Obama Endorsements

Sportsmen for Obama

2008-11-04T11:43:00.000-08:00

http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2008/04/24/opinion/guest/guest48.txt

Obama will protect interests of sportsmen
By STEVE DOHERTY, JIM POSEWITZ, LAND TAWNEY and KENDALL VAN DYK

As Montanans who take advantage of our state’s unique hunting and fishing opportunities, we believe strongly that the next president must respect our right to own and use guns, expand access to public lands, reward private landowners who open their lands to sportsmen and protect the habitats that make our state so rich in wildlife. We believe Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is the leader who will best represent sportsmen on these non-negotiable issues.

While critics try to distort his record, one thing is clear: Obama respects the rights and traditions of Montana’s sportsmen. He has repeatedly and consistently said that he has no intention of taking away our Second Amendment rights. Obama understands that the U.S. Constitution protects an individual’s right to possess and bear arms. And Obama realizes that Montana’s gun laws shouldn’t necessarily be the same as those in Chicago, where he served as a state senator. We all agree that we need to do what we can to prevent criminals from obtaining guns, and Obama will do this by working to ensure that illegal guns do not fall into the wrong hands. However, Montana residents who obtain firearms legally will see no changes in their traditional lifestyles.

And Obama’s record shows that he understands the Second Amendment. As a U.S. Senator, Obama stood up for gun owners by supporting Sen. David Vitter’s (R-La.) bill prohibiting the federal government from confiscating guns during a declared state of emergency. Obama’s opponent, Sen. Hillary Clinton, threatened our gun rights by voting against the amendment.

We agree with Obama’s assertion that we must do more for sportsmen than just protect gun rights. Obama understands that hunters and anglers are losing access to Montana’s wild places. He supports Open Fields Incentives legislation, which provides incentives for landowners who voluntarily open their land to sportsmen. Obama also knows that climate change threatens our fish, wildlife and natural habitats. He supports common sense solutions, endorsed by dozens of America’s premier hunting and angling organizations (including our very own Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation), which will reduce the effects of climate change on wildlife. He will work with state fish and game agencies to aid their conservation efforts and teach our young people about hunting and fishing, hunter safety and the basic principles of fish and wildlife management.

We urge Montanans across the state to join us and over 50 other members of Sportsmen for Obama in supporting Obama in the June 3 primary. You can be confident that you are voting for a leader who understands and respects our rights and traditions as sportsmen. We know that under his leadership, we will be free to maintain our culture and preserve our rights. It is our responsibility to make sure our leaders give us the opportunity to pass down these rich traditions to our children, and that is why we support Sen. Barack Obama.

Steve Doherty is a former Senate Minority Leader and chairman of the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission. Jim Posewitz is a lifelong sportsman, member of Helena Hunters and Anglers Association and retired biologist with Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks. Land Tawney is a lifelong, avid sportsman, and Rep. Kendall Van Dyk is Democratic chair of the Montana Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus.

Obama's response to Cheney endorsing McCain

2008-11-04T11:34:00.000-08:00

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/obama_on_cheneys_endorsement_o.php

I'd like to congratulate Senator McCain on this endorsement because he really earned it. That endorsement didn't come easy. Senator McCain had to vote 90 percent of the time with George Bush and Dick Cheney to get it. He served as Washington's biggest cheerleader for going to war in Iraq, and supports economic policies that are no different from the last eight years. So Senator McCain worked hard to get Dick Cheney's support.
But here's my question for you, Colorado: do you think Dick Cheney is delighted to support John McCain because he thinks John McCain's going to bring change? Do you think John McCain and Dick Cheney have been talking about how to shake things up, and get rid of the lobbyists and the old boys club in Washington?

Colorado, we know better. After all, it was just a few days ago that Senator McCain said that he and President Bush share a "common philosophy." And we know that when it comes to foreign policy, John McCain and Dick Cheney share a common philosophy that thinks that empty bluster from Washington will fix all of our problems, and a war without end in Iraq is the way to defeat Osama bin Laden and the al Qaeda terrorists who are in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

So George Bush may be in an undisclosed location, but Dick Cheney's out there on the campaign trail because he'd be delighted to pass the baton to John McCain. He knows that with John McCain you get a twofer: George Bush's economic policy and Dick Cheney's foreign policy -- but that's a risk we cannot afford to take.

Dennis Hopper

2008-11-04T10:42:00.000-08:00

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/04/dennis-hopper-i-voted-for_n_140940.html

Hopper said that he had been a Republican since Reagan, but the choice Sarah Palin pushed him over the edge and he voted for Barack Obama instead. He then told a lovely anecdote of Obama saying kind words to him about his mother's death once.

Video at the link.

Eiffel Tower, Paris

2008-11-04T10:25:00.000-08:00

Steven Colbert, Comedy Central

2008-11-03T17:22:00.000-08:00

Andrew Sullivan

2008-11-03T14:12:00.000-08:00

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/11/barack-obama-fo.html

03 Nov 2008 12:30 pm

Barack Obama For President

On a spectacular September morning more than seven years ago, our world changed. I remain one of those who believe that that day remains indelible, and its lesson unforgettable. The civilized democratic world came under attack from a small but lethal band of religious fanatics bent on destroying free societies, and, more terrifyingly, eager to get their hands on weapons of mass destruction that could make 9/11 look like a dry run.

We are still under attack.

This confluence of fundamentalism and lethal technology is the greatest danger of our time. And in the last seven years, the threat has not abated. Al Qaeda remains at large, and the very top leadership that planned and executed 9/11 is alive. They have reconstituted a base of sorts in Pakistan. They have scored several major propaganda victories - from Abu Ghraib to Guantanamo Bay to trapping most of the US military in an unending counter-insurgency in one country where al Qaeda was weak before 2002, Iraq. Islamist factions in Pakistan's government are horrifyingly close to nuclear technology. Iran has gained in power and influence in the Middle East and its ability to launch and use nuclear weapons is much greater than it was on 9/11. At its best, the Iraq war will lead to a fractured petro-state, closely allied with Iran, beset by constant infighting and terrorism. At its worst, Iraq will keep over 100,000 young Americans trapped there for the rest of our lives. The war in Afghanistan against the Taliban is at a seven year nadir.

Now the really bad news: the view of co-presidents Bush and Cheney is that this is a war that can and should be controlled by only one branch of government and a war in which the job of the citizenry is to shop. It is a global war where force of arms remains too often a first resort and in which talking to our enemies is regarded as "the white flag of surrender," instead of another tool at our disposal. It is a war where the American government has alienated - in some cases deeply - democratic allies whose police work and intelligence we desperately need. I do not doubt that military force is part of the mix to defeat this threat. (Like everyone else, I'm heartened that general Petraeus has introduced some minimal intelligence into the occupation of Iraq, although I fear it has merely made our presence more protracted and our withdrawal more difficult.) But the crudeness with which military force has been deployed, the absence of strategy or even due diligence in the execution of the long war, and the massive public relations blunders which have led the United States to lose a propaganda war against a bunch of murderous, medieval loons are unforgivable.

These mistakes were compounded - and in large part created - by what I believe will one day be seen as the core event of the last eight years: the collapse of constitutional order and the rule of law fomented in a mixture of hubris and laziness by the president himself. It is now indisputable that the president and vice-president of the United States engineered a de facto coup against the constitution after 9/11, declaring themselves above any law, any treaty, and any basic moral norm in their misguided mission to rid the world of evil. This blog has watched this process with increasing dismay - and watched several attempts to bring the US back to sanity foiled by a relentless and unhinged vice-president's office.

Cheney and Bush, unlike any presidency in American history, have dangerously pushed constitutional government to the brink of collapse. They did not merely assert a unified executive in which actions and regulations reserved to the executive branch were kept free from Congressional and judicial tampering. That is a perfectly defensible position, especially in wartime. They did not merely act in the immediate wake of an emergency to protect American citizens swiftly - again a perfectly legitimate use of executive power, unhampered by Congress or courts. They declared such power to be unlimited; they asserted also that it was as permanent as the emergency they declared; they claimed their dictatorial powers were inherent in the presidency itself, and above any legal constraints; they ordered their own lawyers to provide retroactive and laughable legal immunity for their crimes; they by-passed all the usual and necessary checks within the executive branch to ensure prudence and legality and self-doubt in the conduct of a war; they asserted that emergency war powers applied to the territory of the United States itself; they claimed the right to seize anyone - anyone, citizen or not - they deemed an "enemy combatant," to hold them indefinitely with no due process and to torture them until they became incoherent, broken, brutalized shells of human beings, if they survived at all. They did this to the guilty and they did this to the innocent. But they also had no way of reliably knowing which was which and who was who. Never before in wartime has the precious, sacred inheritance of free people been treated with such contempt by the leaders of the democratic West.

They seized countless individuals with no trials and no hearings. They tortured dozens to death. They subjected many more to some of the worst psychological torture techniques devised by Communist totalitarians and the worst physical suffering devised by the Gestapo. They crossed lines no American president had ever crossed before. They withdrew the US from the Geneva Conventions - and did so secretly. They tapped American's phones without warrants, and forced many of their randomly grabbed prisoners into the black hole of insanity. They set up secret sites in former Soviet gulags to torture their victims. They single-handedly devastated America's reputation for human rights and the rule of law in the minds of the vast majority of people in other Western democracies, let alone the developing world, let alone the millions of Muslims across the Middle East who now suspect that America is not really better than their own thugocracies, that America also tortures when it wants to, that the shining city on a hill is actually a place where men above the law can do anything they want to other human beings in their custody.

No economic mismanagement can compare with this attack on the basic institutions of our democracy and the constitution. No incompetence in conducting an occupation can be deemed comparable with this level of criminality and indecency. No reaction to a natural disaster, however hapless and negligent, is as grave as this crime. No financial crisis eclipses it in gravity. The president's oath is to protect the constitution from enemies foreign and domestic. Instead, the president himself became an enemy to the constitution he swore to uphold.

This is the depth of the predicament the United States is in. The Islamist threat remains; but the Constitution is in deep disrepair, the military stretched to breaking point, the national debt doubled, and America's reputation in terrible shape. More important, the president and vice-president deeply damaged the reliability and integrity of America's intelligence services, creating a self-perpetuating loop of phony intelligence procured by torture which then justified more torture which led to worse intelligence. It will be decades before we learn the full extent of the damage Bush and Cheney have done to the country's ability to find out what the enemy is really up to, how much risk these sadists and goons have subjected us to, how much damage to this country they may have facilitated by filling intelligence with the garbage always created by torture. We do know that their policy has led to just one successful prosecution - and that many guilty figures will escape justice because torture has tainted the legal process beyond repair.

My great fear since 2004 is that this could have gotten even worse. Another attack and the abuse of power could have become much worse. A Romney or a Giuliani, empowered by religious fanaticism and a worship of state power, could have taken us down a path much darker than even the Cheney-Addington-Yoo cul-de-sac. Ron Paul emerged as the one Republican prepared to defend the rule of law, the Constitution and habeas corpus in the primaries. But, in the end, McCain emerged by default, a torture victim himself, and a critic of some aspects of the conduct of the war. But we saw in 2006 that, when push came to shove, even McCain acquiesced to the legalization of America's use of the very same torture techniques once used against him. And in this campaign, we have seen how no Republican candidate can escape the logic of bigotry, fanaticism and xenophobia that now grips and motivates the Republican party base. We have also learned, much more importantly, that McCain would appoint Justices to the Supreme Court who would acquiesce to and constitutionally entrench the dictatorial presidency that Bush-Cheney believe in as loyally as Roberts, Alito, Thomas and Scalia. That means we are one vote away from the court ever restraining this unchecked executive. It doesn't matter who that executive is and what party he or she belongs to. What matters is that the controls upon it - controls critical to the endurance of constitutional balance and individual freedom in America - have been frayed to the breaking point. There is no greater cause right now than repairing that.

If I were to give one reason why I believe electing Barack Obama is essential tomorrow, it would be an end to this dark, lawless period in American constitutional government. The domestic cultural and political reasons for an Obama presidency remain as strong as they were when I wrote "Goodbye To All That" over a year ago. His ability to get us past the culture war has been proven in this campaign, in the generation now coming of age that will elect him if they turn out, in Obama's staggering ability not to take the bait. His fiscal policies are too liberal for me - I don't believe in raising taxes, I believe in cutting entitlements for the middle classes as the way to fiscal balance. I don't believe in "progressive taxation", I support a flat tax. I don't want to give unions any more power. I'm sure there will be moments when a Democratic Congress will make me wince. But I also understand that money has to come from somewhere, and it will not come in any meaningful measure from freezing pork or the other transparent gimmicks advertized in advance by McCain. McCain is not serious on spending. But he is deadly serious in not touching taxes. So, on the core question of debt, on bringing America back to fiscal reason, Obama is still better than McCain. If I have to take an ideological hit to head toward fiscal solvency, I'll put country before ideology.

But none of this compares to the task of restoring the rule of law and Constitutional balance. Unlike McCain, Obama has never wavered on torture or habeas corpus or on keeping the executive branch under the law. His deep understanding and awareness of the Constitution eclipses McCain's. Coming from the opposing party, he will also be able to restore confidence that what lies within America's secret government - the one constructed by Bush and Cheney beyond any accountability, law or morality - will be ended or cleaned up. He can restore critically needed trust again - and force the Democratic party to take responsibility for a war which we all need to own, and take responsibility for, again.

We cannot win this war without regaining our democratic soul, ending torture, and returning to lawful governance. But these things won't win the war either. On that, we have a perilous task ahead. I don't know how Obama will be able to get out of Iraq in his first term. I fear that Bush and Cheney have made withdrawal deliberately difficult if not impossible. I fear the same in Afghanistan. I don't know how Obama will handle Iran, given the power that Bush and Cheney have ceded to the Islamist regime there, and the danger of a pre-emptive strike before Obama even gets inaugurated. But I do know that he will handle these wars with reason, with prudence and with care. Those are three qualities absent from the White House for eight years. And I do know that Obama's very person, and what he symbolizes, will do more to restore America's image and repair our global public relations than any single measure any new administration will be able to accomplish.

The truth is: we are in a war for the future of human civilization. We are fighting for a world in which destructive technology need not collide with fierce religious fundamentalism to annihilate us all; for a world in which dialogue across cultures and religions and regions (even within America) is essential if we are to survive. We need to win the argument in the developing world; we need to reach out and persuade the Muslim middle - especially the next generation in Iran and Iraq and Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and Turkey and Western Europe - about the virtues of democracy and constitutionalism. We cannot do that if we trash our own values ourselves. It is self-defeating. We cannot be a beacon to the world until we have reformed ourselves. In this war, we are also fighting for an America that does not lose its soul in fighting our enemy. Just because we are fighting evil does not mean we cannot ourselves succumb to it. That is what my Christian faith teaches me - that no nation has a monopoly on virtue, and that every generation has to earn its own integrity. I fear and believe we have given away far too much - and that, while this loss is permanent, it can nonetheless be mitigated by a new start, a new direction, a new statement that the America the world once knew and loved is back.

It will not be easy. The world will soon remember why it resents America as well as loves it. But until this unlikely fellow with the funny ears and strange name and exotic biography emerged on the scene, I had begun to wonder if it was possible at all. I had almost given up hope, and he helped restore it. That is what is stirring out there; and although you are welcome to mock me for it, I remain unashamed. As someone once said, in the unlikely story of America, there is never anything false about hope. Obama, moreover, seems to bring out the best in people, and the calmest, and the sanest. He seems to me to have a blend of Midwestern good sense, an intuitive understanding of the developing world that is as much our future now as theirs', an analyst's mind and a poet's tongue. He is human. He is flawed. He will make mistakes. His passivity and ambiguity are sometimes weaknesses as well as strengths.

But there is something about his rise that is also supremely American, a reminder of why so many of us love this country so passionately and are filled with such grief at what has been done to it and in its name. I endorse Barack Obama because I will not give up on America, because I believe in America, and in her constitution and decency and character and strength.

And the world needs that America now as much as it ever has. Can we start that healing, that rebirth, tomorrow?

Yes. We. Can.

Permalink :: Trackback (0) :: Sphere It! ::

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2224950/35266889

FL, South Florida Times, never endorsed before

2008-11-03T13:16:00.000-08:00

http://www.sfltimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2068&Itemid=42

South Florida Times endorses Obama for president

http://www.sfltimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2068&Itemid=42

BY SOUTH FLORIDA TIMES

The South Florida Times has never endorsed a candidate for political office. As the newspaper continues to grow, we aim to establish an editorial board that will craft meaningful, insightful recommendations to help readers make the best choices.

That said, after much internal discussion, we have decided that this year’s presidential election is of such enormous significance that we cannot allow ourselves to sit silently on the sidelines while anticipating our growth into this important role.

The United States is experiencing a devastating economic crisis, is in two wars that have marred its global image, and is under the control of a government system that has failed to protect its citizens from runaway greed.

Considering all of these challenges, the choice of a leader who will usher in needed, fundamental change is clear. The South Florida Times endorses Illinois Sen. Barack Obama for president.

As a premiere media outlet focused on the African-American and Caribbean communities, we are keenly aware of the responsibility – and the risk – of endorsing the first black person who has earned the presidential nomination of a major political party.

The risk for us is that – like Gen. Colin Powell – we are presumed to endorse the candidate who shares our skin color, regardless of our independent ability to reason and decide for ourselves who we think is best.

We accept this risk and responsibility, and invite our readers into the logic behind our position. We would no more endorse a black candidate who is unfit for duty than a large, metropolitan daily newspaper would endorse a candidate solely because he is white.

We believe that Obama’s promise of hope and change, tempered by his ability to calmly exercise sound judgment, and the assemblage of a quality team of advisers on economic and foreign policies, give him the decisive edge over Arizona Sen. John McCain.

While McCain has run a campaign based on historic divisions between political parties, classes and – subtly – between races of Americans, Obama has sought to unify the nation around a singular purpose: That, as Americans, we can build a better future for ourselves.

ECONOMY

Obama has shown a greater grasp of how to fix the nation’s economic woes. He has assembled an impressive team that seeks to foster economic equity. He would expand healthcare to all Americans, and seek better regulation of the financial markets that created the economic crisis in the first place. His plan for modest cuts to most taxpayers, and raising taxes on those with the highest incomes, would shrink the expanding gap between most Americans and the wealthiest one percent.

Obama would also raise the minimum wage, allow workers more opportunity to organize labor unions, and create more opportunities for education.

By contrast, McCain’s biggest proposed reforms to the economy are eliminating pork-barrel spending – a small fraction of the national budget – and cutting taxes. Also, some of McCain’s economic policies appear to have shifted with the political winds: He once opposed President George W. Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy, and said they could harm the middle class. Now, he proposes tax cuts that would benefit the wealthiest Americans while potentially worsening the nation’s financial crisis.

