Ignore smear campaigns against Barack Obama
The smear campaign has begun. Recently I received two e-mails claiming that Barack Obama is a radical Muslim. CNN news has sent reporter John Vause to Jakarta, Indonesia, and he reported, "I came here to Barack Obama's elementary school, looking for what some are calling an Islamic Madrassa, like the ones that teach hate and violence in Pakistan and Afghanistan. I have been to those Madrassas in Pakistan and this school is not like that."
Time Magazine's Joe Klein has stated: Attacks on Obama's elementary school are "laughable" given the moderate form of Islam practiced in Indonesia in those days. He went on to say, "The efforts to slime Barack Obama have begun in the slimiest way."
These are the same kind of smear tactics that swift boat people used against John Kerry, a decorated veteran of the Vietnam War. I would like to say to the people that use such lies to smear people, as Joseph Welch said to U.S. Senator McCarthy, concerning McCarthy's charges that many in the Army were communists: "Sir, do you have no decency?"
For the truth about Barack Obama's background, his religious convictions or patriotism, go to www.BarackObama.com/factcheck.
HUEY REED, Boise
Change party in charge, stand up for Sen. Obama
As a retired Idahoan I have seen my disposable income shrink over the last eight years under the Bush administration. My husband and I retired with hopes of traveling this great country. The price of oil, among other things, has kept us from living our dream and we have been forced to come out of retirement to maintain decent health care.
I will be proudly standing for Sen. Barack Obama at our caucus on Feb. 5. This is an important election; we need to do more than just change the party in charge. We need to fundamentally change politics. Sen. Obama has been working for change and achieving results his entire life. That is why I support Sen. Obama.
Please come to the caucus on Feb. 5 and stand with me for Barack Obama.
JACKI DUNNE, Boise
Make own judgments
It would be laughable to me, if it weren't so gravely serious an issue, to observe the backtracking and navel gazing by our lauded political pundits on the New Hampshire results. They are now busy wondering why their polls and predictions were so wrong, accompanied with the usual new predictions. It is absurd. To actually believe that Hillary would drop out of the race (immediately divining Obama), or that Romney was "dead" (Huck's the man) based on one small state's caucus is beyond belief. It was not believable then, and it's not believable based on two small states' results. What is believable is that our mainstream information sources are motivated by the daily creation of "news events," and perhaps less so, biased to drive opinion where it can.
A wise friend once told me a newspaper writer's function is "To alarm and inform, in that order." We should all take extra care to make our own judgments (and votes ultimately) one of careful thought and understanding of the campaigning environment, as well as a keen appreciation of human nature. It's just too important.
WHITNEY LIPPINCOTT, Eagle
Get active in the process
In the stories we hear about the elections in New Hampshire, we find an interesting event. There is no requirement for residency to vote. Stories so far indicate that many people from out of state were bussed in to vote. No one at the voting areas new these people and they all registered at the time they voted.
In the 1950s, a FBI report stated that one of the goals for communist takeover of the United States was to get control of one or more political parties. The fraud that was perpetrated during the New Hampshire primary shows that the FBI report has some fact in it. After reading that report, I can say that we are getting very close to losing all of the liberties set forth in the Constitution. We must, as a people, get active in the political process now and get honorable men into our government. Inactivity assures that enemies of freedom will destroy our liberties.
IVAN HOFFMAN JR., Meridian
'Gender strategy' is scary
I'm scared - N.H. primary. I'm not scared because Hillary won the N.H. Democratic Primary. I'm not scared because of the Hillary "emotion" before the primary, but because of the effective "emotion hype" surrounding it. Over and over, women were interviewed (few men), and the media played women saying variations of, "I'm voting for Hillary because she is a woman." I was especially concerned when I heard, "we need to get a woman to clean up the mess that men have made." Now that's appealing, but are they referring to the past Democratic men too?
This new "gender strategy" showed itself to be very powerful when the victory of charismatic Democrat Obama in (white) Iowa could be so effectively reversed a few days later. Was (white) N.H. more bigoted? - I think not. A "gender strategy" means that if women can be convinced that we need a woman (any woman) in the White House, then women voters who previously supported normally Republican "swing" issues can have a disproportionate effect on the national election outcome. Yes, I'm scared. I expected more of American women. With a gender strategy, Hillary could run against George Washington himself - and win.
IKE SWEESY, Boise
Media unfair to Clinton
Your news media coverage on Hillary Clinton in my opinion has been very unfair. The women of America are the backbone of this country. And it's time the people stood up and told these newsmen they are there to report the news and leave their opinion out of it.
I am an independent, and what they think is no concern of mine. I am a senior citizen and in all my years of voting I have never seen such reporting.
You have a responsibility and you have not met this obligation.
If the women of this country stand up you will know it, sir.
I have not made up my mind as to who should lead this country, but this will be my decision, not your reporters'.
PEGGY GARRETT, Fruitland
Questions for Democrats
The "Super Tuesday" caucuses are just around the corner. Being a registered Democrat knowing not many (if any) of the candidates will be visiting Idaho for any meetings with the voters of Idaho anytime in the near future before "Super Tuesday," I have three simple questions I would like to ask each of them. They deserve straight answers:
1. With the national "No Child Left Behind," policy, why have our "special needs" children been left out of the equation?
2. Why doesn't the national government grant the states the funds required to better provide for the residential care of our special needs population, and for the caregivers who provide the services that they require, in most all cases, on a 24/7/365 basis?
3. Why is NAFTA being allowed to drive our middle-class American jobs out of our country faster than new positions can be created to replace them?
Is there anyone out there who might know how to get the questions I have, answered?
ELLEN OREMUS, Caldwell
How can Norris judgeMcCain's credentials?
Here we go again, a person who has gained the public ear and their eyes via TV; Chuck Norris says that John McCain is too old to be elected president.
I am not a big supporter of John McCain, but let's compare life experiences. Chuck is a champion karate, martial arts practitioner; beyond that and his movie and TV career, where has he gained the knowledge to make this determination?
He is typical of show business people who because of their celebrity - and I include academics, talk show hosts and so-called religious leaders - are qualified to make these great pronouncements.
John McCain is likely more aware of the world's problems than the average 50-year-old stockbroker, and has used the ultimate judgment about living in the world that we face in the near future.
I qualify this letter as a 76-year-old retired USAF special operator, who has worked and lived in the Mideast, Korea, Japan, Thailand, Laos and Germany.
I understand if you will not vote for John McCain, but not because he does not have knowledge of the threat facing our country.
JOE COLEMAN, Boise
