Letters to the Editor
-
Carville is absolutely correct
I am so tired of reading about all of these poor scapegoats that resign over every little remark. As with everything else, the media blows everything out of proportion instead of focusing on what is really important.
Didn't we all learn that "sticks and stones will break my bones, but names will never hurt me" in elementary school?
Grow up, people. Let's concentrate on the important issues.
For instance, what did Britney have for breakfast???
;-)
-
Not always, reader
You say: "As with everything else, the media blows everything out of proportion instead of focusing on what is really important."
Obama's 20 year relationship with Rev. Wright IS important: it goes straight to the character issue, which has been more or less the centerpiece of his campaign. Fairly or not, Ferraro got a major grilling in the press over her remarks and Clinton got splattered with the fallout. And now we're going to watch Obama skate on the issue of his spiritual mentor? This is not only depressing, it's positively alarming.
-
whining and sniping
Well said, Mr. Carville. The kind of back and forth between the two Democrats has been moronic and infantile. I usually ignore it, but sometimes you just can't avoid the stupidity that passes for politics and political discourse.
I've always believed that people ought to be allowed to say the most racist, sexist, homophobic, class-biased crap they want to say. It's better to let people see how utterly stupid these people are than to drive them away from the fresh sunlight of exposure and reason. After awhile most intelligent people—left, right and center—see what's going, and tend to reject the termites.
Typically, the Democrats started on a high note of comity, and now have begun to wallow in the kind of ID politics that has made the party less a party of ideas and agenda and more a morass of competing victims. To some degree, the GOP has been spared this since they tend to be a party of an overwhelming demographic, but they have the stain of using Geo. Wallace's play book, which morphed into Nixon's Southern Strategy.
Politics ought to be about free speech, and sometimes people get carried away. But the kind of juvenile tit-for-tat fighting between the two Democratic camps ought to stop. Also, people ought to hold the media responsible for pushing the kind of responses that feeds into the "freak show" mentality.
As a pro-Obama leaner but non-Obama partisan, Ms. Powers ought to have remained on staff; so should Ms. Ferraro, who diminished her stature by her rather silly comments.
Now, can w get back to some real issues?
-
Wright IS Important?
Yes, I know you think so. You and others keep posting this again and again and again. How helpful. I've already watched one of the several internet videos on this guy.
I'll see your angry black preacher, and raise you one armageddeon parsley.
-
the preacher issue
Of course we can scream on high about Wright's comments and how they cut to the core of Obama's personhood. Or we could, you know, listen to what he has to say about it:
"This is a pastor who is on the brink of retirement who in the past has made some controversial statements. I profoundly disagree with some of these statements...Obviously, I disagree with that. Here is what happens when you just cherry-pick statements from a guy who had a 40-year career as a pastor. There are times when people say things that are just wrong. But I think it's important to judge me on what I've said in the past and what I believe."
I guess we'll just have to see if he both renounces and rejects Wright as well.
-
Amen
I couldn't agree more. And it's interesting to see Clinton supporters, like the very first post on this thread, suddenly saying they "can't trust Carville now" after all he is "married to a Republican." Geesh, have you guys and gals no loyalty at all.
Carville's right. This is what Obama correctly referred to as "silly season." Let's stop it now.
-
p.s.
the statement "obviously I disagree with that" after the ellipses in that quote is in response to the question about the god damn american quote.
sorry for the confusion, clearly this is why I'm not an editor :)
-
Carville is more clever than some Salon posters
He did not call for the end of back-and-forth bickering. He called for an end to the calls for an end of such bickering.
He wants a muddy playing field because it favors his candidate -- which is why he used Power as an example. While I tend to agree about the resignations being a bit silly (you can cycle through hundreds if you want to work surrogates), Carville is working for his candidate. Expect no less from a professional.
-
Carville believes in hardball
It is not that Carville doesn't want the candidates to fight back against attacks. He just thinks the demand for resignations is foolish. Which it is.
If it's baseless and ridiculous, then shoot down the attack on its own. If your opponent has a loose cannon on board who's spouting all sorts of crazy shit, then let them spout. I for one have no problem with facing an opposition made up entirely of nutters.
The difference is that I would just expose them as nutters. This resignation stuff is nonsense and will not fly in the general election.
-
@Kate Tex
KateTex: "Obama's 20 year relationship with Rev. Wright IS important: it goes straight to the character issue, which has been more or less the centerpiece of his campaign."
In what sense is this a character issue? Obama belongs to a church whose reverend has some hotheaded views. Okay, and this speaks of Obama's character how...?
KateTex: "Fairly or not, Ferraro got a major grilling in the press over her remarks and Clinton got splattered with the fallout. And now we're going to watch Obama skate on the issue of his spiritual mentor?"
Ferraro got grilled because:
-- Her statement was a direct attack on Obama
-- She was a prominent member of Clinton's campaign
Reverend Wright is not:
-- attacking Clinton
-- involved in Obama's campaign
I also question the term "spiritual mentor." Is that true? I mean, has Obama referred to him as such?
Another question: What has Wright said that Obama should renounce, reject, denoune, or whatever? The clip I saw from the past week (on The Daily Show or whatever) had Wright saying "God damn America" for its treatment of lower classes, slavery, or something like that. Those are harsh words, but they're outside of the political campaign.
This isn't like Pat Robertson calling for the CIA to assassinate Hugo Chavez while prominent Christians and religious-right Republicans stay ominously silent.
Even if somebody eventually does question Obama on this association, I don't think he has to answer for it in the same way as he would if somebody in his campaign said something questionable.
But hey, use what ya got. It doesn't make Ferraro's statements any better.