NATIONAL SECURITY

Bush sold the Iraq war to Congress on false information, continues to spend billions on the war in a country that has an enormous surplus, and has allowed the terrorists who plotted the
Sept. 11 attacks to remain on the loose. McCain would continue to fight the war in Iraq while neglecting the war in Afghanistan, where the Taliban and Al Qaeda reside, and would continue overlooking a potential terrorist threat from Pakistan.

Obama, who has always opposed the Iraq war, has a plan for quickly withdrawing the troops from there, while strengthening the military presence where it is needed on the terrorist front in Afghanistan.

While McCain makes the argument that he has a clear edge in foreign policy experience, his selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who has no foreign policy experience at all, diminishes that argument. Palin is not ready to step into the role of commander in chief should serious illness or death befall McCain. By contrast, Obama’s selection of Sen. Joseph Biden, a veteran foreign policy expert, strengthens Obama’s credentials.

The McCain campaign has blasted Sen. Obama for agreeing to meet with leaders who disagree with American foreign policy. Yet we believe that America should improve its image around the world – where possible – with diplomacy instead of discord, with conversation rather than confrontation, and with harmony where there is hostility. Obama already has a large amount of support throughout the world – highlighted by huge rallies around him during his recent travels abroad – that would help remove the blemishes left by the Bush administration.

Obama, as leader of the Harvard Law Review, garnered praise from conservative thinkers for his willingness to listen to what they had to say, and build a consensus, even if he did not necessarily agree with them. Building a greater conversation around critical issues can help the world solve its most pressing problems.

SUPREME COURT

Our next president can either push the U.S. Supreme Court toward the conservative right or guide it to a more balanced leaning in the selection of judges. On the issue of women’s reproductive rights, McCain has said he would never appoint a judge who believes in a woman’s choice concerning abortion. Obama has said it is the woman’s right and responsibility to reach her own moral and ethical conclusion about this important decision.

LEGITIMATE CRITICISM

Obama can be justly criticized for positioning himself as a supporter of campaign finance reform, only to back out of the public financing system when he saw the enormous sums he could raise over the Internet.

Also, he has been not been fully forthcoming about how many of his promises can be fulfilled in a huge national financial crisis.

While these are legitimate areas of policy for which the McCain camp could have rightly assailed Obama, they have instead turned most of their attention to other, frivolous issues that weakened their stance.

NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNING

McCain and Palin have attacked Obama using tactics that unfairly sought to alienate this native son from America, cast him as a Muslim-in-hiding though he has always professed his Christianity, and asserted his allegiance to former domestic terrorists who committed their most heinous acts when the candidate was only 8 years old.

The “Swift Boat’’ politics of fear and divisiveness that helped George W. Bush defeat John Kerry in 2004 must not be allowed to influence this enormous moment in history. America has a great opportunity to show that it has evolved beyond its racial and ideological divisions to embrace all people and create a land for everyone, as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.’’

EMBRACING OF HISTORY

Obama embraces his bi-racial family history, having been raised by a white mother from Kansas and his white grandparents. He later bonded with relatives from his father’s side in Kenya, where he is greatly adored. His very life represents the kind of unity that is possible for all of America.

McCain, on the other hand, has refused to fully acknowledge the black relatives who are descended from slaves his ancestors once owned, as first reported in the South Florida Times.

This represents a missed opportunity. McCain should have embraced his family history – and thus a piece of American history – on both sides of the racial divide. He should have highlighted this important part of his family story rather than dodge his biracial family reunions in rural Mississippi. This would have allowed McCain to show true presidential leadership in an America that – while acknowledging its darkest period – can shine the light of hope on a brighter future.

LEGACY OF HOPE

More than 40 years after King was assassinated for his famous dream of hope in a better America, the country now stands poised to realize its full potential.

We urge you to vote for Obama not because he is the first serious black candidate for the Oval Office, but because he is simply the best applicant for the job.

Obama represents the greatest hope for a better America, and the change this country so desperately needs.

Newsday.com

2008-11-03T12:42:00.000-08:00

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vppres025907368nov02,0,3064317,print.story

Newsday.com

THE NEWSDAY EDITORIAL BOARD ENDORSES: For president

Barack Obama has the vision and the judgment to lead the country now

November 2, 2008

Leading the nation through the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, two wars and excruciating anxiety about what the future holds will demand intellect, judgment, pragmatism and the more intangible ability to nourish the American spirit.

The need to make fundamental changes in how we power our cars, heat our homes, pay our doctors, earn our livings and secure our retirements is unnerving. The times demand a president who can see promise beyond the peril and articulate that vision for the rest of us. We believe this profile best fits one candidate in this race for the White House: Democrat Barack Obama.

In this marathon of a campaign, Obama has shown the discipline and demeanor for the job. He has articulated a more compelling vision and strategy for the nation than has Republican John McCain, at a time when both are desperately needed.

Obama has railed eloquently against the politics of fear and ideological combat, and promoted inclusiveness and cooperation. He has a strong grasp of the nation's economic problems, a more urgent commitment to the green energy revolution and a better plan for expanding access to health care. On issues such as Iraq, taxes and trade, he should practice the bipartisanship he promises, but has yet to demonstrate, by remaining open to alternative views. Still, on balance, Obama offers the better way forward.

When he launched his improbable presidential run, early impressions of the Illinois senator didn't go much beyond a man with limited experience who could deliver a great speech. Critics derided his ability to charge up a crowd with soaring rhetoric, calling it just talk. But it's more than that. Obama has an uncommon ability to explain and inspire. Those are vital components of national leadership as we struggle to understand and tame the complex economic forces eating away at the value of our homes and nest eggs, and making jobs and credit harder to come by.

Obama's relative inexperience was one reason we didn't endorse him in the Democratic primary, and it remains a concern: He's only three years removed from the Illinois State Senate. We are also critical of his decision to abandon a pledge to tap public campaign financing for his presidential run.

But organizing and running a national campaign is a tough test of executive ability - one that Obama has passed impressively. We believe that he will be able to draw from his campaign and professional experience to hone conflicting ideas and philosophies into sharp policy prescriptions on the challenges the next president will face over the coming four years.

Energy

Obama demonstrated a noteworthy, clear-eyed approach to this issue last summer, when gas prices skyrocketed. As McCain and others called for a popular, temporary suspension of the federal gas tax, Obama resisted the urge to pander. His view - that trying to ease the pain of price hikes wouldn't work and would retard efforts to wean the nation off fossil fuels - wasn't popular. But he was right. And he was willing to take the political heat to advance the nation's long-term interest.

Obama understands the urgency of making the country less dependent on foreign oil, for both economic and national security reasons. He supports an all-out effort to develop sustainable, alternative fuels and green technology. He also has acknowledged the need to expand the use of nuclear power, and has reluctantly come to accept the need to drill more for oil here at home.

McCain also supports developing alternative fuels and technology and expanding the use of nuclear power. And he says that the push for energy independence should proceed on all fronts. But he elevated increased domestic drilling to the top of his energy agenda when he made "drill baby drill" a campaign slogan, even though more domestic drilling won't do much to lower gas prices or anything to advance the key goal of energy independence.

Taxes

Given the high-decibel debate over taxes, you'd think there were huge differences between what the candidates offer. There aren't, and in fact, neither plan may be realistic, given the deficit and the economic slowdown. Both Obama and McCain have proposed trillions of dollars in tax cuts over the next decade - both for individuals and, in different ways, for small businesses. They agree on delivering tax relief for the middle class, defined as taxpayers earning less than $250,000 a year. But that's where Obama would draw the line.

McCain would extend the tax rates for everyone, including those earning over a quarter-million a year, and add new corporate tax cuts for good measure.

On Long Island, with our high cost of living, close to 10 percent of households take in $250,000 or more. That's much higher than the national average of 2 percent. So some small business owners would be among those whose taxes Obama would raise. That's of considerable concern locally, because it would hamper their ability to create jobs, thus slowing the Island's economic growth. This is a case where one size doesn't fit all.

Trade

Both Obama and McCain recognize the importance of free trade to the nation's economy. But while McCain's enthusiasm for trade agreements between the United States and other countries is unbridled, Obama seems conflicted. That's troubling.

Obama should reconsider his early campaign pledge to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement in an effort to add stronger worker and environmental protections to that long-settled deal with Mexico and Canada. Free trade is a net plus for the U.S. economy. It would be a mistake to throttle back, particularly now, when the nation is suffering such economic distress. The better approach would be to do more for displaced workers here, such as expanding opportunities for retraining, a worthwhile component of McCain's plan.

Iraq

Both candidates favor a muscular foreign policy, although Obama would be more likely to make the military option a last resort. But on Iraq, they have real differences. Obama has promised to responsibly but quickly withdraw most U.S. troops from the country on a set timetable. McCain resists that plan, which he unambiguously calls surrender.

McCain championed last year's surge - a big, temporary increase in the number of troops in Iraq that has played a significant role in reducing the violence dogging that nation. There's a lesson in that for Obama, who has been reluctant to acknowledge its success. It would be wiser to allow facts on the ground to determine when U.S. troops are withdrawn - although the Iraqi government, which is pressing for a fixed timeline, may have more to say about when the occupation ends than the next American president.

Health care

Here, Obama and McCain offer fundamentally different approaches. Both acknowledge that the employer-based system of health insurance is disappearing. But the alternative McCain favors is a deregulated, individual insurance market in which consumers, armed with a tax credit, buy their own coverage.

Obama wants to give government a bigger role. He would prohibit "cherry picking," so insurers couldn't routinely deny coverage to people who are sick. And he would establish what he calls the National Health Insurance Exchange, a group that would allow individuals and small businesses to select a plan offering a government-negotiated level of coverage, and buy it at the group rate from a participating private insurance company.

Obama's plan, which includes subsidies based on income, would cover millions more of the uninsured than McCain's approach, and cost little more. Unfortunately, neither plan would do enough to control rising costs, an even more difficult problem than the need to expand access.

Moving forward

It won't be easy for Obama to translate his transformative vision of post-partisanship into concrete change in how business is done in Washington. Particularly if Democrats control the House and Senate as well as the White House. The impulse to ride roughshod over a Republican minority may be hard to resist, but Obama must. And he should stand up to his party's congressional leaders to avoid partisan excesses.

A commitment by Obama to do that is a necessary first step toward post-partisan policy-making. The second would be for him to surround himself with top-notch advisers and a cabinet peopled by the best and brightest, from both parties. He should embrace good ideas, no matter which party produced them, and make competence, not party loyalty, the prime criterion for appointments.

For much of his decades-long career in Washington, John McCain exhibited just that kind of principled bipartisanship. For the good of the country, he bucked his party and joined with Democrats to tackle contentious issues such as campaign finance, immigration and taxes. We cited his "courage, integrity and willingness to take principled and consistent stands" when we endorsed McCain in the Republican primary in February.

But that man got lost in the general campaign. Candidate McCain abandoned Senator McCain's support for comprehensive immigration reform, saying he would no longer even vote for the bill he had previously sponsored. As a candidate, he embraced the tax cuts of President George W. Bush that as a senator he had derided as unaffordable.

While insisting he would always put country first, candidate McCain impulsively picked as his running mate Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who is not ready to assume the duties of the presidency.

And when the nation was hit by the financial storm, McCain appeared rudderless. He declared the economic fundamentals sound one day and wailed the next that the financial markets were in crisis. Obama didn't have answers, either. But he was calm and deliberative, and helped the process by laying out conditions that an acceptable deal should meet.

McCain has been an outstanding public servant. He responded heroically when held captive in Vietnam. He clearly loves his country. But during this campaign he hasn't given the nation any compelling reason to make him president.

Obama has advanced big themes at a time when the nation faces big challenges. We believe he is ready to be the president of the United States. This editorial board endorses Barack Obama.

McCain Chairman, Florida University

2008-11-03T12:17:00.000-08:00

http://www.alligator.org/articles/2008/11/03/news/campus/081102_biden.txt

“I wanted to see the next vice president of the United States,” said Josh Simmons, Gators for McCain chairman.

Simmons said he voted for Obama about two weeks ago.

“I’ve seen a different John McCain than the one I signed up to work for,” he said.

Simmons said he submitted his resignation Sunday night and will no longer be chairman for the group, which has more than 1,000 members.

“I expect them to be incredibly pissed off,” he said.

LA, Shreveport Times

2008-11-03T11:58:00.000-08:00

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081026/OPINION03/810250321/1058

October 26, 2008

Barack Obama for President

The average American looks at the national landscape for the next four years and wonders why anyone would want to be president.

A bear of an economic implosion robs Americans of their retirement funds, access to credit and job certainty.

Our national debt and deficit are thus exacerbated at a time when our nation finally seems ready to confront the medical care gap for 47 million Americans without health insurance.

The middle class, any healthy economy's bulwark, continues to lose ground while Americans of all classes have been paying dearly for the lack of a sane and sustainable energy policy.

Overseas, we search for a responsible way out of Iraq without leaving behind a chaotic breeding ground for the very threat we were told our troops were eradicating. Nearby, Osama bin Laden presumably continues to live out his miserable life without facing the justice he deserves while providing an incendiary icon to terrorists everywhere.

Into the breach, our political system has yielded two presidential candidates of vastly different experiences. One is a seasoned lawmaker who unfortunately abandoned his trademark independence for political expediency. The other is a candidate who may have fewer years in the public eye but who offers the best chance for a fresh start for our nation both at home and overseas.

The Times today recommends Barack Obama to be the next President of the United States.

Obama initially made his mark with the American public as an eloquent communicator and gifted politician. For almost two years his campaign has reflected grace and poise, whether inspiring thousands who flock to his rallies or addressing the blistering attacks launched from both inside and outside his party. He is reminiscent of past gifted leaders, whether FDR or Ronald Reagan, who were able to both project calm in uncertain times and to exhort Americans toward our potential to build a better future.

But the presidency demands not just image and rhetoric but substance. We believe Obama can deliver. In his first major decision as the presumptive Democratic nominee, Obama demonstrated more mature judgment than his opponent in choosing a running mate. In selecting a long-time U.S. Senator, foreign policy veteran Joe Biden, Obama answered the experience issue and reassured Americans they would have a vice president on standby who understands the levers of power.

Obama's controlled style also makes him the best choice for succeeding in a new political understanding that our problems can't be solved by distrust and disrespect, but through collaboration and compromise.

Take health care. Obama's plan to insure all children and to expand worker access to employee or employee-supported national health plans seems more workable. His opponent's tax credit approach that would also impose taxes on health benefits is fraught with the potential for unintended consequences. Neither plan likely can pass muster in Congress without adjustments.

Overhauling tax policies also will require tough legislative work and presidential leadership, particularly with the need to pay down our mounting debt while paying for the spending proposals of whichever candidate is elected to the White House. On tax relief, we favor Obama's approach to ease the strain on middle income families and the working poor over his opponent's embrace of permanent tax cuts for the wealthy.

Obama "would cut taxes by greater amounts than McCain for all families earning less than $250,000 a year, or for over 85 percent of the country," writes Dr. Eamon Kelly, a professor and president emeritus of Tulane University. "For Americans making over $250,000, Obama would return their tax rates to the 2000 level, which was less than that under the senior President Bush. In dollar terms, McCain would cut taxes for the top 1 percent of incomes by $125,000, while Obama would raise their taxes by around $19,000."

The next president will inherit a $700 billion bailout plan for financial markets, but adjustments will continue to be needed as the Wall Street meltdown filters down to Main Street, not to mention 70th Street and Airline Drive. Obama already has proposed giving employers a $3,000 tax credit for each new hire to encourage job creation. He earlier proposed spending $50 billion to help states and speed construction of roads and other infrastructure projects that create jobs.

On energy, Obama offers an idealistic approach tempered with pragmatism. Lifting bans on offshore drilling should be paired with commitments to clean energy, greater efficiency and renewable sources.

But while focusing on our huge domestic issues, the next president must repair our damaged international reputation starting with a repudiation of the "you're either with us or against us" approach to foreign affairs. The recent Wall Street meltdown has also shaken financial confidence in the United States as the world's economic driver, putting even more emphasis on the need for diplomacy. Obama has the skills and worldview to accumulate international goodwill rather than to alienate.

As for Iraq, Obama wants to pull out all combat troops in 16 months with some forces left both to protect our embassy and as a counterterrorism measure. Yet he doesn't shrink from aggressive pursuit of terrorists in Afghanistan or pushing Pakistan to eliminate safe havens.

These are all huge issues that require hard choices and inspired leadership. Of the two major candidates remaining, we believe Obama to be the most presidential, the leader with the best chance to discard mistakes of the past and craft a new vision for the future.

US Recall News

2008-11-03T11:21:00.000-08:00

http://www.usrecallnews.com/2008/11/we-endorse-barack-obama-for-president-here%E2%80%99s-why.html

We Endorse Barack Obama for President: Here’s Why

November 3, 2008

Although our tempers may flare from time to time when the US government doesn’t do their job of keeping dangerous products off the shelves, or when drug companies ignore FDA reports and end up putting thousands of lives at risk - when it comes to choosing a side in the great Republican VS Democrat debate, we like to refrain. We like to think that some of the information found on this website can save lives. And it is therefore important that we do not knowingly alienate any one of our readers. That is why my decision as Editor to endorse Barack Obama on this website was not made lightly. However, this election is too important for us to ignore on this website.

First, I’d like to say that I think John McCain is a genuinely good man who has the best interest of the United States in his heart. I think McCain would make a much better President than George W. Bush. And no, I’m not about to pull a Joe Biden and proceed to slander McCain after commenting on what a great person he is. But I also think Barack Obama would make a better President than John McCain, and here’s why:

The Economy

I run a small business that does pretty well by most standards; and I also have a job that pays pretty well by most standards. When I go to a bipartisan source like The Tax Foundation I can find out that my tax rate would be slightly lower under Obama’s plan than McCain’s. Assuming that both candidates were able to get their budgets passed and tax plans approved as they are presented (doubtful for either of them) it is true that – under Obama’s plan - anyone making under $200,000 would get a tax break, those making between $200,000 and $250,000 would see their taxes unchanged and those making over $250,000 would see a tax increase in that the Bush-implemented tax CUTS they currently enjoy will be taken away. McCain, on the other hand, wants to make those Bush tax cuts permanent. Let’s be clear about this: Those tax cuts go to the richest people in America while the middle class is shrinking, jobs are being lost, CEOs are stealing pensions, homes are being foreclosed and the tax payers are STILL being asked to shell out billions in bailout money because the same people who were given tax breaks were gambling on subprime loans.

It all comes down to the decades-old debate on trickle-down economics VS trickle-up economics. The term “trickle down economics” has been attributed to humorist Will Rogers, who said during the Great Depression that “money was all appropriated for the top in hopes that it would trickle down to the needy.” Isn’t it ironic that he was describing the cause of the Great Depression, yet some politicians continue to tout this economic theory as being something that actually works? And here we are again, after eight years of tax cuts that were given to the richest of Americans in hopes that the money would find its way down to the rest of us… where has it gotten us this time? John McCain wants to make those tax cuts permanent (call his campaign center and ask them if you don’t believe me). Obama wants to take them away and give them to the middle class. Obama’s tax plan is better for our economy, and that is why he wins my vote on the issue. (Not to mention his plans to create a new energy economy and use biofuel, solar and wind energy technology research, production and installation as a means to create new, high-paying US jobs.)

