Part of me hopes that Mitt Romney will win the Republican nomination because it will be easy for the Democrats to destroy him in the general election as a fraud, flip-flopper, and liar. Romney never would have been elected governor of Massachusetts with the right-wing-extremist views he currently holds. It was clear 24 months into his governorship that he was going to make a run at the White House. And with McCain and Giuliani cornering the moderate vote, he saw that a “real conservative” — one with extreme views on taxes, religion, and abortion — was needed. So he changed all of his positions throughout the next two years.
Unfortunately for Romney, a real conservative — Mike Huckabee — did run. And a real conservative beats a fraud conservative every time. It is also painfully clear that all of the other GOP candidates despise Romney. Sorry, Mitt: back to Belmont/Salt Lake.
Doug Carr
Medford
Empty vessels make the most noise
Hear, hear! I was glad to see Steven Stark’s take on the way the Internet has given us less, not more, useful information during presidential-election cycles. The hype surrounding the limitless possibilities of Internet news and commentary is bound to settle down, leaving us once again with reliable, professionally vetted sources of carefully researched information.
In the meantime, I worry about those who think the Internet “supplies all” necessary information, and that all info on it is equally useful and good. Most blogs just add too much noise. Hopefully the few good sources will survive the cacophony.
Maggi Smith-Dalton
Salem
Sizing up the present
Regarding “Going the Distance,” Hillary Clinton realizes that, for her, the time is now or never. For Obama, it may be now, four years from now, or even eight. His time is destined to come. What Clinton won’t admit is that the presidency is not an opportunity for personal fulfillment. You can’t just do it because you want to. You must be good for the nation.
That said, what makes or breaks a leader of the free world is his or her ability to negotiate, and Obama has natural diplomatic gifts and a flair for thinking critically about world affairs. We do him an injustice to equate his skills in this area with the kind of craven, pusillanimous brand of compromise we can expect from Clinton.
As for Steven Stark’s comments on the dreary Internet landscape of political commentary, his points are well taken. But we should ask ourselves, what kind of Internet pundit would Edward R. Murrow have been? The beauty and the curse of blogging is that one can be bold without repercussions. But boldness, as soon as it surfaces, becomes fatuous. With Morrow we had great testament but great persecution. Take your pick.
Gordon Marshall
Boston
