My Photo

July 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Autographed Memorabilia

Find the best blogs at Blogs.com.

Blog powered by TypePad

« Politics | Main | Godley & Creme, "Cry" (1985) »

Wednesday, 13 August 2008

From Today's New York Times

To the Editor:

Charles M. Blow is right and Hillary Rodham Clinton was right: racism is still a malignant evil in America. Many people still believe that black people are intellectually inferior to white people and thus deserve the lowest economic and social standing in America.

Nevertheless, what Mr. Blow implies and what Mrs. Clinton strongly implied is wrong: racism will not determine who will be the next president. Intelligence will.

Barack Obama’s intelligence is undeniable. Inherent even in all the charges that he is “arrogant” and “egotistical” is a reluctant acknowledgment that he is highly intelligent.

Moreover, as the general election surges on, it will become increasingly obvious how far more intelligent and wise Senator Obama is than Senator John McCain.

To win this election by either a narrow or a wide margin, Mr. Obama, through his abundant faith, wisdom and intelligence, just needs to offer Americans powerful solutions to our most critical problems.

Leon Green
Las Vegas, Aug. 9, 2008

Note from KBJ: Where is the evidence that Barack Obama is more intelligent than John McCain? Have they taken intelligence tests? If so, what are the results? I suspect the letter writer is confusing articulateness ("talking good") with intelligence. It's a common progressive mistake. By this logic, John Rawls, who stuttered, and Henry Sidgwick, who stammered, were dolts.

Note 2 from KBJ: Americans want an intelligent president, but not at the cost of good character and good judgment. It's why they rejected Hubert Humphrey (in 1968), George McGovern (in 1972), Jimmy Carter (in 1980), Walter Mondale (in 1984), Michael Dukakis (in 1988), Al Gore (in 2000), and John Kerry (in 2004). It's why they will reject Barack Obama in 2008.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e553bed6a0883300e553e327618833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference From Today's New York Times:

» Smarty Pants from what if?
Every day, Professor Keith Burgess-Jackson reprints a Letter to the Editor from the New York Times. Today's offering left me gape-jawed. [Read More]

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Where is the evidence that "racism is still a malignant evil in America"? What does that even mean? Then there is this, "Many people still believe that black people are intellectually inferior to white people and thus deserve the lowest economic and social standing in America.". Who are these "many people"? Name names, please, Mr. Green!

Oh - they are out there. Easy to find if you look for them on the Internet, Steve.

But the real issue is not whether there are still racists and haters out there. The issue is whether even a sizeable minority still would vote against Obama due to his race - or whether the bulk of America really is ready to judge a candidate based upon "the content of his character".

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Visits

Search

  • Google

    WWW
    This Blog