By the way, from current campaign rhetoric you’d think Obama was going to “redistribute” your money to lazy bums who sit around watching Oprah all day. Those people don’t pay federal taxes because they don’t make an income – so to say that the middle class tax cut proposed by Obama would be doing such a thing is ludicrous.

The War

For those of you who are old enough to remember the Vietnam War you may be excused for thinking you have a chronic case of Déjà vu. While it is true that we need to get out of Iraq as soon as we RESPONSIBLY can, it is also true that neither candidate has really given a detailed description of how he plans to do so. That is to be expected, given matters of national security. Yes, John McCain served admirably and we all owe him respect for that. I certainly do respect him for that and many other reasons, but I also know that he – unlike Barack Obama – voted for the war in Iraq. Obama knew the War on Terrorism had nothing to do with Iraq. He knew that not one single, solitary terrorist on any of those planes on 9/11 was from Iraq. Fifteen of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, two from the United Arab Emirates, one from Egypt, and one from Lebanon. Again – none from Iraq.

When it comes to war I care more about a President’s judgment than anything else, even experience. He decides whether we go to war or not. Tactical decisions are certainly discussed with him on a macro scale – being the Commander-in-Chief after all – but day-to-day combat decisions are made by brass on the ground and people like lifelong career generals. In deciding whether we should go to war in Iraq, John McCain said Yes. Barack Obama said No, we should instead be stepping up our efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan where Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda hold power, terrorize the people and plot their next attacks. Obama has proved that his judgment during times of crisis is better than John McCain, and that is why I’m voting for him.

Health Care

As you may have guessed from visiting this site, I care about health. It is of my opinion that health care is Right, not a privilege. Having traveled to and lived in other countries like Canada and Australia, I can say from first-hand experience that it took me less time to see a doctor than it does here in the US. That argument against universal health care always gets under my skin when it is used by people who have never experienced it first-hand. That issue aside, however, Barack Obama’s plan for health care does not involve Big Government coming in and taking over the health care industry. There’s nothing wrong with a private health care industry – as long as they are regulated independently. The problem with our health care system is that big insurance and pharmaceutical companies are basically allowed, through lobbyists, to write their own rules. Other problems are the inefficiency of the paper-trail health care system and the inefficiency of a system where you can only see certain doctors after seeing other doctors and getting permission. If you know your foot is broken why should you have to go to your GP in order to get a referral to see an orthopedic doctor? If you make one single mistake in this whole process (and the onus is on you to know all of the rules in that health insurance contract) the insurance company will deny your claim and leave you with all of the bills. God forbid it is something serious like an incurable disease because A: You’re going to owe hundreds-of-thousands in medical bills and B: You’ll never get health insurance again without paying rates that, frankly, if you could afford you wouldn’t need insurance in the first place.

Obama’s plan isn’t for a big, government-run health care system that forces you to wait months to see a doctor. His plan is about optimizing the system, removing the loopholes that insurance and pharmaceutical companies use to screw patients over, and making insurance affordable to those who don’t get it through their jobs, medicaid or medicare. And that is why I’m voting for Barack Obama on Health Care..

Social Issues

Personally, I’m with the Libertarian or Independent voter when it comes to social issues like religion, abortion, gay marriage and the Second Amendment. I’m not going to write an essay on any of these since there is no way to reach consensus on any of them. But I WILL give an outline:

- Religion: Yes, we are a nation of “mostly” Christians but the idea that we were a nation created by Christians for Christians is a misnomer. We came here seeking religious freedom for everyone, no matter what religion, and that is precisely what I believe in. Just keep it out of my government. McCain, Obama and Biden all see eye-to-eye with me on this one, but I’m not so sure about Sarah Palin, and that is another reason I’m voting for Barack Obama.

- Abortion: Yes, I think an unborn baby is still a human being and killing a human being is murder. I have a right to choose a vasectomy, but I do not have a right to choose murder. However, I would NOT ask a victim of rape or incest – or someone who’s own life is on the line – to go through with a pregnancy. Here’s the problem with that: If you make it illegal “except” for those situations, how many innocent men would spend half their lives in prison because a one-night-stand wanted an excuse to have an abortion? NONE of the candidates see eye-to-eye with me on this one, and I don’t expect them to. I don’t expect you to either. But if I can live with a wife who doesn’t agree with me 100% on it, I can live with a President who doesn’t either. This particular decision is not factoring into my vote, but it does certainly make me wish we could vote for Supreme Court Judges.

- Gay Marriage: I’ll keep my view on this one simple: “Who Cares?” If it were up to me I’d let ‘em do it. They couldn’t do any worse harm to the “sanctity” of marriage than us heterosexuals have been doing to it since the dawn of time. For me at least, this is a non-issue. We have more important things to worry about right now.

- Second Amendment: Yes I absolutely believe in our right to bear arms. I do understand where Barack Obama is coming from in regard to his stance that I’ll paraphrase – “You don’t need an AK-47 to shoot a deer or protect your house.” Obama leads me to believe that he thinks semi-automatic handguns and shotguns are OK, but other guns should be illegal. I’m not sure if that is his official stance or not. I don’t think he’s actually given an “official policy” but I can say that I do not agree that protecting ourselves in our own homes and hunting for our own food are the only two reasons to bear arms in the Second Amendment. In-fact, neither of those reasons is there. Instead, a much more important reason was outlined which, in this day in age, would necessitate much more than just pistols and shotguns: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Not that he could even if he wanted to, but Obama is not going to infringe on the second amendment right. It is in the constitution and, yes it was recently challenged, but was upheld by the highest court in the land. Again, this is another non-issue for me because I don’t think the status-quo here is going to change under either of the Presidential nominees.

As you can see, I have thought out my position. Who hasn’t after two years of campaigning? I’m not a super-liberal Democrat. In-fact, I was a card-carrying independent until I had to register to vote in the Democratic primaries. We ride ATVs; I drive a pick-up; like to shoot guns… But an election for President of the United States isn’t about who you identify with. It’s about who the best person is for what is arguably the most important job in the world.

My mind was made up months ago. For the reasons above, I’ve voting for Barak Obama. I’ve also donated and volunteered for him because it is such an important election that I do not want to wonder Tuesday night if there was something else I could have done. And that is why I have written this; in hopes that maybe I could share my thought process with anyone who was still undecided to help show them how I went about deciding myself.

And for those of you who don’t feel like standing in line on Election Day, I understand. You’re busy; tired; overworked; stressed… But this is only ONE day out of the next four years and – THANK GOD – after Tuesday it will all be over with. I’m as tired of this whole election thing as everyone else is, but I would like to ask my friends, family, subscribers, and just those who happened to stop buy to please VOTE. It really is that important.

This has been an editorial and does not necessarily reflect the views of US Recall News, LLC or any of the regular US Recall News contributors.

Regards,
Editor-in-Chief
Everett Sizemore

Yale Daily News

2008-11-03T11:09:00.000-08:00

http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/26192

Yale Daily News

Published: Monday, November 3, 2008

News' View: Obama for president

Forty years ago today, the Rev. William Sloane Coffin Jr. ’49 DIV ’56 stood in Battell Chapel to address students about the upcoming presidential election. An unpopular and ill-conceived war raged overseas. Strife and division reigned at home.

“We try to play God in the world,” Coffin told students. “We must accept the guilt and shame of our Vietnam blunder before we can be humanized and act internationally with wisdom.”

The longtime University chaplain was speaking about another war in another era, but his message still resonates today.

We continue to pour billions of dollars each month into an ill-conceived war. The global community’s trust and respect for our country has suffered. We do not see that our nation and the world are any safer today than they were eight years ago. And this year’s financial collapse, topped off by the crash of formerly reliable banks and the stock market in just the past two months, makes the picture at home no more encouraging.

On the eve of that election, Coffin wasn’t pleased enough with any candidate to endorse; all he could say with certainty was that America needed to right itself.

Four decades later, as we head to the polls once again to choose a president — though for many of us, this will be the first time — we have a clear choice to make. We can continue the hubris, greed and intolerance of the last eight years. Or, as Coffin urged, we can choose humility, and the new direction that comes with it.

Barack Obama can lead us there.

* * *

“Change” became a tired cliché nearly a year ago, back when candidates like Hillary Clinton LAW ’73 and Mitt Romney piggybacked on the enthusiasm Obama had generated and also attempted to carry its banner. But, as our predecessors wrote in this space in February when they endorsed him in the Democratic primary, Obama’s promise of change has been unique, and his record has always made it plausible.

Both candidates are good men and great public servants. In John McCain, America can choose a man who has served this country as much as anyone can. His military service, his years spent as a prisoner of war and his distinguished career in Congress have won him the admiration and appreciation of his comrades, colleagues and constituents. He has won friends in both parties, and he has earned the favor of those in our profession who have covered him.

In Obama, we can choose an inspiring scholar and leader. In only two decades of adult life, he has worked as a community organizer, a constitutional law professor and a legislator at both the state and national level. He has been the president of the Harvard Law Review, the keynote speaker at the Democratic National Convention and the author of two best-selling books. He has shown political courage, personal fortitude and impressive intellect.

The greatest changes to expect from an Obama presidency will come simply from electing a candidate who does not see progressivism as a perversion. On almost every political issue the two parties debate today, it is clear how a Democratic president would break from the policies of the current Republican administration.

On numerous social issues, changes — and progress toward a fairer future — are long overdue. That in the 21st century we still debate whether to expand health care, protect a woman’s right to choose or grant equal rights for gays and lesbians is itself disconcerting. We look forward to the day when these are no longer debatable issues in our elections, or in our country. Obama can move us toward that day.

Similarly, we must now look to a Democrat to fix the financial mess allowed by the Republican mantra of deregulation. We trust a new president from the other party to introduce new policies, inspired by a different economic ideology, to revitalize our economy.

We must also have new leadership at the Pentagon and over military and foreign affairs. On the issue of national security, one party wants to stop fighting a costly war while the other seeks an indefinite occupation.

Given the consequences of eight years of Republican rule, we are naturally inclined to vote a Democrat into the White House this time around. But we are thrilled with the choice the Democrats have given us. We can endorse Barack Obama with enthusiasm and excitement.

Even if he is a Cantab.

* * *

In a different election, we could have supported John McCain. Not too many years ago, McCain ran for the Republican presidential nomination on the platform of a true maverick. He had bucked his party time and time again, he had refused to pander to the extreme wing of his party’s base and he had spoken honestly to the country, even when it was not easy to do so.

Then something changed.

Perhaps McCain believed he could win the presidency by sliding far to the right. And perhaps he believed he could win by exploiting the worst fears and divisions in American society. For whatever reason, McCain has become a politician in the worst sense of the word. Now we do not trust him with the presidency.

Since June, when Obama clinched his party’s nomination, McCain and his eventual running mate, Sarah Palin, have called Obama a celebrity, a socialist, a friend of terrorists and even, in so many words, a traitor. From the ridiculous to the offensive, these attacks have been unfounded.

But the campaign only reached so low when their initial approach — a truthful one — failed. At first they attacked Obama for being an inspiring speechmaker and an elitist.

As if those were bad things.

The president of the United States of America should inspire us. He or she should be elite.

Obama is a politician unlike any other we have seen in our lifetimes. His ability to inspire should not be underappreciated, and it should certainly not be considered a weakness. It rises out of genuine intellect and composure. And it will be necessary to mobilize a country that can no longer ask a president to solve problems alone. Obama offers something no other politician today does: the ability to inspire citizens across the country to work with him to address our greatest challenges.

Obama is not the perfect candidate. It is not lost on us that he has served less than four years at the national level, and that he has been running for president for the last two of those years. He has not governed as an executive, nor has he led a legislature. And since entering the Senate he has cast few controversial votes or spoken out against his party’s leadership.

But we are reassured by those with whom Obama has chosen to surround himself. From his first day in office, Obama will have Joe Biden at his side to provide wise counsel guided by decades in the Senate. He will also have, as he has had throughout the campaign, dozens of advisers with impressive experience in all areas of governance to help him. After an administration dominated by yes-men, it will be refreshing and necessary to have a president who once again invites disagreement.

In his associations, McCain, on the other hand, fails to recommend himself. Most visibly, his vice presidential selection appalls us. As popular as Palin is among her constituents, she has shown herself to be shockingly ignorant on many of the most important issues national leaders confront daily. Watching Palin since her addition to McCain’s ticket, it has become clear to millions of Americans that in the most important decision of his campaign, McCain placed political strategy over qualifications. So much for “Country First.”

Before he selected Palin to join his ticket, McCain asked the country not to choose Obama because he is inexperienced. But experience — or the lack of it — does not wholly define a person. We do not find it an insurmountable weakness that Obama does not have decades of familiarity with Robert’s Rules of Order and the nuances of the Senate Commerce Committee. It will be Congress, not Obama, writing our laws under his administration.

Obama’s inexperience, while not ideal, is hardly a disqualifying factor to his candidacy, at least not after all he has shown throughout the campaign. He has been steady and strong, thoughtful and honest, resolute and restrained. He won his primary and grew his support without tearing down his opponents, and without undermining his reasons for running.

* * *

Two years into this historic campaign, we are comfortable elevating Obama to the White House because of what he has proven himself to be, both as a lawmaker and as a person.

We are encouraged by his positions on issues important to all Americans, notably those listed earlier. But as students, we must think too about each candidate’s stance on education.

Obama’s vision will be felt here at Yale and on college campuses nationwide. To help young people defray the cost of college, he will advance a tax credit in return for community service — a thoughtful and fair idea. McCain has proposed nothing so innovative.

Of course, Obama offers more than policies should he be elected. He promises remarkable judgment and intellect. He has shown eagerness to rise above party lines and to transcend ideological entitlement, ego and special interests. He aspires to govern by cooperation, not by brute force; to treat the world community with tolerance and respect, not aloofness and disregard. And he respects the Constitution.

This is what America needs.

The old John McCain — the one we saw in the 2000 primary, and over many years in the Senate — might have fit that description. But the McCain of this campaign will bring four more years of political strife and closed-mindedness to the White House.

Obama had it right at his party’s convention. “America, we are better than these last eight years,” he said. “We are a better country than this.”

Indeed we are. And though both campaigns have claimed as much, one campaign has shown it to be true. One campaign has appealed to hope and unity, the other to fear and division. One campaign has looked to the future, the other to the past. One campaign has sought to represent the United States of America, the other the select few who live in the so-called “real” America. We can’t allow the latter to reach the White House.

* * *

The Rev. Coffin passed away two years ago, but his wisdom remains with us. “Hope is a state of mind independent of the state of the world,” he once told an interviewer. “If your heart’s full of hope, you can be persistent when you can’t be optimistic. You can keep the faith despite the evidence, knowing that only in so doing has the evidence any chance of changing. So while I’m not optimistic, I’m always very hopeful.”

Obama, too, has spoken about hope. But he has not only spoken about it; he has created it. While we have come to our endorsement by judging the records of the two candidates, it is impossible to overlook the positive power of the Obama campaign — and the negative force of the McCain campaign.

Though once we may have been torn between these two men, over two years of campaigning, the contrast between them has grown increasingly stark. And we have come to support Obama with no hesitation.

In his convention speech, Obama called this election our chance to keep the American promise alive. It is a chance we cannot afford to pass up.

Barack Obama’s message of hope and vision toward the future has lifted us over the course of this campaign. Let him now do the same to the nation.

PA, Daily Pennsylvanian

2008-11-03T11:02:00.000-08:00

http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2008/11/03/VotingGuide/Endorsement.Obama.For.President-3520797.shtml

Endorsement | Obama for president

By: Opinion Board

Posted: 11/3/08

Senator Obama is not our savior.

He will not solve all our problems in his first hundred days. He will not restore the economy overnight.

But while Senator McCain is a candidate with a compelling history of public service, Obama offers a compelling vision for the direction of this country. It is for this reason that we endorse him for president.

During this historic election, the Illinois Senator has demonstrated a willingness to build consensus and engage intellectually with people who disagree with him. In the debates, we saw a thoughtful and prudent leader who could back up his policy proposals with hard evidence.

When we endorsed Senator Clinton for the Democratic ticket in April, we expressed concern over Obama's ability to back "Yes we can" with "How we can." In the past few months, he's shown us how.

On major domestic issues, Obama offers substantive reform. His American Opportunity Tax Credit would give students more college options in exchange for public service. His proposals to simplify financial aid forms will make higher education more accessible. And, unlike McCain, Obama views America's cities as economic assets that deserve federal investment, rather than economic liabilities that can be neglected. Philadelphia will benefit from Obama's plan to adequately fund the Community Development Block Grant and federal infrastructure projects.

We still admire McCain's principled leadership on many issues, including earmark-reform, torture and the War in Iraq. But recently, the Arizona senator has pandered to the far-right. In response to the financial crisis, McCain offers tired rhetoric instead of a unified economic plan. Perhaps most worrisome of all, McCain has selected a vice presidential candidate who is singularly unqualified to deal with the challenges of the White House.

This is the first time that a candidate has brought so many into the political process. Obama's intelligence and vision inspire millions. We give him our wholehearted support.

Newsweek

2008-11-03T10:58:00.001-08:00

WY, Casper Star Tribune, Cheney's home town

2008-11-03T10:49:00.000-08:00

http://www.trib.com/articles/2008/11/03/editorial/editorial/8fb5b809854145d7872574f50026785c.txt

Monday, November 3, 2008 2:05 AM MST

Star-Tribune Editorial Board

It is a foregone conclusion that Wyoming's three electoral votes will go to Sen. John McCain. It would be easy for the Star-Tribune to simply agree with the majority of voters in this red state and endorse the Republican candidate for president.

But this isn't an ordinary election, and Sen. Barack Obama has the potential to be an extraordinary leader at a time we desperately need one. The next occupant of the White House will inherit a national economy that's collapsing and two wars our nation has been fighting for years, depleting valuable resources we need to fix a multitude of domestic problems. Far too many of our nation's citizens live paycheck to paycheck, worried about whether they'll have a job next week or if a medical crisis will bankrupt them.

What America needs most in these troubled times is a president who will move the country in a positive direction. The candidate who is most likely to chart a new course that will lead us to better days is Obama. Moreover, he is the best candidate for Wyoming.

In our state and across the country, Obama has reinvigorated his party and won over independent and even GOP voters. A record 7,000 people participated in Wyoming's Democratic county caucuses, which Obama convincingly won.

Obama earned the endorsement of Gov. Dave Freudenthal, who has an 80 percent approval rating in Wyoming and is probably the least partisan governor in the nation. Cynics may say Freudenthal wants a job in an Obama administration, but it's simply not in the man's character to set aside his Wyoming values for personal gain.

Wyoming's energy-based economy is faring better than the nation's, but there's no guarantee that will last forever. Obama supports the development of clean-coal technology, which could assure a future for our vast coal resources. His focus on energy independence through a major investment in alternative energy research and development could lead to the creation of new industry and jobs in the state, and dovetails nicely with the work being done at the new School of Energy Resources at the University of Wyoming.

On Western issues, Obama seeks the advice of people like Freudenthal and Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico. McCain showed a surprising lack of understanding of Western issues when he initially called for renegotiation of the Colorado River Compact, before others in the region set him straight.

Two of the best ways to judge presidential candidates is by looking at how they conduct their campaigns and who they select as vice president. On both fronts, Obama wins impressively.

We may not always agree with Sen. Joe Biden's decisions, but Obama tapped him to bring valuable foreign policy experience to the ticket. There is no question that the longtime senator is capable of serving as president if needed.

McCain's selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, however, shows extremely poor judgment. She has shown repeatedly that she is simply not ready to fill McCain's shoes.

Obama's advisers are extremely capable leaders. It's good to know that he turns to the likes of Warren Buffett for financial matters and retired Gen. Colin Powell on military issues. With his emphasis on diplomacy along with a commitment to protecting America, Obama gives us our best hope of regaining the respect of other nations.

If the John McCain of 2000 saw today's counterpart, he wouldn't recognize himself. McCain is no longer a GOP maverick, or the war hero whose principles were unwavering. He has flip-flopped on issues ranging from tax cuts to torture in an effort to win over the conservative base of his party. He has waged a dismal campaign based on fear and divisiveness.

We don't agree with Obama on several issues. There is no evidence that raising taxes on any segment of the population has ever stimulated the economy. He should reject this part of his economic plan.

But his campaign has been an honorable one that has focused on inclusiveness and hope. The three presidential debates showed Obama to be a calm, thoughtful leader with a unique vision of the future. The contrast with his opponent, who seemed angry and erratic, could not have been more stark or more telling.

We endorse Barack Obama for president.

Kathleen Parker

2008-11-03T10:01:00.000-08:00

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/188303/october-13-2008/kathleen-parker

Kathleen Parker hints that she's voting for Obama.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/30/AR2008103003635.html?sub%3DAR&sub=AR

The Palin Problem

By Kathleen Parker
Sunday, September 28, 2008; B07

If at one time women were considered heretical for swimming upstream against feminist orthodoxy, they now face condemnation for swimming downstream -- away from Sarah Palin.

To express reservations about her qualifications to be vice president -- and possibly president -- is to risk being labeled anti-woman.

Or, as I am guilty of charging her early critics, supporting only a certain kind of woman.

Some of the passionately feminist critics of Palin who attacked her personally deserved some of the backlash they received. But circumstances have changed since Palin was introduced as just a hockey mom with lipstick -- what a difference a financial crisis makes -- and a more complicated picture has emerged.

As we've seen and heard more from John McCain's running mate, it is increasingly clear that Palin is a problem. Quick study or not, she doesn't know enough about economics and foreign policy to make Americans comfortable with a President Palin should conditions require her promotion.

Yes, she recently met and turned several heads of state as the U.N. General Assembly convened in New York. She was gracious, charming and disarming. Men swooned. Pakistan's president wanted to hug her. (Perhaps Osama bin Laden is dying to meet her?)

And, yes, she has common sense, something we value. And she's had executive experience as a mayor and a governor, though of relatively small constituencies (about 6,000 and 680,000, respectively).

Finally, Palin's narrative is fun, inspiring and all-American in that frontier way we seem to admire. When Palin first emerged as John McCain's running mate, I confess I was delighted. She was the antithesis and nemesis of the hirsute, Birkenstock-wearing sisterhood -- a refreshing feminist of a different order who personified the modern successful working mother.

Palin didn't make a mess cracking the glass ceiling. She simply glided through it.

It was fun while it lasted.

Palin's recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League.

No one hates saying that more than I do. Like so many women, I've been pulling for Palin, wishing her the best, hoping she will perform brilliantly. I've also noticed that I watch her interviews with the held breath of an anxious parent, my finger poised over the mute button in case it gets too painful. Unfortunately, it often does. My cringe reflex is exhausted.

Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage, and there's not much content there. Here's but one example of many from her interview with Hannity:

"Well, there is a danger in allowing some obsessive partisanship to get into the issue that we're talking about today. And that's something that John McCain, too, his track record, proving that he can work both sides of the aisle, he can surpass the partisanship that must be surpassed to deal with an issue like this."

When Couric pointed to polls showing that the financial crisis had boosted Obama's numbers, Palin blustered wordily: "I'm not looking at poll numbers. What I think Americans at the end of the day are going to be able to go back and look at track records and see who's more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions for some opportunity to change, and who's actually done it?"

If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself.

If Palin were a man, we'd all be guffawing, just as we do every time Joe Biden tickles the back of his throat with his toes. But because she's a woman -- and the first ever on a Republican presidential ticket -- we are reluctant to say what is painfully true.

What to do?

McCain can't repudiate his choice of running mate. He not only risks the wrath of the GOP's unforgiving base, but he invites others to second-guess his executive decision-making ability. Barack Obama faces the same problem with Biden.

Only Palin can save McCain, her party and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first.

Do it for your country.

Kathleen Parker is syndicated by theWashington Post Writers Group. Her e-mail address iskparker@kparker.com.

Peggy Noonan, Wall Street Journal

2008-11-03T09:45:00.000-08:00

http://www.peggynoonan.com/article.php?article=440

Peggy Noonan comments, not an endorsement.

Obama and the Runaway Train

The race, the case, a hope for grace.

The Wall Street Journal: October 29, 2008

The case for Barack Obama, in broad strokes:

He has within him the possibility to change the direction and tone of American foreign policy, which need changing; his rise will serve as a practical rebuke to the past five years, which need rebuking; his victory would provide a fresh start in a nation in which a fresh start would come as a national relief. He climbed steep stairs, born off the continent with no father to guide, a dreamy, abandoning mother, mixed race, no connections. He rose with guts and gifts. He is steady, calm, and, in terms of the execution of his political ascent, still the primary and almost only area in which his executive abilities can be discerned, he shows good judgment in terms of whom to hire and consult, what steps to take and moves to make. We witnessed from him this year something unique in American politics: He took down a political machine without raising his voice.

A great moment: When the press was hitting hard on the pregnancy of Sarah Palin’s 17-year-old daughter, he did not respond with a politically shrewd “I have no comment,” or “We shouldn’t judge.” Instead he said, “My mother had me when she was 18,” which shamed the press and others into silence. He showed grace when he didn’t have to.

There is something else. On Feb. 5, Super Tuesday, Mr. Obama won the Alabama primary with 56% to Hillary Clinton’s 42%. That evening, a friend watched the victory speech on TV in his suburban den. His 10-year-old daughter walked in, saw on the screen “Obama Wins” and “Alabama.” She said, “Daddy, we saw a documentary on Martin Luther King Day in school.” She said, “That’s where they used the hoses.” Suddenly my friend saw it new. Birmingham, 1963, and the water hoses used against the civil rights demonstrators. And now look, the black man thanking Alabama for his victory.

This means nothing? This means a great deal.

John McCain’s story is not of rise so much as endurance, not only in Vietnam, which was spectacular enough, but throughout a rough and rugged political career of 26 years. He is passionate, obstreperous, independent, sees existential fables within history. His self-confessed role model for many years was Robert Jordan in Ernest Hemingway’s novel of the Spanish Civil War, “For Whom the Bell Tolls.” Mr. McCain, in his last memoir: “He was and remains to my mind a hero for the twentieth century . . . an idealistic freedom fighter” who had “a beautiful fatalism” and who sacrificed “for something else, something greater.” Actually Jordan fought on the side of the communists and died pointlessly, but never mind. He joined his personality to a great purpose and found meaning in his maverickness. In his campaign, Mr. McCain rarely got down to the meaning of things; he mostly stated stands. But separate and seemingly unconnected stands do not coherence make.

However: It was a night during the Republican Convention in September, and two former U.S. senators, who had served with Mr. McCain for a combined 16 years, were having drinks in a hotel dining room. I told them I collected stories of senators who’d been cursed out by John McCain, and they laughed and told me of times they’d been the target of his wrath on the Senate floor.

The talk turned to presidents they had known, and why they had wanted the job. This one wanted it as the last item on his résumé, that one wanted it out of an inflated sense of personal destiny. Is that why Mr. McCain wants it? “No”, said one, reflectively. “He wants to help the country.” The other added, with almost an air of wonder, “He wants to make America stronger, he really does.” And then they spoke, these two men who’d been bruised by him, of John McCain’s honest patriotism.

Those who have historically been sympathetic to the Republican Party or conservatism, and who support Barack Obama—Colin Powell, William Weld and Charles Fried, among others—and whose arguments have not passed muster with some muster-passers, go undamned here. Their objections include: The McCain campaign has been inadequate, and some of his major decisions embarrassing. All too true. But conservatives must honor prudence, and ask if the circumstances accompanying an Obama victory will encourage the helpful moderation and nonpartisan spirit these supporters attempt, in their endorsements, to demonstrate.

There is for instance, in the words of Minnesota’s Gov. Tim Pawlenty, “the runaway train.” The size and dimension of the likely Democratic victory seem clear. A Democratic House with a bigger, more fervent Democratic majority; a Democratic Senate with the same, and possibly with a filibuster-breaking 60 seats; a new and popular Democratic president, elected by a few points or more; a Democratic base whose anger and hunger have built for eight years; Democratic activists and operatives hungry for business and action. What will this mix produce? A runaway train with no one to put on the brakes, to claim a mandate for slowing, no one to cry “Crossing ahead”? Democrats in Congress will move for innovation when much of the country hopes only for stability. Who will tell Congress of that rest of the nation? Mr. Obama will be overwhelmed trying to placate the innovators.

America enjoyed divided government most successfully recently from 1994 to 2000, with Bill Clinton in the White House and Newt Gingrich in effect running Congress. It wasn’t so bad. In fact, it yielded a great deal, including sweeping reform of the welfare system, and balanced budgets.

Whoever is elected Tuesday, his freedom in office will be limited. Mr. Obama is out of money and Mr. McCain is out of army, so what might be assumed to be the worst impulses of each—big spender, big scrapper—will be circumscribed by reality. In Mr. Obama’s case, energy will likely be diverted to other issues. He will raise taxes, of course, but he may also feel forced to bow to a clamorous base with the nonspending items they favor: the rewriting of union law to force greater unionization of smaller shops, for instance, and a return to a “fairness doctrine” that would limit free speech on the air.

And there is this. The past few months as the campaign unfolded, I listened for Mr. Obama to speak thoughtfully about the life issues, including abortion. Our last Democratic president knew what that issue was, and knew by nature how to speak of it. Bill Clinton famously said, over and over, that abortion should be “safe, legal and rare.” The “rare” mattered. It set a tone, as presidents do, and made an important concession: You only want a medical practice to be rare when it isn’t good. For Mr. Obama, whose mind tends, as intellectuals’ minds do, toward the abstract, it all seems so . . . abstract. And cold. And rather suggestive of radical departures. “That’s above my pay grade.” Friend, that is your pay grade, that’s where the presidency lives, in issues like that.

But let’s be frank. Something new is happening in America. It is the imminent arrival of a new liberal moment. History happens, it makes its turns, you hold on for dear life. Life moves.

A fitting end for a harem-scarem, rock-’em-sock-’em shakeup of a year—one of tumbling inevitabilities, torn coalitions, striking new personalities.

Eras end, and begin. “God is in charge of history.” And so my beautiful election ends.

Larry Gellman

2008-11-03T09:22:00.000-08:00

Larry Gellman is a financial advisor, a Jewish community leader, a former TV news reporter in Arizona; and has been cited as one of the nation's top money managers.

http://larrygellman.blogspot.com/2008/10/will-republican-party-survive-and-does.html

Will the Republican Party Survive--And Does Anybody Care Anymore?

Just two months ago, I talked with John McCain in Aspen. Since moving to Arizona seven years ago, I have voted for and supported McCain for Senate and always admired his independence and willingness to cross party lines to do the right thing. I asked him why he had suddenly aligned himself with the most Right Wing, scariest people in the Republican Party and had named the same people who smeared him so viciously in the 2000 primary to run his campaign.

"The Republican Party is a big tent." he told me. "There's room for everyone."

In recent weeks, that tent seems to have gotten much, much smaller as some people have gotten disgusted and left and others have been thrown out. And, as many Republicans and Conservatives have recently pointed out, it's a neighborhood that very few people want to live in any more.

The water carriers of the Right--particularly Fox News, bloggers on townhall.com, and the dozens of talk radio hosts who call themselves Conservative--have always been biased. But as McCain has fallen farther behind in the polls their shows and blogs have become cesspools of hatred, anger, lies, distortion and vitriol which are liberally spewed on Democrats, Obama, and anyone who would vote for either.

In their passionate determination to vilify Obama and the Left, they have ignored the fact that the most devastating critiques of McCain and Palin have come from their own ranks. Conservatives and Republicans such as Charles Krauthammer, David Brooks, Kathleen Parker, George Will, and Christopher Buckley have all expressed their disgust with McCain's selection of Palin, his gutter campaign tactics, and his lack of the temperament, judgment, and ability to be president.

The coup de grace came Sunday when General Colin Powell--a Republican--announced his endorsement of Obama for president. Powell cited a wide variety of reasons that he was excited about Obama, disappointed in McCain himself and disgusted with the way he has run his campaign. Powell was precise, logical, and objective. His criticism of McCain was well thought out and devastating.

After hearing Powell, I immediately switched over to Fox News in time to get their reaction which was entirely critical and dismissive of Powell. One "analyst" speculated this was Powell's way of getting even with McCain for not selecting Powell to be his running mate. Another focused on how unfair it is for anyone to criticize McCain or his campaign since McCain is honest and righteous and Obama is so much worse. No one mentioned the merit or accuracy of Powell's statements. Later on MSNBC, Republican Pat Buchanan speculated that Powell picked Obama because he was just anxious to endorse a fellow Black guy.

Meanwhile, the Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Hugh Hewitt, Michael Medved, Dennis Prager radio crowd has gone non-stop venal and ballistic over the airwaves this month. Their entire programs are filled with lies, distortions, and partial truths about Obama and his positions. He is freely and constantly called anti-American, a traitor, a socialist, a terrorist, a friend of terrorists, a liar, a thief, a criminal, and a "bloodsucker" who wants to take every hard-working citizen's money--all of it--and distribute it to his liberal, radical, good-for-nothing friends.

This is not just about politics or an election. This has become a Holy War with these guys. My longtime friend Dennis Prager told me last year that unless I had learned to loathe the Left, then I had learned nothing from him in the 20 years I have regarded him as a teacher. He recently wrote a column on townhall.com in which he explains the difference between people on the Left and people on the Right. Apparently being a pluralist or an independent--trying to learn from all people--is no longer an option.

This latest descent completes the utter destruction of the Republican party as a force for good in this country. Until eight years ago, Republicans had a deserved reputation for being more socially and fiscally conservative and responsible. When the party culture became infected with the Bush/Rove/Cheney virus, it began to morph into a divisive force that possessed none of those qualities.

Now the mass exodus is underway. Anyone who is fiscally conservative can't call himself a Republican anymore. Anyone who is a religious Christian can't honestly be part of this since Jesus preached about caring for the sick and the poor--not about eliminating reproductive choice or issues related to same-sex marriage. There's nothing Christian about the agenda of the Religious Right--it's a totally political movement focused on issues that Jesus never mentioned and they ignore the issues about which Jesus preached constantly.

Anyone who believes in honesty or competence in government wouldn't call themselves a Republican after Bush. And now, no one who is not a committed soldier in the Holy War against the Left is welcome either.

The only ones left inside the tent are people who don't want to vote for a Black person, those who mistakenly believe they have been better off financially over the last eight years than they'd be under Obama, or those who are driven by a complete and unwavering hatred of liberals, Democrats, and the Left. It doesn't take a lot of room to accommodate that crowd and who would want to be in that tent anyway?

I find all this frustrating and it makes me sad. I liked being an independent. More important--we need the old Republican party--the one that thought the only thing worse than taxing and spending was borrowing and spending which is what the Bush/DeLay crowd has done for years in the name of Conservatism.

I hope the recent meltdown will set the stage for a revival of something we all need now more than ever--a viable intelligent alternative to complete control by the Democrats. As much as I like Obama, the thought of either party having that much power still scares me. Reed and Pelosi scare me much more than Obama does. I think Obama is smart, presidential, and will surround himself with smart, good people.

It's time for a change.

Farid Zackaria

2008-11-03T08:50:00.000-08:00

Editor of Newsweek International and host of Fareed Zakaria GPS, which airs Sundays worldwide on CNN.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/164498/page/1

The Case for Barack Obama

Obama is pushing to change the parameters of the country's comfort zone. That's leadership.

Published Oct 18, 2008

From the magazine issue dated Oct 27, 2008

The Case for Barack Obama

Obama is pushing to change the parameters of the country's comfort zone. That's leadership.

Fareed Zakaria

NEWSWEEK

From the magazine issue dated Oct 27, 2008

Ken Duberstein, Reagan Chief of Staff

2008-11-03T08:39:00.000-08:00

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/31/former-reagan-adviser-endorses-obama/

October 31, 2008

Former Reagan adviser endorses Obama

Posted: 01:35 PM ET

From CNN's Adam Levy

Duberstein is pulling for Obama.

(CNN) — Former Reagan chief of staff Ken Duberstein told CNN's Fareed Zakaria this week he intends to vote for Democrat Barack Obama on Tuesday.

Duberstein said he was influenced by another prominent Reagan official - Colin Powell - in his decision.

"Well let's put it this way - I think Colin Powell's decision is in fact the good housekeeping seal of approval on Barack Obama."

Powell served as national security advisor to Reagan during Duberstein's tenure as chief of staff.

Duberstein spoke with Zakaria about his final days in the Reagan White House. The Reagan official, along with Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Carter National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, also discussed the transition process to a new administration.

Watch the full discussion on the next administration this Sunday at 1 p.m. on Fareed Zakaria GPS.

Guardian, UK

2008-11-02T21:07:00.000-08:00

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/01/elections-obama-mccain-usa-bush/print

A new leader for a new era

The US stands on the threshold of the new era it needs. Americans should elect Barack Obama as their president

The Guardian,

Saturday November 1 2008

Every United States presidential election is important. Most of them provide dramatic political theatre. All of them are compulsively watched by the rest of the world. The election of 2008, however, is a record-breaker in all departments. It is important because it comes at the end of George Bush's calamitous two terms and amid such economic turmoil. It is memorable because it has involved so many ground-breaking candidates and long campaigns on both sides. And it has been watched and experienced by the world as no American election has been before. Not since the Kennedy era has such a contest resonated so potently with so many people in America and beyond, including in this country. But the circumstances of this year's contest, the character of the protagonists and the immediacy of the internet age combine to mean that the 2008 election is likely to make a defining statement about America for this global generation that may eclipse even the impact of the contest of 1960.

World interest

Though we lack the vote, this is our election too. Such statements outrage many Americans and inspire others. But the rest of the world has not just lived this election. Our life chances and societies will also be shaped by what happens next Tuesday. The world has an interest in the outcome because, in spite of everything, America remains the world's pre-eminent military, political, financial and cultural power. America's standing in the world has been damaged during the Bush years. He has inflicted massive direct harm to many parts of the world through his military actions, has set back the quality of life on our planet by his indifference to climate change, international cooperation and the rule of law. He has been anti-Americanism's best recruiting sergeant and al-Qaida's too.

The world may not have the vote on Tuesday. But it certainly has a candidate. That candidate is Senator Barack Obama. If the world could vote on November 4, Mr Obama would win by a landslide. Polling shows him preferred in Egypt by two to one, in Poland by three to one, in Canada by five to one, in Brazil by six to one, in Britain by seven to one, in France by 11 to one and in Kenya by more than 17 to one.

He is not just the preferred choice of liberal Europeans. He is also the choice of the rest of the world, of all races and creeds - and of young people in particular. No buses crammed with lawyers would be needed to validate the accuracy of these votes. He commands this support, not only because he is not George Bush but because he personifies so much of what the world still admires about America. Americans ought to think about that. The world longs, perhaps unrealistically but palpably nevertheless, for a new America. Only Mr Obama can provide that.

John McCain manifestly would not do this. Eight years ago, Mr McCain offered himself as a punchy and principled alternative to Mr Bush. The McCain of 2008 has been very different. He has made too many compromises with the social conservative wing of his party and in the last few weeks has run a partisan campaign in an attempt to re-energise the Republican faithful. His response to the economic crisis triggered by the credit crunch and the collapse of Lehman Brothers has been parlous. His party faces a bitter and enduring self-examination if it loses next week.

By choosing Sarah Palin as his running mate, he made a huge error of both tactical and strategic judgment. Mrs Palin may have entranced the celebrity-driven parts of the media, but she has relentlessly alienated American voters, nearly 60% of whom now believe that she is not qualified to be the nation's vice-president. Mr McCain has made much of his experience and readiness to lead, but in this campaign he has been found lamentably wanting.

When the 2008 campaign began, Mr Obama stood for two things. He was against the Iraq war and he was in favour of a break with the embattled partisan politics of America's recent past. He was the candidate offering hope and change. He is still all those things today, but he has become much more than that. Over the past 20 months he has been tested in debate, in campaigning skills, and on policy. At each turn he has responded with enviable coolness and clarity of judgment and language, while developing a detailed programme of commitments on the issues that would shape his presidency - healthcare, economic restoration, the federal budget, energy and Iraq.

His performance in the televised debates was formidable, showcasing the discipline that has been such a feature of his campaign. He has responded well to the financial crisis, after a cautious start. In his 30-minute campaign infomercial this week, he reiterated the key pledges that he has made throughout this campaign, with a radical sustainable energy programme as a hallmark. Attacked by the Republicans as a redistributionist and a socialist, he has held his ground, insisting that America needs to be a fairer society.

High expectations

The voters may give the Democrats a clean sweep in Congress and the White House next week. Expectations will be high, hard to manage, and the honeymoon may not last. Yet Mr Obama will be in an enviable position. He will have the political space to write a new chapter for centre-left American governance. His election would mark the end of the conservative era that began under Ronald Reagan and which so inhibited the Democrats of the 1980s and 90s. His race is part of his appeal, and if he is elected it will mark a historic moment in American public life. But it is not, in the end, the central question next week. Mr Obama's greatest achievement is to have seized on the failures of the Republican era and to have developed a serious new progressive coalition and programme. America stands on the threshold of a new era. That is what the nation needs and the world craves, and Americans should elect Barack Obama as their president.

Thomas Friedman, New York Times

2008-11-02T20:30:00.000-08:00

Op-Ed Columnist

Vote for ( )

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Published: November 1, 2008

Here’s what strikes me this election eve: I can’t remember a presidential campaign that was so disconnected from the actual challenges of governing that will confront the winner the morning after. When this election campaign began two years ago, the big issue was how and for how long do we continue nation-building in Iraq. As the campaign comes to a close, the big issue is how and at what sacrifice do we do nation-building in America.

Unfortunately, you’d barely know that from the presidential debates. Watching them in the context of the meltdown of the financial system was like watching a game show where the two contestants were kept off-stage in a soundproof booth and brought out to address the audience without knowing the context.

Since the last debate, John McCain and Barack Obama have unveiled broad ideas about how to restore the nation’s financial health. But they continue to suggest that this will be largely pain-free. McCain says giving everyone a tax cut will save the day; Obama tells us only the rich will have to pay to help us out of this hole. Neither is true.

We are all going to have to pay, because this meltdown comes in the context of what has been “perhaps the greatest wealth transfer since the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917,” says Michael Mandelbaum, author of “Democracy’s Good Name.” “It is not a wealth transfer from rich to poor that the Bush administration will be remembered for. It is a wealth transfer from the future to the present.”

Never has one generation spent so much of its children’s wealth in such a short period of time with so little to show for it as in the Bush years. Under George W. Bush, America has foisted onto future generations a huge financial burden to finance our current tax cuts, wars and now bailouts. Just paying off those debts will require significant sacrifices. But when you add the destruction of wealth that has taken place in the last two months in the markets, and the need for more bailouts, you understand why this is not going to be a painless recovery.

The Bush team leaves us with another debt — one to Mother Nature. We have added tons more CO2 into the atmosphere these last eight years, without any mitigation effort. As a result, slowing down climate change in the next eight years is going to require even bigger changes and investments in how we use energy.

Given that Times columnists are not allowed to “formally” endorse candidates and given that the context of this election has changed so much from the policy positions the candidates started with, all I can suggest is that you vote for the candidate with these character traits:

First, we need a president who can speak English and deconstruct and navigate complex issues so Americans can make informed choices. We have paid an enormous price for having a president who could not explain and reassure us during this financial meltdown. We wasted a huge amount of time pretending that we could punish Wall Street without punishing Main Street — when, in fact, they are intricately intertwined.

A major money market fund — Reserve Primary — failed in September because the extra interest it offered customers derived, in part, from the $785 million in high-yielding Lehman Brothers commercial paper and notes it was holding. Depositors who told their congressmen to just let that greedy Lehman Brothers fail were shocked to discover this meant that their own money market would be frozen. No, we don’t need a president defending greed on Wall Street, but we do need one who can explain that we are all in the same boat, that a leak at one end can sink everyone and that while we must regulate, we don’t want to kill risk-taking and the rewards that go with that — which are essential to growing our economy.

Second, we need a president who can energize, inspire and hold the country together during what will be a very stressful recovery. We have to climb out of this financial crisis at a time when the baby boomers are about to retire and going to need their Social Security and eventually Medicare. We are all going to be paying the government more and getting less until we grow out of this hole.

Third, we need a president who can rally the world to our side. We cannot get out of this crisis unless China starts consuming more and unless Europe keeps lowering interest rates. Everyone is interconnected, and everyone is still looking to America to lead.

So, bottom line: Please do not vote for the candidate you most want to have a beer with (unless it’s to get stone cold drunk so you don’t have to think about this mess we’re in). Vote for the person you’d most like at your side when you ask your bank manager for an extension on your mortgage.

Vote for the candidate you think has the smarts, temperament and inspirational capacity to unify the country and steer our ship through what could be the rockiest shoals our generation has ever known. Your kids will thank you.

Frank Schaeffer

2008-11-02T20:27:00.000-08:00

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/obama-will-be-one-of-the_b_132843.html

Frank Schaeffer

Posted October 8, 2008 | 02:45 PM (EST)

Obama Will Be One of The Greatest (and Most Loved) American Presidents

Great presidents are made great by horrible circumstances combined with character, temperament and intelligence. Like firemen, cops, doctors or soldiers, presidents need a crisis to shine.

I say this as a white, former life-long Republican. I say this as the proud father of a Marine. I say this as just another American watching his pension evaporate along with the stock market! I speak as someone who knows it's time to forget party loyalty, ideology and pride and put the country first. I say this as someone happy to be called a fool for going out on a limb and declaring that, 1) Obama will win, and 2) he is going to be amongst the greatest of American presidents.

Obama is our last best chance. He's worth laying it all on the line for.

This is a man who in the age of greed took the high road of community service. This is the good father and husband. This is the humble servant. This is the patient teacher. This is the scholar statesman. This is the man of deep Christian faith.

Good stories about Obama abound; from his personal relationship with his Secret Service agents (he invites them into his home to watch sports, and shoots hoops with them) to the story about how, more than twenty years ago, while standing in the check-in line at an airport, Obama paid a $100 baggage surcharge for a stranger who was broke and stuck. (Obama was virtually penniless himself in those days.) Years later after he became a senator, that stranger recognized Obama's picture and wrote to him to thank him. She received a kindly note back from the senator. (The story only surfaced because the person, who lives in Norway, told a local newspaper after Obama ran for the presidency. The paper published a photograph of this lady proudly displaying Senator Obama's letter.)

Where many leaders are two-faced; publicly kindly but privately feared and/or hated by people closest to them, Obama is consistent in the way he treats people, consistently kind and personally humble. He lives by the code that those who lead must serve. He believes that. He lives it. He lived it long before he was in the public eye.

Obama puts service ahead of ideology. He also knows that to win politically you need to be tough. He can be. He has been. This is a man who does what works, rather than scoring ideological points. In other words he is the quintessential non-ideological pragmatic American. He will (thank God!) disappoint ideologues and purists of the left and the right.

Obama has a reservoir of personal physical courage that is unmatched in presidential history. Why unmatched? Because as the first black contender for the presidency who will win, Obama, and all the rest of us, know that he is in great physical danger from the seemingly unlimited reserve of unhinged racial hatred, and just plain unhinged ignorant hatred, that swirls in the bowels of our wounded and sinful country. By stepping forward to lead, Obama has literally put his life on the line for all of us in a way no white candidate ever has had to do. (And we all know how dangerous the presidency has been even for white presidents.)

Nice stories or even unparalleled courage isn't the only point. The greater point about Obama is that the midst of our worldwide financial meltdown, an expanding (and losing) war in Afghanistan, trying to extricate our country from a wrong and stupidly mistaken ruinously expensive war in Iraq, our mounting and crushing national debt, awaiting the next (and inevitable) al Qaeda attack on our homeland, watching our schools decline to Third World levels of incompetence, facing a general loss of confidence in the government that has been exacerbated by the Republicans doing all they can to undermine our government's capabilities and programs... President Obama will take on the leadership of our country at a make or break time of historic proportions. He faces not one but dozens of crisis, each big enough to define any presidency in better times.

As luck, fate or divine grace would have it (depending on one's personal theology) Obama is blessedly, dare I say uniquely, well-suited to our dire circumstances. Obama is a person with hands-on community service experience, deep connections to top economic advisers from the renowned University of Chicago where he taught law, and a middle-class background that gives him an abiding knowledgeable empathy with the rest of us. As the son of a single mother, who has worked his way up with merit and brains, recipient of top-notch academic scholarships, the peer-selected editor of the Harvard Law Review and, in three giant political steps to state office, national office and now the presidency, Obama clearly has the wit and drive to lead.

Obama is the sober voice of reason at a time of unreason. He is the fellow keeping his head while all around him are panicking. He is the healing presence at a time of national division and strife. He is also new enough to the political process so that he doesn't suffer from the terminally jaded cynicism, the seen-it-all-before syndrome afflicting most politicians in Washington. In that regard we Americans lucked out. It's as if having despaired of our political process we picked a name from the phone book to lead us and that person turned out to be a very man we needed.

Obama brings a healing and uplifting spiritual quality to our politics at the very time when our worst enemy is fear. For eight years we've been ruled by a stunted fear-filled mediocrity of a little liar who has expanded his power on the basis of creating fear in others. Fearless Obama is the cure. He speaks a litany of hope rather than a litany of terror.

As we have watched Obama respond in a quiet reasoned manner to crisis after crisis, in both the way he has responded after being attacked and lied about in the 2008 campaign season, to his reasoned response to our multiplying national crises, what we see is the spirit of a trusted family doctor with a great bedside manner. Obama is perfectly suited to hold our hand and lead us through some very tough times. The word panic is not in the Obama dictionary.

America is fighting its "Armageddon" in one fearful heart at a time. A brilliant leader with the mild manner of an old-time matter-of-fact country doctor soothing a frightened child is just what we need. The fact that our "doctor" is a black man leading a hitherto white-ruled nation out of the mess of its own making is all the sweeter and raises the Obama story to that of moral allegory.

Obama brings a moral clarity to his leadership reserved for those who have had to work for everything they've gotten and had to do twice as well as the person standing next to them because of the color of their skin. His experience of succeeding in spite of his color, social background and prejudice could have been embittering or one that fostered a spiritual rebirth of forgiveness and enlightenment. Obama radiates the calm inner peace of the spirit of forgiveness.

Speaking as a believing Christian I see the hand of a merciful God in Obama's candidacy. The biblical metaphors abound. The stone the builder rejected is become the cornerstone... the last shall be first... he that would gain his life must first lose it... the meek shall inherit the earth...

For my secular friends I'll allow that we may have just been extraordinarily lucky! Either way America wins.

Only a brilliant man, with the spirit of a preacher and the humble heart of a kindly family doctor can lead us now. We are afraid, out of ideas, and worst of all out of hope. Obama is the cure. And we Americans have it in us to rise to the occasion. We will. We're about to enter one of the most frightening periods of American history. Our country has rarely faced more uncertainty. This is the time for greatness. We have a great leader. We must be a great people backing him, fighting for him, sacrificing for a cause greater than ourselves.

A hundred years from now Obama's portrait will be placed next to that of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt. Long before that we'll be telling our children and grandchildren that we stepped out in faith and voted for a young black man who stood up and led our country back from the brink of an abyss. We'll tell them about the power of love, faith and hope. We'll tell them about the power of creativity combined with humility and intellectual brilliance. We'll tell them that President Obama gave us the gift of regaining our faith in our country. We'll tell them that we all stood up and pitched in and won the day. We'll tell them that President Obama restored our standing in the world. We'll tell them that by the time he left office our schools were on the mend, our economy booming, that we'd become a nation filled with green energy alternatives and were leading the world away from dependence on carbon-based destruction. We'll tell them that because of President Obama's example and leadership the integrity of the family was restored, divorce rates went down, more fathers took responsibility for their children, and abortion rates fell dramatically as women, families and children were cared for through compassionate social programs that worked. We'll tell them about how the gap closed between the middle class and the super rich, how we won health care for all, how crime rates fell, how bad wars were brought to an honorable conclusion. We'll tell them that when we were attacked again by al Qaeda, how reason prevailed and the response was smart, tough, measured and effective, and our civil rights were protected even in times of crisis...

We'll tell them that we were part of the inexplicably blessed miracle that happened to our country those many years ago in 2008 when a young black man was sent by God, fate or luck to save our country. We'll tell them that it's good to live in America where anything is possible. Yes we will.

Frank Schaeffer is the author of CRAZY FOR GOD-How I Grew Up As One Of The Elect, Helped Found The Religious Right, And Lived To Take All (Or Almost All) Of It Back. Now in paperback.

Thomas Chatterton Williams, Culture11

2008-11-02T07:24:00.000-08:00

http://www.culture11.com/print/32959

Black Man, White House

What the first African American president would mean for black America.

By Thomas Chatterton Williams, posted October 16, 2008

William Weld (R), former Gov MA

2008-11-02T07:17:00.000-08:00

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2008/10/24/former_mass_gov_william_weld_to_endorse_obama/

CONCORD, N.H.—Former Massachusetts Gov. William Weld, a Republican, endorsed Democrat Barack Obama for president on Friday, citing the senator's good judgment, "deep sense of calm" and "first-class political temperament."

Weld said he's never endorsed a Democrat for president before, but in the last six weeks or so, it became "close to a no-brainer." Obama has a history of bringing Democrats, Republicans and independents together and is the best choice at a time when America's standing in the world is at a low point, he said.

"It's not often you get a guy with his combination of qualities, chief among which I would say is the deep sense of calm he displays, and I think that's a product of his equally deep intelligence," he said in a phone interview.

He insisted his endorsement was based on an assessment of Obama's strengths, not Republican John McCain's weaknesses.

"John McCain is a very good guy," he said. "I do think the Republican Party has been playing on an increasingly small field in the last couple of elections."

Weld joined other prominent Republicans endorsing Obama over McCain in the campaign's final weeks, including former Secretary of State Colin Powell, former Minnesota Gov. Arne Carlson and Scott McClellan, former press secretary to President Bush.

Weld announced his support at a news conference at Obama's campaign office in Salem. Last year, he came to New Hampshire to campaign for another former Massachusetts governor, Republican Mitt Romney, who ended his bid for the presidential nomination in February.

Weld was governor of Massachusetts from 1991 to 1997. Before that, he was U.S. attorney for Massachusetts under President Reagan and later led the criminal division of the U.S. Justice Department.

Two of his successors, responded to the endorsement with a statement supporting McCain.

"John McCain stands head and shoulders above Barack Obama on the critical issues facing our country. McCain alone has the experience and judgment to jumpstart our economy, create good jobs and keep America safe in a dangerous world," said former Govs. Paul Cellucci and Jane Swift. "As no less than Joe Biden has said, Barack Obama is not ready to lead. Bill Weld is entitled to his opinion, but we respectfully and strongly disagree."

William Gould, pro-life journalist at Commonwealth Magazine

2008-11-02T07:11:00.000-08:00

http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/article.php3?id_article=2355

Pro-life, Pro-Obama?

Why this election can’t be reduced to one issue

William J. Gould

Significant portions of the Catholic Church in the United States appear committed to the proposition that the only acceptable political manifestation of being a Catholic entails embracing the Republican Party. Clearly this is the (at least de facto) position of many prominent prelates such as Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver and Bishop Joseph Martino of Scranton. It is also quite clearly the position of EWTN, which furnishes a one-hour commercial for the Republican Party every Friday night at 8 Eastern (Of course, I’m referring to The World Over, hosted by Raymond Arroyo). Nor is that support confined to high-ranking church figures and leading Catholic media outlets. On the contrary, at Mass in my parish two weeks ago, a very young, newly ordained priest encouraged his listeners to vote Republican solely on the basis of the abortion issue.

In this political and religious climate, I find Doug Kmiec’s support for Sen. Barack Obama a salutary and refreshing development. I say this as someone who does not fully share Kmiec’s enthusiastic embrace of Obama or his high expectations regarding what an Obama presidency is likely to achieve. Instead I write as someone who has long been disenchanted with American politics and who fully expects that we will continue to be ill-governed no matter who wins the election.

Why then do I regard Kmiec’s contribution in such a positive light? For two reasons. The first is that as a Catholic with a long history of support for the prolife cause, Kmiec’s endorsement of Obama calls into question the notion that the GOP is the only acceptable political option for Catholics. Of course one might well counter that the Democratic Party is a far from welcome home for Catholic principles as well, and I would readily agree. But that’s not really the point. At the moment, neither party is a good vehicle for the promotion of Catholic social principles. Catholics who truly understand and embrace the main ideas of the Catholic political and social tradition will find themselves politically homeless and regularly confronted with unattractive voting options. But if political homelessness is the characteristic condition of American Catholics, then the proper response of church authorities should be to acknowledge that lamentable situation rather than to offer de facto political endorsements—as they are coming perilously close to doing with the Republican Party. To the extent that Kmiec’s vocal support for Obama challenges the movement toward a Republican hegemony within U.S. Catholicism, it performs a major service.

The second reason I find Kmiec’s position helpful is that, while clearly speaking from within the prolife movement, he provides much-needed correctives to two unfortunate tendencies within that movement. The first is the propensity of many prolifers—including many church leaders—to attach so much significance to opposing abortion that they end up effectively dismissing every other issue as unimportant or of minimal importance. (Indeed, in a recent pastoral letter, Bishop Martino approvingly quoted the view of his predecessor, Bishop Timlin, that “abortion is the issue this year and every year in every campaign.”) While opposition to abortion is surely an important part of Catholic teaching, it does not begin to exhaust the riches of the Catholic social tradition. On the contrary, there are many other important matters—issues of foreign policy (including questions of war and peace), health care, whether and how we are going to meet our obligations to the poor, just to name a few—on which the Catholic social tradition has much wisdom and insight to contribute. To reduce Catholic teaching to opposing abortion, which many bishops are very close to doing, is to present a truncated version of the Catholic tradition, and Kmiec is to be commended for pointing that out.

Kmiec has also rightly noted a tendency among many in the prolife movement to ascribe excessive importance to the results of elections, including this one. This has long been my impression of the prolife movement. Having reduced everything to the issue of abortion, they tend to attach excessive (I almost wrote utopian) hopes and expectations to the outcomes of elections. In this year’s campaign, they appear to believe that everything hinges on electing John McCain, who will appoint prolife justices who will in turn overturn Roe v. Wade.

There are serious problems with that approach. To begin with, it mistakenly treats this election as though it were a referendum on abortion. It is not. Voters are not being asked to vote directly up or down on whether we support legalized abortion—as have the electorates of some other countries (Ireland and Portugal, for example). Of course, if we were faced with such a prospect then the prolife rhetoric about how important it is to vote a certain way would make a lot more sense. But we are not faced with a referendum on abortion. Instead, we are asked to choose between candidates campaigning on a wide range of issues (candidates who, once in office, may or may not carry out the policies they are proposing). This is the familiar situation that causes so many conscientious Catholic voters, myself included, to feel so conflicted.

Even if McCain wins, it’s not certain that he will be able to fulfill the hopes some fervent prolifers are investing in him. If elected, he will almost certainly confront a Senate controlled by a large Democratic majority. This will make it very difficult to shepherd an openly prolife justice through the confirmation process. He may surprise supporters by nominating people considered unsuitable by prolifers. After all, McCain has already indicated that he will not have a “litmus test” for judicial appointments. Moreover, he is known to be a rather mercurial fellow. In any event, we can never know for certain what kind of person a president will nominate to the Court. Who expected President George W. Bush to nominate Harriet Miers? Nor can we be sure how new justices will vote. Did the Republican presidents who nominated Earl Warren, William Brennan, and David Souter expect them to turn out as they did? But let’s assume a best-case scenario. Let’s assume McCain is elected, that his nominees for the Court are confirmed by the Senate, and that they go on to prove instrumental in overturning Roe. While I would welcome such a development, let’s not be under any illusions about it. It would not mean the end of legalized abortion in America. Instead the issue would be kicked back to the states. Different states would adopt different policies. And given the remote prospect of a constitutional amendment banning abortion, there is every reason to expect that such a situation would remain for the foreseeable future.

If that analysis is correct, then a McCain presidency, even under the best circumstances (at least from a prolife standpoint), is not going to result in a final or definitive triumph over legalized abortion. Yes, it would change the nature of the struggle, but the struggle would continue, probably indefinitely. And there would still remain the need to address all the other important issues confronting us, issues to which some of us do not regard a McCain presidency as the best response.

In view of all this, we would be far better served by church authorities if, instead of granting a kind of unofficial imprimatur to a particular party (as some seem to be doing), they would recognize and accept a legitimate pluralism and diversity among faithful Catholics seeking to discharge their political responsibilities in the light of church teaching. The kind of pluralism I have in mind would range from radical perspectives such as that of the eminent Catholic philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre—who contends that the two major parties are so defective that not voting is actually preferable to voting—to support for antisystem third-party candidates like Ralph Nader, to voting for Obama (as I will) on the grounds that, on balance, his administration will do more to serve the common good than McCain’s, to voting for McCain (as many others will) on prolife or other grounds. That approach comports far better with the situation facing Catholics than anything proposed by bishops like Chaput and Martino.

Finally, let me try to avoid misunderstanding by affirming that I am prolife, and that I fully share the objective of the prolife movement to end legalized abortion. But I also believe that our national well-being will be much enhanced if the pursuit of this worthy objective is integrated within the broader context of Catholic political and social teaching rather than made the sole criterion of Catholic political orthodoxy. In seeking to promote a prolife agenda, we will do well to lower our expectations about what may be achieved by any one election (or even by a cluster of elections). Progress against abortion is likely to prove slow and incremental. But that should not surprise us, for as T. S. Eliot wrote: "The Catholic should have high ideals—or rather, I should say absolute ideals—and moderate expectations." Nor should that discourage us, for, as Eliot also wrote: "For us, there is only the trying. The rest is not our business."

William J. Gould is Assistant Dean of the Juniors at Fordham College.

AZ, Arizona Star

2008-11-02T06:12:00.000-08:00

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/politics/265275

Opinion

Sen. Barack Obama

Barack Obama for president

Tucson, Arizona | Published: 11.02.2008

We see America the way Barack Obama sees America.

Our future requires a steady, intelligent and, as former Secretary of State Colin Powell said, a "transformational" leader to guide us into a new era. Obama brings deep intellectual curiosity, equanimity and discipline.

The ground under America is moving. A generational change is under way with or without Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., or Barack Obama, D-Ill.

The core concerns are more about the future than the past, be it eight years ago or one day ago. They are about the moment and the movement to engage Americans in ways not seen before, especially against a backdrop of economic strife unmatched since the Great Depression.

McCain is correct that it's time to stand up. "Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight. Nothing is inevitable here. We're Americans, and we never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history," he said at the Republican National Convention.

However, the ways of the past, which we believe McCain understands, will not work in this new America. The future requires new tools and new expertise. A premium must be placed on more than just love of country. We must re-embrace American ideals and lead the world on a stronger path to prosperity and peace.

The time is now and the leader is Barack Obama. The Star endorses Obama for president of the United States.

Like a race car driver going into a turn, a leader must see not only what confronts our nation today but envision where we come out on the other side. Obama sees how the United States is connected to other nations through our economic, immigration, national security and energy policies. No one can thrive alone.

Obama sees a foreign policy where force is but one tool. He envisions countries collaborating to confront bad actors and shared challenges such as global warming, poverty, terrorism, disease and religious extremism.

Obama sees a health-care system in which children can go to the doctor and families aren't forced into bankruptcy by medical bills. He experienced the same hardships many American families face. While his mother was dying of cancer, she battled her insurance company for care.

He embraces the strength of the free market, but sees that, in the United States today, the market doesn't meet people's health-care needs. He knows the heavy toll that inequitable public policies take on people's lives. We agree with Obama that health care should be as affordable and accessible to as many people as possible.

Obama sees an economy creating jobs through innovation, helping families stay in their homes and lifting the middle class and small businesses. He would reduce taxes for the majority of Americans and not raise taxes on those making less than $250,000.

Obama sees education as an investment in America's prosperity, political system and national security. He would expand early childhood education and protect funding for public schools. A college education is out of reach for many Americans. He would help make it more affordable through tuition tax credits.

He's proved himself with his nuanced understanding of complicated issues. His vision is not built on rhetoric. He offers substantive, detailed policies and the acumen to make these changes a reality.

He demonstrates leadership by surrounding himself with smart people who will strengthen his administration. For vice president Obama chose Joseph Biden, a U.S. senator with 35 years of experience, a foreign policy expert qualified to be president.

Obama made a responsible, pragmatic and intelligent choice that shows us he puts the nation above party politics.

This moment in history requires courage to change. Our nation must find a way to restore the confidence that our government is of the people, by the people, for the people — all of our people.

We share Obama's vision of America. And we share his urgency.

Ron Wilcox, Forbes contributor

2008-11-01T21:34:00.000-07:00

http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2008/10/30/conservative-vote-obama-oped-cx_rw_1030wilcox.html

Commentary
A Conservative For Obama
Ron Wilcox 10.30.08, 2:22 PM ET

I'm a conservative. I've spent my money and my time in support of Republican candidates. I also support Barack Obama for president.

Modern conservatism is deeply rooted in ideas and political philosophy, in rational discourse and pragmatism. John Stuart Mill matters to conservatives. Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman matter as well. They matter not only because of their conclusions about the limited role of government power in a free society but because they were aggressive questioners, carefully dissecting problems to uncover potential solutions.

The American version of modern conservatism began as an intellectual revolt against the excesses of government emerging out of the New Deal era. The prevailing liberal view of the time was that government could engineer a more just and equitable society by elevating its role in the day-to-day activities of citizens. Proponents believed the benefits of collective decision making outweighed the increased restrictions on individuals' liberties that such social engineering required.

The modern conservative movement, through rational discourse and appeals to empirical research in economics, pointed out that reducing these individual freedoms had negative consequences far in excess of the commonly held view. Yes, you could decrease poverty among low-wage workers by mandating a minimum wage, but you would also increase unemployment among the young and those of color. Yes, you could use the power of taxation to redistribute income, but this could dramatically shrink the wealth available to the entire society.

Conservatives used to ask the tough questions and did not accept simplistic solutions. That is why it is deeply disappointing to me, both personally and professionally, that John McCain has run a campaign that is so antithetical to rational discourse about public policy. His campaign has been about glib answers to complex problems. His choice for vice president was political malpractice.

He has catered to a wing of the Republican Party that believes everything will be all right--if only the government gets out of the way. No matter the problem, that is the only acceptable solution. To suggest that research about or thoughtful analysis of a situation might, in some cases, point in a different direction is apostasy.

For these Republicans, simply the act of doing policy analysis must mean that you are a liberal. They know that real Republicans, and real men, don't need to think things through. I do not respect these people. They have dragged a proud movement that had much to offer our country down into the mud of ignorance.

And yet the reason I now support Obama is only partially due to McCain's decision to embrace this base form of populism. It also stems from a growing respect for Obama's thoughtfulness, which reveals itself when he's faced with difficult questions. I do not agree with all elements of Obama's tax policy, but I certainly get the impression he has thought about it a whole lot more than McCain.

In a world that will certainly throw many unexpected, unknowable problems at the next president, I don't really care if I agree with all of their policy decisions. I want a smart, thoughtful person who can adapt his ideas to the facts on the ground. I don't want someone who retreats to ideology because he cannot--or is not inclined to--think through the complexities of the problem at hand. Barack Obama is not afraid to talk about complicated solutions to complicated problems. He is a skilled critical thinker. John McCain, unfortunately, has not left the same impression on me.

I also believe that Obama will not end up being the orthodox liberal many have warned against or hoped for. He is not from Cambridge, Mass. He is from Illinois. His economic advisers, both formal and some informal, are from the University of Chicago, a school known for its free market philosophy; he also taught there.

The institutions with which you associate, after all, do affect your thinking. That life experience, combined with his inquisitive mind, will lead him out of the liberal underbrush when the House of Representatives inevitably proposes some hard-left legislation. I genuinely believe the people who are likely to be most disappointed with Obama are the far left wing of the Democratic Party.

I will not celebrate when Obama is elected president next Tuesday, but I will smile a little--and hope that my beliefs about him are correct.

Ronald T. Wilcox is a Darden School professor of business administration at the University of Virginia and author of Whatever Happened to Thrift? Why Americans Don't Save and What to Do About It. This piece is adapted from a post on his blog.

Obamacon, Moveon winner, John Weiler

2008-11-01T21:28:00.000-07:00

Thomas Barnett

2008-11-01T21:15:00.000-07:00

http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/weblog/2008/10/i_choose_the_economist_and_oba.html

Thomas Barnett, author of "The Pentagon's New Map", has been a strategic planner in national security affairs since the end of the Cold War.

I choose The Economist and Obama

ENDORSEMENT: It's time, The Economist, Oct 30th 2008

Talking to an Economist reporter today on an unrelated subject, so good a time as any to remind everyone of my great devotion to this mag. If I was stranded on the proverbial desert island (and I've said this for years), the Economist is the only subscription I'd carry.

This is the clincher for me, even though I voted nearly a month ago.

Obama's task is the great unwinding of the Bush debacle, which Bush himself started these past two years, but which is likely to go four more. If Obama spends his first term unwinding both the financial crisis and the two wars well, then he wins a second term and there stands his real chance to imprint a different world moving forward.

McCain is just not the guy to do the unwinds. I honestly think he'd be a complete disaster, so my expectations for Obama are suitably set: unwind and reset in first term, come out charging like the America the world needs in term two.

Done well, this is one of the great rule-set resets of American and world history.

But no question, the need is great and the time is now and McCain is definitely not the leader for the job.

Ron Reagan

2008-11-01T17:35:00.000-07:00

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ron-reagan/making-it-official-i-endo_b_139932.html

Making It Official: I Endorse Barack Obama

I assumed most people already knew that I had supported Obama. Anyone who has spent five minutes listening to my program would have known that. But if it helped to make it official, I'm happy to make it so.

MI, Traverse City Record Eagle

2008-10-31T04:54:00.001-07:00

http://www.record-eagle.com/opinion/local_story_304095224.html

Published: October 30, 2008 09:52 am

Editorial: Obama is best choice

It is fair to say no presidential election in a generation has come at a more difficult and trying time for America.

The nation's financial industry is in shambles, trillions of dollars in personal wealth have evaporated from Wall Street, millions of Americans have lost their homes or gone bankrupt or both, jobs are vanishing and we are still embroiled in two wars half a world away.

What we need at this crucial moment in history is a leader who offers not just hope for a new direction, but someone who can inspire the nation to set aside differences and work for the greater good. We need policies that will help the great middle class get back on its feet and restore confidence in our system and the future. We need a foreign policy that will keep America safe and pursue our terrorist enemies while restoring the trust and admiration of the world.

We think that candidate is BARACK OBAMA and we urge his election Tuesday.

On the economy -- our top national challenge -- Obama has said recovery won't come easily. He has proposed increasing investment in the nation's infrastructure, education and research and development. He favors lowering taxes for the middle class while raising taxes on the highest earners, a direct reversal of the "trickle-down" economic theory still favored by his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain, of Arizona.

Obama wants more investment in alternate energy and pro-worker trade policies. He has said financial markets need greater oversight. He has proposed eliminating capital gains taxes on small businesses and startups. He favors a pay-as-you-go federal spending policy long advocated by some Democrats.

Despite McCain's military and foreign policy experience, he has stubbornly clung to the concept that we must "win" in Iraq without ever saying what "victory" would look like. For McCain, pursuing al-Qaida is secondary.

Obama has rightly said our real war must be against terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan, including al-Qaida, and has advocated pursuing them into Pakistan if necessary.

Former Secretary of State and Joint Chiefs chairman Colin Powell, who helped George W. Bush make his case for the war in Iraq, has endorsed Obama.

Obama's health care program would center around continuing private insurance plans but with a government-funded option for those who don't have coverage. McCain wants a system that would offer stipends to help individuals buy insurance but also tax the stipend. Neither is the groundbreaking change we need.

Voters must realize this is not the John McCain of eight years ago, the "maverick" who often bucked GOP policies. Instead, McCain has become a successor to many failed Bush policies and Bush's world view.

McCain has dismissed common-sense calls by Obama for direct talks with many nations within Bush's infamous "Axis of Evil," proposals based on the premise that the nation loses nothing by talking first and saber-rattling later.

McCain -- famous for battling congressional "earmarks" -- has built his campaign around some of the top lobbyists in Washington, the very people who make a living off pork-barrel spending.

That's not McCain's only lapse. His choice of Sarah Palin as running mate was questionable. While Palin appeals to the GOP base, her knowledge of domestic and foreign policy issues is almost nonexistent. Even those who admire Palin must admit that for McCain to choose her to be a heartbeat away from the presidency of the United States after meeting her just twice is, at best, rash.

Obama is hardly everyone's choice, of course. The National Rifle Association has endorsed McCain and Palin and says Obama has a "radical record of opposition to our constitutional rights." McCain has been endorsed by four former Secretaries of State and 300 retired generals and admirals. Obama is pro-choice, McCain has been endorsed by Right to Life.

In the end, a president's judgment and character always count more than his foreign policy chops. While McCain has been known throughout his career for having a quick temper and a fighter pilot's inclination to act first, Obama has proven to be calm and thoughtful.

We need calm, we need thoughtful. We need someone to inspire the nation to great things and then unify us to achieve them.

BARACK OBAMA is that candidate.

Nigerian Masterweb

2008-10-30T20:07:00.000-07:00

Barack Obama Endorsed By Masterweb For U.S. Presidency

Masterweb Endorses Obama

For Immediate Release
MILWAUKEE/EWORLDWIRE/Oct. 27, 2008 --- This is to inform the general public that Nigeria / Africa Masterweb
( http://www.nigeriamasterweb.com and http://www.africamasterweb.com )

U.S. Web-based media serving as news outlets and gateways to Nigeria and Africa endorses Barack Obama, U.S. Democratic Candidate for the president of the country. Charles O. Okereke said, "Our management reached this decision after careful review of Obama's profile and political manifesto and believes he is the best choice for President Of The United States.

"Obama's presidency even though will pursue the best interests of the U.S., will not relent in sanctioning all corrupt and despotic African states because of his African heritage. Ignoring and not working with these undemocratic states and focusing on America's domestic needs is enough for these selfish African leaders to jitter. We believe that Obama will do more than that to free his people from the bondage of predators in guise as leaders.

