Saturday, Jul 5, 2008
Not-so-super Tuesday Plus: Beware gang green; female-to-male conference wasn't just about sex.
Mar 11, 2000 | Post-Super Tuesday poll: Now what?
COMPILED BY SALON STAFF
(03/08/00)
If anyone doubted it, now we have proof: U.S. Civics 101 is all wrong. We don't live in a democracy, heck, we don't even live in a representative democracy or a republic. We live in a state controlled by party machines, which are in turn controlled by big business and labor unions.
Somehow I thought that the presidency was reserved for men of substance, who had distinguished themselves as American patriots, heroes, thinkers, revolutionaries, reformers. The two candidates we have been presented are anything but. One is a party hack, the other a spoiled little rich cipher who couldn't even succeed with nepotism going for him. The governorship of Texas qualifies the man for this rare honor? Give me a break.
While the chattering classes talk blithely about the politics of centrism, the implications for the future of American democracy are more ominous. In a land where the highest office is bought and sold by big money, where is the nobility and need for public service? Why should I die in defense of a country where suffrage is a joke? And who really does speak for "We the People?"
It sure as hell isn't George W. Bush or Al Gore.
-- James Stephen Garrett
I was appalled at the alleged analysis by Ann Coulter, and amazed you printed it. "Chicks like a cute, dumb guy?" Maybe high school sophomores do. I hope that most women voters have transcended that preference.
-- Leslie Burleson
Thank you to Fran Lebowitz for giving voice to my frustration and depression over seeing tossed out the window the best chance we had at having a president with any kind of depth. I wasn't sure if any of the political writers would do anything other than point to failed campaign tactics as the reason why Bradley lost. Ugh. At least now I know there is one media person who shares my sentiments.
-- Rachel DuBois
California makes its choices
BY FIONA MORGAN
(03/08/00)
Astonishment was the emotion that bubbled up when I read today that millions of Californians think they know better than I whom I should devote my life to. Of course, that is not how Proposition 22 was worded. It simply affirmed the exclusive supremacy of marriage between a man and a woman. But that simple idea represents a monumental arrogance to millions of other people who want to share their lives with someone who happens to be of the same sex. How could that possibly matter to heterosexuals?
-- Denny Smith
Rushing to judgment
BY SEAN ELDER
(03/08/00)
One point Sean Elder's story makes, perhaps without intending to, is just how much political news coverage is about political news coverage. I, like many others, have become increasingly disillusioned about our political process, and the self-referential media at large is not helping.
While it's been highly amusing watching the GOP implode this week, news coverage itself (with few exceptions) has been equally raucous, steadily declining in both discipline and credibility. Form has followed function.
Media: Please regain some semblance of objectivity and simply report the news. It's not your job to spin it, too.
-- T. L. Hoganson
Get Salon in your mailbox!