Letters to the Editor
-
OT @The Professor: Texas results delivered by Steer?
Texas caucus results legally don't have to be posted until Saturday. Counties along the border are historically slow in reporting results.
That's a few lifetimes from now given the attention span of the media.
-
@danbe
Why not vote for McCain? Why not, indeed.
Actions, not words... remember? 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, she 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 fairness that has a racial impact, and makes no effort to protect you and I from unconstitutional government intrusions on our privacy. Indeed, why not vote for McCain?
And what of the first terms? The big payoff legislation? NAFTA. Welfare reform. Promoting the party? Democrats lost control of the house, state legislatures, the majority of gubernatoral and mayoral seats. And how in the world did Al Gore have even a close campaign against such a terrible candidate as W? Because during the latter half of the Clinton term, he was (unwittingly) peddling their lies and defending their indefensible actions (you remember - the ones Hillary blamed on the VRWC, but which turned out to be true?). Unfortunately, he was tarred by the deceit, cynicism, and outright lies of the Clintons. I wonder, sitting here today, if Al Gore's impression of the Clintons are closer to yours or mine? And we know, after all, how many disenchanted former Clinton administrations officials have come out in favor of Obama. There is a damn good reason for this, and we all know it. They care not for anything or anyone but themselves. When it comes right down to it, political expediency and power trumps all.
-
No good can come from any of this...
The only person to benefit from this new round of internecine Democratic strife will be John "One Hundred Years of War" McCain.
-
@WES: We love you, baby!
Not everybody appreciates the effort required in polishing your iconic drive-by genre. Keep that Brando outsider thing going!
Id Be More Than Happy To support and vote for Obama in the general. But his campaign has some tests to pass.
Yes.
-
Our politics are total shit
Remember a few months back when everyone was saying what a great slate of candidates the Democrats have?
Clinton has become so appalling that if she wins, I will not vote for her -- and may even campaign for Nader. Consider her principles:
- Clinton attacks Obama for plagiarism in a televised debate, using a "xerox" line that someone else wrote.
- Her campaign issues a memo attacking Obama for going negative, and then throws in some old attacks.
- She embraces Bush's fearmongering by suggesting your kids will die in their bed if you vote for Obama.
- She casts the dead Ann Richards in one of her campaign ads -- "Do if for Ann" -- over the objections of Richards' kids.
What kind of person does this stuff?
She runs on experience, but I don't know what that means. In 93 she avoided a simple single-payer health system in favor of a complex one that left a cut for insurance companies, and it failed (the insurance companies preferred the cut they were already getting and the public couldn't make heads or tails of it). So what did she learn from that experience? She's got a new plan that is just as complex and even less helpful to the needy. Rock on, Hillary.
She has passed no bill sine coming to the Senate that would do anything very significant -- she hasn't even proposed any bills that would do much. (In fairness, she gets her state pork.)
And I don't get why she's so strong and tough either. Unless "strong and tough" is a way of saying: blank slate of ambition with no principles, a lot of money and ruthless consultants.
Obama is also much of a blank slate, though I think he would bring more of a mandate with him to the White House than Clinton. Unfortunately, he's a hypocrite too -- though not as transparent as Clinton (I guess he hasn't had enough experience). He used to stand up for Palestinians, but now that he's running for president he thinks Israel has a right to do whatever it wants. He voted to defeat an amendment to the bankruptcy bill that would have limited interest rates on credit cards at 30 percent, knowing that the bill would pass (he didn't vote for the bill, but the banks only needed his vote to defeat the amendment). He was against the war in Iraq, as he regularly reminds us, but he now advocates unprovoked military attacks on other sovereign nations with no act of Congress (Hillary calls it naive, but you can imagine that if she thought of it first she would have advocated such action -- and Obama would have called it naive -- seriously, who can't imagine this scenario?).
I'll still vote for Obama in the general if the party lets him have the nomination. His "lack of experience" means that he could surprise me. I'm not counting on it, but I'll take the gamble.
In any event, we deserve better. Maybe Clinton's decision to drag this out will, in fact, tear apart the party (can't really see how it won't). But maybe that will be a good thing; the party hasn't served us well since LBJ or earlier.
-
@Ricardo Malocchio
Gore lost because he moved away from the most popular Democratic President since FDR! The country had turned on the Republican Congress after the impeachment. But Gore tried to turn right and offered Lieberman the #2 slot to appeal to the hawks. If he had embraced Clinton, he would have won. Period. How can you blame Clinton for Gore's poor political skills?
And I'm sorry, some of us don't consider Welfare Reform a bad thing! Yes, NAFTA is not perfect, but I believe in the principals of Free Trade, Capitalism and the Free Market. As does Bill Clinton. It sounds like that is the root of some of your problems.
As far as Hillary's war vote, I agree it was a mistake. I was againsts this war from the get go, but what now? There are real problems with just pulling out. It's bad enough we removed Iran's only check in the region, now what, give them the whole store? Two wrongs does not make a right!
The Flag Burning and Iran vote were purely political. She knows neither will mean action, but it gives here something the security moms can identify with. But can't we say the same with Obama's support of War funding and McCain ultimate approval for Torture?