"Corruption, tyranny and civil strive have kept Africa underdeveloped and on her knees amongst nations and continents and we believe Africans will smile along with Americans once the baton of American leadership is handed over to Barack Obama. We wish him success at the polls on November 4, and look forward to celebrating the well-deserved victory."

By: Nigeria / Africa Masterweb
Contact: Charles O. Okereke
Phone: 414-442-5133, Mobile: 414-807-0329
Email: Info@africamasterweb.com, admin@nigeriamasterweb.com

NY, Daily News

2008-10-30T13:06:00.000-07:00

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/10/18/2008-10-18_daily_news_endorses_obama_for_president_.html

Daily News endorses Obama for President: He has the promise to renew America at home and abroad

Saturday, October 18th 2008, 7:12 PM

Brandon/AP

The need for a fresh start in America has grown markedly in the two years of this presidential campaign, and became imperative as the crippled financial system punishes workers, families and retirees in the country.

The U.S. is in want of leadership that repairs a damaged economy, restores faith in government as an engine for the common good and returns competence to the White House after the spectacular failures of the Bush administration.

Barack Obama holds the greater promise of accomplishing the mission than does John McCain. The Daily News endorses the 47-year-old Democrat, the first black American to win a major party nomination, for President.

Even his detractors agree Obama is an extraordinary politician. His campaign elevated a freshman senator to preeminence with a message that he represents a chance to make fundamental change in Washington.

Gifted in oratory and gracefully bearing the mantle of history, Obama stood as the repudiation of the record of George W. Bush. No one capitalized on the blunders of the last eight years more skillfully than he did, while aligning a liberal Democratic agenda with the country's decided shift away from the status quo.

Obama has been called audacious, and he certainly is. But his confidence is supported by both a high intelligence and a clear-eyed pragmatism, qualities that enabled him to best more established competitors - now to stand within reach of breaking America's ultimate racial barrier.

A brilliant mind combined with practicality would well serve any President, and the reserves shown by Obama suggest he would bring nimbleness and judgment to the Oval Office. So does his crucial vow to reach across the aisle for solutions frozen in partisan gridlock.

Obama has the potential to reinvigorate a nation fed up with the dysfunctional behavior of its leaders. But he would face tests - deciding, not speaking; governing, not campaigning - that dwarf any he encountered in his slim 12 years in the Illinois Legislature and the U.S. Senate.

The challenges are of historic proportions and growing.

The American standard of living is threatened with severe erosion from the global financial crisis. There's a war in Iraq to wind responsibly down, and there's a war in Afghanistan that demands smart new strategies. Iran is defiantly acquiring nuclear capability; Russia is flexing its muscles. Energy independence and global warming demand action.

RI, Providence Journal

2008-10-30T12:40:00.000-07:00

http://media.www.browndailyherald.com/media/storage/paper472/news/2008/10/28/Metro/Journal.Breaks.With.Tradition.Endorses.Obama-3510140.shtml

Journal breaks with tradition, endorses Obama

Simon van Zuylen-Wood

Issue date: 10/28/08 Section: Metro

The Providence Journal's endorsement of Barack Obama is its first for a Democratic presidential candidate in four decades. The paper's Sunday editorial lauded Obama's "self-discipline, calm, intelligence, experiences, eloquence and ability to reach out to a panorama of Americans with widely different backgrounds."

http://www.projo.com/opinion/editorials/content/ED_obama26_10-26-08_8BC0MHT_v47.3e2b640.html
Editorial: Obama for president
01:00 AM EDT on Sunday, October 26, 2008

This year America has two first-class major-party candidates for the presidency, with experiences enough to fill novels. While acknowledging that any candidate endorsement involves a leap of faith, we support Sen. Barack Obama over his estimable Republican opponent, John McCain.

The Illinois Democrat’s self-discipline, calm, intelligence, experiences, eloquence and ability to reach out to a panorama of Americans with widely different backgrounds have impressed us. The Arizona Republican, for his part, has sometimes displayed an irritability and negativity unsuited to an office that combines the functions of head of government and head of state.

Senator McCain has criticized his opponent for allegedly having too little experience. But consider Mr. Obama’s knowledge of America at the neighborhood and at the national level. Consider how well he understands and articulates the challenges and opportunities of our heterogeneous world and his obvious capacity for empathy and his ability to listen. (That is not to say, of course, that we laud his associations with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and some other dubious Chicagoans. But then, Mr. Obama, like Mr. McCain, has had a very complicated life.)

Mr. Obama was educated at Occidental and Columbia colleges and Harvard Law School, where he was president of the Harvard Law Review. His work in an international business consultancy, and then as a lawyer, writer, community organizer and politician has repeatedly demonstrated his ability to work with and inspire people in very different settings. And in his presidential race, he has shown an impressive management ability by organizing and running a vast and complicated campaign whose success would have seemed implausible two years ago.

And, yes, consider Senator Obama’s culturally complex national and international background, and that he has known both affluence and poverty. He has, in short, been informed by a very rich set of experiences, some very challenging emotionally and intellectually, that should strengthen his capacity for national and international leadership.

John McCain, of course, is an impressive leader — with a record for bravery and independence. But in his effort to gain the support of the Republican base, he has cast off some of the ideals that for a long time made him so attractive to us. While he used to be a deficit hawk, who warned about the effects on our over-indebted society of federal budget deficits, in this election cycle he has backed continued big tax cuts weighted to the wealthy. He has also supported some of the Bush administration’s constitutionally flawed policies in the “War on Terror.” His response to the credit crisis has been erratic, with several ill-considered schemes put forward. And he seems less likely to effectively address the urgent need for health-care reform and independence from fossil fuel than Mr. Obama.

Neither of the candidates’ economic plans add up: They both ignore the scary deficit and contain absurd promises (as in all such campaigns), but Senator Obama seems to us to be more likely to develop a coherent and effective program. Mr. Obama, whose advisers include the likes of Warren Buffett and Paul Volcker, has displayed more interest in and knowledge of economics than has Senator McCain, who thought that this election would be mostly about national security and foreign affairs instead of how to deal with a financial disaster. We suspect, by the way, that Messrs. Obama’s and McCain’s national-security and foreign policies in practice would not be nearly as different as some have predicted.

There is also the matter of vice-presidential selections, probably the most important one a presidential candidate makes. In this, the 72-year-old McCain has come up short. Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, whom Senator McCain apparently chose to appeal to his party’s right wing, is intelligent and often engaging but has not yet shown the breadth of knowledge, the judgment or the temperament needed to be a good president. Senator Obama’s choice, Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden, however, has that knowledge and experience, however irritating his egotism.

The next president will have to deal with a Congress that, although almost certainly Democratic, will sometimes want to go its own way. And all successful American politicians must be willing to shift course and endlessly experiment in that broad center that Americans want to stay in.

“We do not know what the future will bring except that it will be different from any future we could predict,” said John Maynard Keynes. So above all, our choice comes down to broad themes and a sense of a candidate’s judgment, temperament and experience, and hence ability to lead the country as unforeseen events roll in. Thus we endorse Barack Obama.

MO, St. Louis American

2008-10-30T12:31:00.001-07:00

THURSDAY OCTOBER 30, 2008
Last modified: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 11:38 PM CDT

Obama for us, St. Louis American endorses Obama and Biden

By the St. Louis American

It will come as no surprise that we heartily endorse Barack Obama for U.S. president.

There are at least 100,000 reasons for our decision. That is, roughly, the number of people who stood on the Gateway Arch grounds and beyond recently to cheer on his candidacy in its final weeks before the Nov. 4 election, when n as Obama told us himself, just before he stepped onstage n African Americans can be the decision makers in his favor if we vote anywhere near our strength.

The image of an African-American orator attracting a diverse, peaceful, passionate crowd of 100,000 in an historically segregated city like St. Louis should be endorsement enough for this very special person. If you can unite St. Louis, whose divisions we know all too well, you can move the country drastically forward toward greater equality and inclusion. And, as Obama told us personally before he took that stage, “America is always better when we pull together.”

Former Fire Chief Sherman George pointed out something important in a speech to his international colleagues in the fire service, soon after Obama made history under the Arch: “The crowd stretched from the Gateway Arch, where Senator Obama delivered his remarks, to the Old Courthouse, where one of Dred Scott’s trials in his lawsuit to free himself and his family from slavery was heard.”

When we talk about making history on Nov. 4, that is the history we are talking about making.

Obama has much more than historical symbolism or racial unity to recommend him as the 44th president of the United States. For a great many Americans who could care less if a black man ever serves as president, the deciding moment in his favor came with Obama’s almost unbelievably cool and intelligent response to the calamitous crisis in the credit markets n this campaign’s October Surprise.

Obama had the foresight to call his Republican opponent, John McCain, and suggest that a joint statement would be in the best interest of the nation at a very tentative time. Perhaps sensing he had been outsmarted and that Obama would take credit for a brilliant and sensible idea, McCain instead put his campaign ahead of his country and took the solo grandstand to suspend his campaign and rush back to Washington n where, according to his colleagues, he offered nothing whatsoever to the intense discussions about the bailout.

Against the urgent counsel of many of his advisors, Obama resisted the bait. He did not take McCain’s lead. Unforgettably, he addressed the American people to expose McCain’s ploy and remind us that presidents need to have the wherewithal to do more than one difficult thing at a time. He assured us he was in daily contact with his colleagues in the Senate and with Treasury officials n and, in the meantime, he would continue with the task he had set for himself: that of convincing a fearful and weary nation that he is the leader we need.

We are convinced.

In terms of policy proposals, the media is saturated with what Obama plans to deliver, compared to McCain, and we have printed much of what Obama will propose to the Congress and his party if we vote him into office. His middle-class tax cuts are more wise than the Bush tax cuts that McCain would uphold and increase n adding an estimated $4.2 billion in debt over 10 years. Obama’s health care plan n while far from perfect n at least moves toward the universal coverage we need, whereas McCain would tax citizens for the health care benefits their employers provide and push health insurance further down the path of deregulation that has brought disaster to the credit markets.

Of course, the president does not impose policy. He guides it through his leadership of his own party and his ability to build consensus with members of Congress, regardless of party affiliation. No one could possibly offer a shred of evidence that his opponent can achieve these difficult tasks better than Obama can.

The McCain campaign bickers and implodes, while Obama drives his campaign steadily toward victory, with even the Clinton sideshow belatedly rushing to join what could be an overwhelming victory. No one could name even one meaningful Democratic defection to McCain’s cause, while throughout his historic campaign, Obama has received support and endorsements from prominent, intelligent Republicans n Goldwaters, Eisenhowers, Buckleys and (a coup that will never be forgotten in Black America) General Colin Powell, based on his intellectual depth and ability to make wise, thoughtful decisions.

Powell’s support reminds us of this country’s many, bloody, precarious and expensive military engagements. Obama’s strong, unequivocal stance against the war in Iraq was key to the success of his primary campaign, and we can appreciate why he has downplayed his doubts about the war in competing against a Republican military veteran in a general election.

But anti-war Democrats have not left Obama’s side or thrown roadblocks across his campaign, because we understand that McCain will continue deadly and costly business as usual in our foreign policy, based largely on military interventions, whereas Obama will bring to it the same sound, penetrating, problem-solving mind that has managed to do the unthinkable: make a black man the favored candidate for the presidency of the United States, still the world’s only superpower, going into the last week of the campaign.

Barack Obama is the inspiring, transcendent figure in politics that comes along, at best, once in a generation, maybe once in a century. This man, who made a conscious choice to self-identify as black, represents what America is fast becoming in the 21st century: a diverse, multi-racial, multi-cultural nation that is inclusive and forward-thinking. Obama is a man of the world, not of a parochial sector of his own country, and a politician of the future, not of the past.

Because of his grounded upbringing and superior education, Obama has combined a brilliant mind with an even temperament, political savvy and the crucial ability to think on his feet. He also possesses the rare ability to communicate to the masses and move them in a positive direction, which the Republicans envy so desperately that they constantly demean this gift of his and have tried (and failed) to manufacture it in the form of their vice president nominee.

Obama’s appeal cuts across racial, ethnic, gender, generational, social and national lines, and he has been able to share his positive vision of the United States and the world with the masses n especially young voters, our future n who now share his conviction that change is what is required. Obama has been able to tap into the dormant spirit of a people and empower us to believe that we n any of us; all of us n are the ones who can make change happen.

As Obama told the American personally before he gave a similar message to 100,000 hopeful people in St. Louis, “We are all in this together and we must try to understand one another’s hopes and dreams, and in that way we will be more successful than if we turn on one another.”

We are sure that a majority of Americans will pull together on Nov. 4, rather than turn on ourselves, as the Republicans always try to get us to do. We are sure that each of you will do all that you can so that all of the registered voters in your family, your church and your neighborhood go n early n to the polls on Nov. 4. We must not let the success of his campaign make us complacent or think for one moment that our vote is not needed or won’t be counted. We must each of us do our part to help fulfill the dream of equality and equal participation in the political process ignited by the Civil Rights Movement. Each of us has a personal responsibility to help make a difference in this historic election. We strongly urge you to vote for JOE BIDEN FOR VICE PRESIDENT and BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

Fred Bramante, NH Republican

2008-10-30T12:16:00.000-07:00

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1128871&format=text

Prominent New Hampshire Republican endorses Obama

By Associated Press | Thursday, October 30, 2008 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Campaign 2008

CONCORD, N.H. 0 A prominent New Hampshire Republican is getting off the Straight Talk Express and hopping on the Obama bandwagon.

Fred Bramante has stepped down from John McCain’s New Hampshire Leadership Committee to endorse Barack Obama. The former chairman and current member of the state Board of Education said he opposes McCain’s support of school vouchers, which would give parents taxpayer money to offset the cost of private schooling. Bramante said politicians must abandon the voucher idea if they want to improve education.

Bramante said he’s concluded McCain would do little to improve education, while Obama supports new and innovative ideas.

Bramante was co-chairman of Mike Huckabee’s New Hampshire presidential campaign and joined McCain after Huckabee dropped out of the race. He also was a delegate to the national GOP convention.

The Economist

2008-10-30T11:45:00.000-07:00

http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12516666&source=features_box_main

The presidential election

It's time

Oct 30th 2008
From The Economist print edition

America should take a chance and make Barack Obama the next leader of the free world

IT IS impossible to forecast how important any presidency will be. Back in 2000 America stood tall as the undisputed superpower, at peace with a generally admiring world. The main argument was over what to do with the federal government’s huge budget surplus. Nobody foresaw the seismic events of the next eight years. When Americans go to the polls next week the mood will be very different. The United States is unhappy, divided and foundering both at home and abroad. Its self-belief and values are under attack.

For all the shortcomings of the campaign, both John McCain and Barack Obama offer hope of national redemption. Now America has to choose between them. The Economist does not have a vote, but if it did, it would cast it for Mr Obama. We do so wholeheartedly: the Democratic candidate has clearly shown that he offers the better chance of restoring America’s self-confidence. But we acknowledge it is a gamble. Given Mr Obama’s inexperience, the lack of clarity about some of his beliefs and the prospect of a stridently Democratic Congress, voting for him is a risk. Yet it is one America should take, given the steep road ahead.

Thinking about 2009 and 2017

The immediate focus, which has dominated the campaign, looks daunting enough: repairing America’s economy and its international reputation. The financial crisis is far from finished. The United States is at the start of a painful recession. Some form of further fiscal stimulus is needed, though estimates of the budget deficit next year already spiral above $1 trillion. Some 50m Americans have negligible health-care cover. Abroad, even though troops are dying in two countries, the cack-handed way in which George Bush has prosecuted his war on terror has left America less feared by its enemies and less admired by its friends than it once was.

Yet there are also longer-term challenges, worth stressing if only because they have been so ignored on the campaign. Jump forward to 2017, when the next president will hope to relinquish office. A combination of demography and the rising costs of America’s huge entitlement programmes—Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid—will be starting to bankrupt the country. Abroad a greater task is already evident: welding the new emerging powers to the West. That is not just a matter of handling the rise of India and China, drawing them into global efforts, such as curbs on climate change; it means reselling economic and political freedom to a world that too quickly associates American capitalism with Lehman Brothers and American justice with Guantánamo Bay. This will take patience, fortitude, salesmanship and strategy.

At the beginning of this election year, there were strong arguments against putting another Republican in the White House. A spell in opposition seemed apt punishment for the incompetence, cronyism and extremism of the Bush presidency. Conservative America also needs to recover its vim. Somehow Ronald Reagan’s party of western individualism and limited government has ended up not just increasing the size of the state but turning it into a tool of southern-fried moralism.

The selection of Mr McCain as the Republicans’ candidate was a powerful reason to reconsider. Mr McCain has his faults: he is an instinctive politician, quick to judge and with a sharp temper. And his age has long been a concern (how many global companies in distress would bring in a new 72-year-old boss?). Yet he has bravely taken unpopular positions—for free trade, immigration reform, the surge in Iraq, tackling climate change and campaign-finance reform. A western Republican in the Reagan mould, he has a long record of working with both Democrats and America’s allies.

If only the real John McCain had been running

That, however, was Senator McCain; the Candidate McCain of the past six months has too often seemed the victim of political sorcery, his good features magically inverted, his bad ones exaggerated. The fiscal conservative who once tackled Mr Bush over his unaffordable tax cuts now proposes not just to keep the cuts, but to deepen them. The man who denounced the religious right as “agents of intolerance” now embraces theocratic culture warriors. The campaigner against ethanol subsidies (who had a better record on global warming than most Democrats) came out in favour of a petrol-tax holiday. It has not all disappeared: his support for free trade has never wavered. Yet rather than heading towards the centre after he won the nomination, Mr McCain moved to the right.

Meanwhile his temperament, always perhaps his weak spot, has been found wanting. Sometimes the seat-of-the-pants method still works: his gut reaction over Georgia—to warn Russia off immediately—was the right one. Yet on the great issue of the campaign, the financial crisis, he has seemed all at sea, emitting panic and indecision. Mr McCain has never been particularly interested in economics, but, unlike Mr Obama, he has made little effort to catch up or to bring in good advisers (Doug Holtz-Eakin being the impressive exception).

The choice of Sarah Palin epitomised the sloppiness. It is not just that she is an unconvincing stand-in, nor even that she seems to have been chosen partly for her views on divisive social issues, notably abortion. Mr McCain made his most important appointment having met her just twice.

Ironically, given that he first won over so many independents by speaking his mind, the case for Mr McCain comes down to a piece of artifice: vote for him on the assumption that he does not believe a word of what he has been saying. Once he reaches the White House, runs this argument, he will put Mrs Palin back in her box, throw away his unrealistic tax plan and begin negotiations with the Democratic Congress. That is plausible; but it is a long way from the convincing case that Mr McCain could have made. Had he become president in 2000 instead of Mr Bush, the world might have had fewer problems. But this time it is beset by problems, and Mr McCain has not proved that he knows how to deal with them.

