could get elected."
Had white voters not first voted for Obama in Iowa and NH, it doesn't matter what color Obama is. Blacks wouldn't have supported him.
Therefore, it is Obama's superior campaign, net-roots fund raising and grassroots support more than anything else that is responsible for where he is today.
-
Sorry, I italicized my whole last post.
I'm still getting used to this internet thingy
-
Dear Alex,
What a long posting. Do you really think that exhausting verbiage somehow covers your weak sophistry?
Please, don't bother. Just don't bother. For quite some time, your bias seems pretty clear from these cheap seats- you support Hillary Clinton, and while that is different from being against Barack Obama, it is depressingly disingenuine of you to try to pretend otherwise.
You can say whatever you think you can reasonably argue about Ferarro's "white man's burden" bigotry, how it's overblown, taken out of context, or how its on a par of Samanatha Power's comments, none of which I buy for a second, and that is your right. Hey, this your war room, you get the paycheck to run this place, and you can run it any way you like.
But please, don't insult me. Don't bother with trying to look unbiased. Just come out and say that you endorse Hillary Clinton, all right? I would have a lot more respect for you if you did that.
-
@ little lord baltimore
I'm not really sure what you are hoping to accomplish. If you have a point to make about affirmative action, about Ferraro's comments, and/or about why you think so many black voters are voting for Obama, why not make just make it?
I am merely asking questions. I may make a point later about Ferraro's comments, but they don't really interest me much if she didn't actually say anything about Affirmative Action. I have supported affirmative action for twenty years. I see nothing wrong with it.
It seemed to me at first that TRenee was saying something negative about Affirmative Action. I am glad we have it and I think we should continue to have it in some form or another.
No, Ferraro never mentioned the words "affirmative action."
You know, I just don't like BS. I don't like people implying things that are not true. Unless Ferraro speaks for herself about Affirmative Action, we really don't know what she thinks about affirmative action. However, I think everything Gloria Steinham said in her controversial NYT piece was true. Just my opinion.
But many people believe that when she said that Obama was "lucky" she was implying that has not rightfully earned his current status as front runner.
I think he has been lucky in this campaign. He has exceeded expectations. He has benefited from the fact that the Clinton campaign thus so far has never seemed to decide what it's message is. Now I think Obama is going to suffer some of the same sorts of problems. Frankly, I am amused.
He has also benefited from the negativity and outright sexism of Chris Matthews and David Shuster. Lucky for him.
The word luck can be used in many contexts. There is absolutely no evidence that Ferraro meant her use of the word "luck" to mean anything connected to Affirmative Action. Do I think she has made a fool of herself? Yes, mostly. Do I think the Clinton campaign said: Geraldine, go out and make a fool of yourself on our behalf? Not likely!
You have to be a certain sort of paranoid to believe that.
The implication and the inference is that because Obama is black, he has been given an unfair advantage. For many people, this reminds them of the arguments against affirmative action.
You know, I just think that this is their oversensitive problem. I am disabled. I have benefited from that ADA. If something good happens to me, I do not automatically assume that they are referring to the ADA. That would be pretty silly of me.
And before you demand "proof," please remember that I am speaking to beliefs and interpretations. You, of course, are free to disagree.
People may hold any belief or interpretation that they choose. Some people believe that when Mars goes retrograde, fights happen. They are entitled to believe this, but for me to agree, I would want to see some proof. Until then, my contention, that a fight may coincide with Mars going retrograde without being caused by Mars is just as legitimate.
Here's the thing. For many people, myself included, being black in the era of affirmative action means having people assume that you did not earn what you have accomplished. I graduated from a New England prep school, my GPA and SAT scores were better than almost everyone in my graduating class, and when I was accepted to an Ivy League college I was told by my classmates in no uncertain terms that it was because I am black. I don't dispute that being black made me attractive to colleges, but I still resent the implication that the only reason why I was accepted over white students with lower grades and fewer achievements is because I am black. And I still resent the implication that being white ( and in the case of most of my classmates, white and wealthy) in America does not come with its own built in privileges that I will never know.
I do understand that, but your feelings do not alter the actual meaning of Ferraro's words.
I realize that for you this may be an academic exercise or maybe your posts are a way to entertain yourself for a few hours.
May I assume that maybe some of your posts are a way to entertain yourself in certain guises.
But for many people, myself included, Ferraro's comments are a reminder that many white Americans will never take our accomplishments seriously. And it a lot of ways it's genuinely disappointing and painful.
Well they may be, but for some people it may just be a way to accuse the Clinton campaign of dog whistling we very little evidence.
I hope you can understand that.
If that is a polite way to say "Shut up, you might hurt someone's feelings," my attitude is that if you can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen.