An editorial on Thursday (“Unfortunate rhetoric from Bush as she lost her primary”) gives the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s super political action committee far more credit than it deserves for U.S. Rep. Cori Bush’s primary defeat in Tuesday’s Missouri Democratic primary. She lost her primary partly because she did not act in good faith on the Israel-Palestine issue during her time in Congress, as evidenced by her support of the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.
Candidates and news media outlets that inaccurately ascribe losing political campaigns to AIPAC’s lavish spending only serve to elevate the influence of AIPAC because in American politics, power is many times simply the appearance of power. AIPAC’s money takes it only so far. Campaigns are much more driven by ideas and persona than money, even though a profusion of cash in hand is definitely helpful to campaigns because it makes it much easier for them to effectively communicate their message to the public.
AIPAC is a force of division in American politics, due to its tactics, but it is not the political behemoth that many in elected office and the news media portray it to be.
The best approach for a political candidate to take on AIPAC when they believe that they are being groundlessly and unjustifiably attacked by AIPAC during an election campaign is to delegitimize AIPAC. This can best be accomplished by ridiculing the group and the candidate that it is promoting, without coming off as mean-spirited. Kind of like what presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris and running mate Tim Walz have successfully done so far to former President Donald Trump and his running mate JD Vance in the presidential election campaign.
Campaign finance reform that caps spending on advertising would also be helpful to further minimizing the limited influence AIPAC currently has on our political system. This is even more true of special interest groups that are far more powerful than AIPAC.
But for Bush to say in her concession speech that AIPAC needs to be afraid of her is a sign of bitterness, and it is unbecoming behavior from a member of Congress. Good riddance to her and her sour grapes.
— David Hurwitz, Chicago
Editorial board soft on Trump
So the Tribune Editorial Board decides to take U.S. Rep. Cori Bush to task for her response to her election loss. However, the board has had almost nothing to say about Donald Trump’s anti-democratic ramblings and election lies for the past three years other than some mild protestations. Give me a break. Could it be that the board’s concern is that a Democrat took a page from the litany of sore losers in the Republican Party?
I am not the only one who thinks the Tribune Editorial Board has become an American disgrace and will continue to be one until it firmly denounces Trump’s candidacy. We’re waiting.
— Bruce Cantor, Aurora
Side-stepping Citizens United
The Tribune Editorial Board’s takedown of Missouri U.S. Rep. Cori Bush caused my stomach to churn. I was not surprised nor disappointed that the citizens of Bush’s congressional district rejected her positions including her views on the Israel-Hamas conflict. That said, we’ll never know whether she would have lost without the political influence available to a special interest group (United Democracy Project) via the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.
The editorial side-steps the Citizens United problem with the phrase “as is its right,” as though acquiescence to one of the worst Supreme Court decisions should be an accepted given. The editorial then focuses on Bush’s highly charged post-loss rhetoric — which I agree was over the top — and castigates her for using the same type of unhinged rhetoric used by Donald Trump. Such an outlandish comparison makes me think the editorial board is participating in a contest for the best example of an apples-to-oranges comparison.
Whether one agrees or disagrees with Bush’s Israel-Palestine position, she is certainly entitled to her opinion and has the right to decry purchased influence by the United Democracy Project (yes, less inflammatory rhetoric would have been a better approach), which is far different than Trump dehumanizing and threatening election officials across the county for simply doing their jobs.
The editorial board’s opinions as of late seem aimed at walking a tightrope whereby it is hedging its bets trying to keep everyone happy, failing to understand that its often hard-to-reconcile opinions are having the opposite effect.
Perhaps the Tribune Editorial Board should rename its editorial page “The Hedge” or “The Waffler.”
— William “Dean” Bruno, Sugar Grove
The GOP’s backbone in 1974
How is it that the 50th anniversary of the Illinois Lottery is worth a front-page article (“A streak of good luck,” Aug. 8), but the 50th anniversary of President Richard Nixon’s resignation is unmentioned?
At a time when the U.S. was suffering from one of its most significant crises, congressional Republicans stood up and told their president that his position was unsupportable and urged him to retire. Where was that backbone during and since the attempted insurrection of Jan. 6, 2021?
In hindsight, the legacies of Howard Baker and Barry Goldwater are burnished while today’s Republican Party burns under the monomaniacal cult of Donald Trump.
— Richard Ramlow, Wilmette
If Harris wins, keep it simple
If and when Vice President Kamala Harris becomes the next president of the United States, I hope all references will be to her as the first female president — period. Yes, we all realize that Black/Indian could be added, but first and foremost, she is an American woman.
— Sandra Paszczyk, Tinley Park
Trump, Vance’s race focus
I am an Asian American who has been a U.S. citizen for decades. Unlike Vice President Kamala Harris, I was not born in the U.S. Given Donald Trump’s and now JD Vance’s attacks on Harris’ race, I cannot help but feel less safe should Trump win.
Trump and Vance need to remember that American citizens come in different colors. Some were born here and others abroad. Their color does not make them less American. Attacks on race aren’t going to win them votes.
— Jade Wu, Naples, Florida
Approach to commandments
To those pushing for the Ten Commandments to be displayed in public schools, I would suggest they just live the commandments. If you live your Christian values, you don’t need to teach them.
— Joan Faloona, Wheaton
We need ‘better,’ not ‘again’
I don’t understand “again.” America was, is and always will be great. The only thing it needs to be is better, for everyone, all-inclusive.
— Tom Witte, Batavia
Affordable housing in Chicago
Some takeaways from the Tribune article “‘It just is outrageous’” (July 28) on Chicago rents, affordability and renter frustrations:
• New buildings should be built where they are feasible based upon supply and demand and rental rates and affordability.
• High land and construction costs for skyscrapers will create the opposite of what the affordable housing advocates seek — high market rate housing and unaffordable affordable housing.
• Do not build in unaffordable neighborhoods on expensive land or create a housing demolition derby in existing neighborhoods to destroy existing housing stock and build higher-priced housing.
• Forget about trying to overcome impossible traffic on a constrained site. Build where the site, neighborhood, and movement and access conditions can create housing and neighborhood value.
• Quit falling for the siren song of the penthouse platform tower developers that need state and city subsidies to pencil out their projects. Build for those in need — the residents and voters of Chicago.
It is time to end giveaways designed by and for developers to sway neighborhoods with unrealistic promises. Listen to the people and make housing truly affordable. Build it at scale where it works for pedestrians, drivers and mass transit and in neighborhoods where the city can grow and thrive. That is a surefire bet on our future.
— Tim Carew, Chicago
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.