Capitol ideas

IF we “liberals” had the luxury of selecting the presidential candidate who would flawlessly safeguard the environment, the world’s resources and the rights of all people, then I would have no issue with the comment that Hillary Clinton is not liberal enough [“Hillary’s No Shoo-In With This Crowd,” by Tina Daunt, April 4]. The flaw in Susan Sarandon’s thinking, and the thinking of other like-minded individuals (Hollywood-based or otherwise), is that, by being rigidly and publicly faithful to the ideas that must be promoted to salvage this Earth and its democratic institutions, the ability of the Democratic party to prevail in an election is sacrificed.

There are two critically important tasks that need to be accomplished: First, protest and publicize all acts that would destroy, or are destroying, civil rights, freedom of speech and the sustainability of our Earth; second, elect a president who will promote and work for those ideals.

What “liberal” purists must acknowledge for the second task to be completed is that many people in our country see the picture differently. To elect a candidate in 2008 who can reverse the savage course of the Bush administration, Democrats must allow a candidate to be centrist -- to speak to, and reach, those seeing a different movie.

Hillary won’t be elected in 2008 because the majority of voters will not elect a woman yet and they’re not ready to let go of any connotations the name Clinton carries. Those of us who seek to install a different type of president must think strategically and ask: Who can win?

JENNIFER BOGDA LOMELI

Manhattan Beach