Sunday, June 08, 2008

Memo to Ray Hackett

You were right about only two things in Sundays op-ed.

Obama should not pick Mrs. Clinton as Vice President but for far different reasons than you think. In short because it will show him as weak as Kerry was in picking media-darling John Edwards. Also the big job of Veep is not to be President of the Senate but to be a great president should something happen to the person elected President. That is what President George W. Bush had in mind when he picked Richard Cheney. How secure would you feel if President John Kerry was shot and John Edwards was President?

Two, given Saturday's concession and unqualified endorsement of her opponent, this article is indeed out of date. How about showing some graciousness that Mrs. Clinton displayed yesterday?

-- or at least to her voters.

Many lifelong Democrats I know don't like him and will vote for McCain. Obama has his work cut out for him sewing up his own base.

I can accept the fact that you may not like -or respect- Hillary Clinton but you should at least respect the democratic, small d, process. Tellingly you have characterized the on-going Democrat primary to decide the leader of the free world as winter in your blog. All throughout the season you have agonized on how protracted the campaign has been. The Clintons have to get out now or.... what? We have to stop democracy because......?

Give Mrs. Clinton her due. She won a majority of the actual votes cast. That's not for nothing. Ann Coulter writes about this --

"Primaries are specifically designed by the parties to choose their strongest candidate for the general election. Hillary's argument that she won the popular vote is manifestly relevant to that determination. Our brave Hillary has every right to take her delegates to the Democratic National Convention and put her case to a vote. She is much closer to B. Hussein Obama than the sainted Teddy Kennedy was to Carter in 1980 when Teddy staged an obviously hopeless rules challenge at the convention. (I mean rules about choosing the candidate, not rules about crushed ice at after-parties.)"

Obama in a very real sense lost. He failed to win a majority of his own base. What does that say about November? Mrs. Clinton was a lot closer in the delegate count than the media liked to say. What's more she clearly is the better candidate for November and would -- by far -- be the tougher president. Terrorists would not be tempted to try what they will try if your man wins in November with Hillary Clinton commanding the military. Clinton would order Osama Bin Laden killed if the CIA told her where he was. Your man wants to sit down with him with tea and cake. Furthermore I may not agree with the Clintons on much but I have never had reason to question their patriotism.

Not so the Obamas. Your man only recently put a flag on his lapel to show solidarity with his countrymen (with some lack of sincerity I must add). His own wife and minister give strong hints of his tolerance for racism and appalling lack of gratitude for the blessings this country has afforded them.

I am not a Democrat and your party can pick who you please and according to the rules your man won. But as an American I am disturbed by the unfairness of the media.

You Mr. Hackett and your colleagues made the difference in this campaign. Had it not been for the meida-spin, Mrs. Clinton would be the Democrat nominee.

Did the media choose wisely? It is on to November. We shall see what the Indpendents think of the choice the Democrats and Republicans have presented them with. My guess is that 2008 will be alot like 1988 where the Democrats left the voters with no real choice at all.

John R. McCommas



Post a Comment

<< Home

Web Counter
Free Counter