Letters to the editor for March 10
Having to decide to nominate Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton is a win-win decision for the Democratic Party and for America. Finally, we will remove ourselves from the dark ages of the Bush administration.
I often hear that Hillary is not electable and that the Republicans want her to be nominated because they can destroy her. First, those who think she is not electable should tell that to the people of Ohio and New York. Secondly, the Republicans have been after her for more than 16 years, and they spent $100 million of our tax dollars on Whitewater that resulted in a 100,000-page report that showed Hillary and Bill Clinton actually lost money.
I often hear people say they just don’t like Hillary, but they don’t give any specifics. Is it because she worked her heart out trying to pass national health care for all Americans? Maybe it is because she is married to Bill Clinton, who left office and America with more than a trillion in the bank!
The major problem I have with Obama’s game plan of “it’s time for hope, change, and let’s not do things the old way,” is that people who use that approach get elected and they have to work with these same people they criticized. Not much gets done.
Frankly, I am getting a little tired of Obama’s empty rhetoric, his finger-pointing and his JFK imitations. I don’t think he has the experience or the understanding of how things really work in Washington. Hillary would get things done faster and more effectively.
Obama deserves much credit for inspiring our younger voters to get excited and involved, but we have had eight years of inexperience in the White House. We don’t need another inexperienced president, no matter how inspiring, or witty or clever he is.
We need a president who knows how to get things done. We need a president who has a heart and a mind to take us out of the dark ages of the Bush administration and into bright sunshine of America’s soul. We need Hillary Clinton.
Leo J. Schools
H.E. Israel (“Mail carriers deserve some understanding,” Feb. 27) took exception to my Feb. 19 letter citing poor mail-carrier service. Please allow a few words in response. First of all, you totally missed the point on the carrier issue. It was the fact that it was half a world away, not what we flew that was germain to the issue. I flew fighters, and you were in helos; so what?
Now, to the meat of the response. He lauds his mail carrier for stellar service and being a blessing to the neighborhood. Fine, but how can he take exception with my statements with zero knowledge or understanding of the service I receive? I suppose if he feels well, then we all feel well, if you apply his reasoning. As for staying warm in the winter or cool in the summer, that’s their problem, not mine. It comes with the job. If they can’t pack the gear, then don’t play the game.
As for the rare instance his carrier fails to deliver the mail, I commend his carrier, but I would invite him to reread my letter. Failure to perform more than 200 times in nine short years clearly does not fall under the “rare occasion” category. And yes, I will be glad to tell you, Mr. Israel, my airline and I most assuredly fly in the worst possible weather one can imagine. When the passenger carriers have shut down because of weather, we’re still doing the job, day and night. So next time, before you adopt the “one shoe fits all” reasoning, I suggest you do your homework before sending another letter to the editor.
South Lake Tahoe