Is Mr Obama any better? Most of the hoopla about him has been about what he is, rather than what he would do. His identity is not as irrelevant as it sounds. Merely by becoming president, he would dispel many of the myths built up about America: it would be far harder for the spreaders of hate in the Islamic world to denounce the Great Satan if it were led by a black man whose middle name is Hussein; and far harder for autocrats around the world to claim that American democracy is a sham. America’s allies would rally to him: the global electoral college on our website shows a landslide in his favour. At home he would salve, if not close, the ugly racial wound left by America’s history and lessen the tendency of American blacks to blame all their problems on racism.

So Mr Obama’s star quality will be useful to him as president. But that alone is not enough to earn him the job. Charisma will not fix Medicare nor deal with Iran. Can he govern well? Two doubts present themselves: his lack of executive experience; and the suspicion that he is too far to the left.

There is no getting around the fact that Mr Obama’s résumé is thin for the world’s biggest job. But the exceptionally assured way in which he has run his campaign is a considerable comfort. It is not just that he has more than held his own against Mr McCain in the debates. A man who started with no money and few supporters has out-thought, out-organised and outfought the two mightiest machines in American politics—the Clintons and the conservative right.

Political fire, far from rattling Mr Obama, seems to bring out the best in him: the furore about his (admittedly ghastly) preacher prompted one of the most thoughtful speeches of the campaign. On the financial crisis his performance has been as assured as Mr McCain’s has been febrile. He seems a quick learner and has built up an impressive team of advisers, drawing in seasoned hands like Paul Volcker, Robert Rubin and Larry Summers. Of course, Mr Obama will make mistakes; but this is a man who listens, learns and manages well.

It is hard too nowadays to depict him as soft when it comes to dealing with America’s enemies. Part of Mr Obama’s original appeal to the Democratic left was his keenness to get American troops out of Iraq; but since the primaries he has moved to the centre, pragmatically saying the troops will leave only when the conditions are right. His determination to focus American power on Afghanistan, Pakistan and proliferation was prescient. He is keener to talk to Iran than Mr McCain is— but that makes sense, providing certain conditions are met.

Our main doubts about Mr Obama have to do with the damage a muddle-headed Democratic Congress might try to do to the economy. Despite the protectionist rhetoric that still sometimes seeps into his speeches, Mr Obama would not sponsor a China-bashing bill. But what happens if one appears out of Congress? Worryingly, he has a poor record of defying his party’s baronies, especially the unions. His advisers insist that Mr Obama is too clever to usher in a new age of over-regulation, that he will stop such nonsense getting out of Congress, that he is a political chameleon who would move to the centre in Washington. But the risk remains that on economic matters the centre that Mr Obama moves to would be that of his party, not that of the country as a whole.

He has earned it

So Mr Obama in that respect is a gamble. But the same goes for Mr McCain on at least as many counts, not least the possibility of President Palin. And this cannot be another election where the choice is based merely on fear. In terms of painting a brighter future for America and the world, Mr Obama has produced the more compelling and detailed portrait. He has campaigned with more style, intelligence and discipline than his opponent. Whether he can fulfil his immense potential remains to be seen. But Mr Obama deserves the presidency.

JFK to Obama video

2008-10-30T11:15:00.001-07:00

FL, Fort Lauderdale, Westside Gazette

2008-10-29T22:52:00.000-07:00

http://www.thewestsidegazette.com/News/article/article.asp?NewsID=92238&sID=4&ItemSource=L

We endorse Senator Barack Obama for our next President of the United States of America!
Westside Gazette

Originally posted 10/29/2008

As we prepare to embark on one of the greatest journeys ever foretold in the history of mankind; from Adam to Barack. I would ask that every Black American that has had to endure any and all forms of the dehumanizing process of slavery to which has played a significant part of this historic journey to lock hands, heart and spirit with those that believed and conspired to pre-vent, discourage and sabotage this moment from coming to pass. To send up prayers to ask God to guide all of us pass our tormented history to a joyous day that will begin a healing process that is so long needed and overdue for us to become that Great Nation that we so long to be.

What has been done has been done and the past has its meanings and directions for us to govern ourselves accordingly. No, we should NEVER forget nor shall we forever live in the past. The stones that were used against us shall be the same stones that are set in place to guide and direct us. Those stones have left many wounds and some disfigurement but they have also been used as a soothing balm and tools to forge us ahead to this time.

Change is inevitable; nature and life are its chief examples. Nothing remains the same except God and His Word.

Who would have ever known that Barack Obama, a man from such self-effacing beginnings and one of mixed races could weave-and-bob his way through the sludge and mess that have become such an essential part of the political arena, as well as life in America, to being so close at becoming our first African American President?

I�m asking you to join us in casting your vote for a man of impeccable, earned credentials and a symbol of what America can be; vote for Senator Barack Obama as our next President of the United States of America!

It is what it is! �Bobby R. Henry, Sr., Publisher

Obama is one of the most intelligent presidential aspirants to ever step forward in American history. The likes of his intellectual capabilities have not been surpassed in public life since the Founding Fathers put pen to paper. His personal character is also solid gold. Take heart, America: we have the leader for our times.

I say this as a white, former lifelong Republican. I say this as the proud father of a Marine. I say this as just another American watching his pension evaporate along with the stock market! I speak as someone who knows it�s time to forget party loyalty, ideology and pride and put the country first. I say this as someone happy to be called a fool for going out on a limb and declaring that, 1) Obama will win, and 2) he is going to be amongst the greatest of American presidents.

Obama is our last best chance. He�s worth laying it all on the line for.
-- Frank Schaeffer

MO, Jackson Free Press

2008-10-29T22:36:00.001-07:00

http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/index.php/site/comments/jfp_endorsements_102908/

JFP Endorsements

Katie Royals

We agree with Colin Powell that Sen. Barack Obama is a next-generation leader for all Americans, regardless of party, race or background.

October 29, 2008

For information on how to protect your vote, please visit Jackpedia.com.

President — Barack Obama
Gen. Colin Powell said it best when he endorsed Sen. Barack Obama on “Meet the Press”: “I think we need a transformational figure. I think we need a president who is a generational change.”

Every good reason, and there are many, to vote for Obama on Nov. 4 falls under that “generational change” umbrella. As Powell said, he is the hopeful change as opposed to the fearful status quo that Sen. John McCain represents.

McCain is a certifiable American hero and deserves respect, and we hope he stays “mavericky” in the Senate, where he provides a much-needed “opposition” voice. But that voice is not one of national leadership, as the petty squabbling in his campaign, his choice of Sarah Palin as backup president, and his use of fear-baiting and divisive strategies and untruths in his campaign clearly show. But this endorsement is not against McCain; it is for Obama.

Barack Obama has inspired a nation in a way that no one who works at the Jackson Free Press remembers seeing a national leader do. He is willing to stand for his ideals, even when he knows they will be twisted against him. And most importantly, he is that generational change—with new ideas, calm resolve, and the welcome willingness to buck failed approaches and policies of the last generation and the last century.

The greatest reason to vote for Obama is a toss-up between foreign policy and economics. On foreign policy, he has been on the right side of history—unlike most members of Congress. As a new senator, he stood against what was a politically popular war (the JFP appreciates that courage; as a new newspaper, we did the same). He now wants to get us out of a war with no end in sight that is sucking up our resources and killing our family members, even as he wants to put more resources into apprehending the man who actually led the attacks on American people on Sept. 11. This is smart, and we all know it.

Perhaps more important, he wants to keep us from going into dumb wars again. He is willing to buck the conventional “wisdom” of the baby-boomer generation of leaders who do not believe it is wise to actually try to talk to our enemies before we attack them. Like most of us, he knows that a 21st-century world needs a U.S. president who is going to build bridges and alliances—including against enemies who cannot be stopped diplomatically—and repair the massive harm that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld did to our good name. He knows that because we’ve done it one way for a long time, it doesn’t mean we continue failed traditions.

On the other hand, McCain wants to return us to Cold War-era times with his pet project, the League of Democracies, that would kick Russia out of the G-8, and leave out China altogether, while inviting India in. We’re no fan of the Chinese government (or its faulty products and poor human rights record) over this way, but some of us at the JFP remember well the “who’s bigger” approach to warring with the old Soviet Union.

We need a leader who will seek out global alliances and conversations, and not just with (mostly) European countries, such as McCain’s plan would do. In this dangerous world and in the quest to turn back and prevent radical terrorists (Islamic and otherwise), the U.S. needs to cultivate more allies, not more enemies, and Obama has the temperament to make that happen. As for McCain, if his temperment is such that he cannot look Obama in the eye, how will fare among actual enemies of the United States?

The economy is easy. We also cannot afford four more years of Bush-McCain policies; that is not just a sound bite. In the run-up to this campaign, McCain clearly bragged to FOX News about voting with Bush “90 percent of the time.” If that’s not the “real McCain,” then why did he compromise his integrity?

The middle class needs help. Small businesses need help. The American people need help. And here’s the “straight talkԗwe’ve got to generate tax revenue to offset the reckless spending of the past eight years. This will happen through smart health-care initiatives and tax cuts targeted to those the hardest hit by today’s economic collapse. It is not “socialistic” to target tax relief beyond the wealthiest Americans, which was Bush’s approach and is now McCain’s. “Trickle down” did not work—although plenty of the spoils went to shareholders and CEOs of the companies getting the most tax relief and incentives. Small businesses that make less than $250,000 a year in profits will benefit from Obama’s tax cuts. And people clearing more than $250,000 per year can afford a return to Clinton-era tax levels. And even McCain’s economic adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin admitted Tuesday that Americans’ current employer insurance policies are better than McCain’s plan.

Mississippians also cannot afford the “hatchet” that John McCain would bring to any kind of federal funding that helps our state. He would “freeze spending” in his words, and stop even the kinds of “pork” that helped rebuild the Gulf Coast after Katrina. Yes, earmarks will require a sharp scalpel, but McCain’s no-pork-never-ever approach will hurt Mississippi severely.

Almost by coincidence, Obama offers the U.S. a poignant fringe benefit: This inspirational man happens to be African American. His race is no reason to endorse him or vote for him—we sure didn’t endorse Democrats Al Sharpton or Frank Melton based on their race—but it does mean that today’s toddlers of all backgrounds will grow up believing that they can be president, and that is no small feat in a country still plagued by race issues, as the McCain-Palin campaign has shown. It is also a way for our country and our state to show and say, “We’re in this together.”

We believe strongly that Barack Obama will be an amazing U.S. president who will help mend division, partisan and otherwise. Please vote for the future on Nov. 4. Lasting solutions are found in hope, never fear.

Seed Magazine

2008-10-29T22:07:00.000-07:00

http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2008/10/obama_for_president.php

Barack Obama for President

An endorsement from the editors of Seed.

by The Editors • Posted October 29, 2008 03:00 PM

Our world is more complex, dynamic, and interdependent than at any time in recent history. Financial markets are in turmoil, geopolitical conflicts abound, and our pale blue dot is in serious peril. Yet these are also times for great optimism — about what can be known and what can be accomplished, about our potential to discover and innovate. To navigate this new reality, to realize opportunity within this massive change, we need a new approach to governance and problem solving; we need a new way of looking at the world and a new set of values founded on the conviction that knowledge is good; and we need leaders who have the courage and wisdom to change their mind in the face of new evidence. Today we stand at an inflection point in modern history, and America, still inarguably and essentially the world's beacon, will chart the way forward next Tuesday. At this critical moment, we offer an endorsement and a perspective that we hope informs the decision of our American readers.

It is abundantly evident that science can refuel economic growth, address the energy and climate challenge, and help restore America's soft power around the world. President Bush dismissed this potential, turned the very act of defying science into an art, and in so doing diminished US competitiveness and disenfranchised the country's source of innovation. His administration not only disregarded evidence time and time again but also rejected and debased the very enterprise that offered that evidence. Renewing the promise of science starts first and foremost with restoring scientific integrity to government.

Sen. Obama's pledged stance on science resonates with us. He has vowed to restore integrity to the role of science advisor by reestablishing the senior status of the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and more broadly, by surrounding himself with individuals with exemplary scientific credentials; his selection of Dr. Harold Varmus as the campaign's science advisor was a very promising and laudable step in that direction. Sen. Obama understands that basic research is fundamental to how scientific advances are made. He sees the importance of expanding funding for "high-risk, high-return" work, strengthening tax policy to spur R&D, and encouraging the careers of young scientists who pursue innovative lines of thinking. He has offered a comprehensive plan to reinvigorate math and science education, and he recognizes the vital importance of re-architecting nationwide science literacy for these times. His positions on topics ranging from agriculture, alternative energy, and medical research to internet policy, patent law, and space are more robust and ultimately more in line with scientific consensus than those of Sen. McCain. These are important policy positions, and they reflect Sen. Obama's appreciation of the need to invest in science and science education as a precondition for growth and prosperity in the 21st century. We recognize, however, that these are not the issues that most voters will be thinking about when they cast their ballot.

Far more important is this: Science is a way of governing, not just something to be governed. Science offers a methodology and philosophy rooted in evidence, kept in check by persistent inquiry, and bounded by the constraints of a self-critical and rigorous method. Science is a lens through which we can and should visualize and solve complex problems, organize government and multilateral bodies, establish international alliances, inspire national pride, restore positive feelings about America around the globe, embolden democracy, and ultimately, lead the world. More than anything, what this lens offers the next administration is a limitless capacity to handle all that comes its way, no matter how complex or unanticipated.

Sen. Obama's embrace of transparency and evidence-based decision-making, his intelligence and curiosity echo this new way of looking at the world. And that is what we should be weighing in the voting booth. For his positions and, even more, for his way of coming to them, we endorse Barack Obama for President of the United States.

MO. Joplin Globe

2008-10-29T21:44:00.000-07:00

http://www.bnd.com/336/story/522249.html

Joplin (Mo.) Globe endorses Obama

The Associated Press

JOPLIN, Mo. -- The Joplin Globe has endorsed Barack Obama, the newspaper's first Democratic presidential endorsement since 1908....

The only other Democrat to win a Globe presidential endorsement was William Jennings Bryan in 1908.

http://www.joplinglobe.com/editorial/local_story_302211616.html

Published October 28, 2008 09:16 pm - It's a theme that both presidential candidates have seized upon during this election cycle — that Americans are ready for a fresh direction at a time of great uncertainty.

In our view: Fresh direction

It's a theme that both presidential candidates have seized upon during this election cycle — that Americans are ready for a fresh direction at a time of great uncertainty.

The Globe's editorial board did not take the matter of a presidential endorsement lightly. It was a discussion that spanned several weeks, and the vote was not unanimous. But when it comes to that issue of a new direction, the majority of the board believes that Sen. Barack Obama is the candidate best suited to deliver it.

Following the market collapse and the recent Wall Street bailout, we believe that the nation needs a new economic plan.

Obama's plan to provide tax cuts for middle-income Americans is a welcome one, as is his plan to eliminate capital-gains taxes for small businesses and provide cuts for businesses that create and keep jobs in the United States.

With the war in Iraq well into its fifth year, Obama has said that it is time for the Iraqi government to begin stepping up to take on financial responsibility for its country at a time when our country is spending billions of dollars (not to mention the human cost) each month in our efforts there.

And we agree that beginning a responsible drawdown of American forces will also require Iraq to begin taking more military control of its country, and allow our troops to place more emphasis on al-Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan, and bringing 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden to justice.

In selecting Sen. Joe Biden as his running mate, Obama made a choice that bolstered his ticket's foreign policy credentials at a time when our nation's standing in the world has been diminished.

We are uncomfortable with Sen. John McCain's selection of Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. With the Palin pick, McCain rallied his base but undercut his theme at the time that experience matters. We remain unconvinced that she is ready to step into the No. 1 spot if needed.

Obama's ability to transcend generational, racial and partisan divisions, his thoughtful approach to weighty issues and message of bipartisanship resonate with many Americans. There are some who see him as simply a gifted speaker, but his words inspire. We believe that Obama can make those words a reality — making "change" more than just a campaign slogan, but a launching point for a brighter future for all Americans.

IA, Press Citizen

2008-10-29T14:20:00.000-07:00

October 29, 2008

Our View -- Vote Obama, turn hope into reality

"After seven years of being lost in the wilderness of oppositional presidential politics, Democrats now seem well positioned to do in 2008 what they failed to do in 2004: Replace a rogue cowboy president with a new president capable of uniting the country and resetting the nation's foreign policy and global reputation. The Press-Citizen Editorial Board thinks Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is the best candidate in a well-qualified field of Democrats to make those long overdue changes. We endorse his candidacy enthusiastically."

That's how we started our Obama endorsement in the weeks before the Iowa Caucuses. And in the subsequent 10 months, we have had little cause to dampen our enthusiasm. Not only did Iowa provide the first gust of wind to help Obama sail on to become the first black candidate to claim a major party presidential nomination, but recent polls show how the Obama campaign also has transformed our former swing state into a much bluer shade of purple.

We're proud that Iowa now stands ready to atone for its support of George W. Bush in 2004 by offering its seven electoral votes to the candidate pledged to fundamentally change the failed policies of the past eight years.

Ever since Obama first addressed the nation in his 2004 Democratic National Convention speech, we've learned a lot about the senator from our neighboring state:

• Through his lengthy primary battles with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, we've seen his leadership, stamina and organizational skills.

• Through his responses to the controversies surrounding his former associates -- specifically the Rev. Jeremiah Wright -- we've learned the depth of his knowledge of Constitutional history, the eloquence in which he can pull from that history to explain current issues and the calm demeanor by which he can assure both the nation and the world that a grownup is making decisions.

• Throughout the debates -- both for the primary and general elections -- we've seen Obama develop beyond the academic-sounding (sometimes stammering) former University of Chicago law professor and rediscover his voice as a community organizer whose community has expanded from the Southside of Chicago to all of Illinois and now to the nation as a whole.

• Through the endorsements of Republicans like former Secretary of State Colin Powell and former Rep. Jim Leach, we've learned that Obama's message does reach across the partisan aisle and that other experts are confident in his understanding of our economic and foreign policy woes.

• And throughout the recent few months, we've seen Obama's general election campaign avoid the politics of fear and manipulation that have overwhelmed the campaign of a one-time Republican maverick from whom we expected much better.

For these general reasons -- as well as for many specific policy issues on health care, energy and economic regulation -- we not only encourage our local readers to cast their votes for Obama, but we also urge them to make sure their friends and neighbors are casting their votes as well.

The once great John McCain

In the past four years, unfortunately, we've also witnessed Republican presidential hopeful John McCain transform from the maverick he seemed to be during his 2000 campaign into a Republican establishment candidate whose economic and foreign policy proposals bear far too much resemblance to the failed policies of the Bush Administration he once routinely criticized.

During the third debate, McCain got off a good zinger against Obama's consistent linking of the Republican candidate's policies to those of the president:

"Senator Obama, I am not President Bush," McCain said. "If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago. I'm going to give a new direction to this economy in this country."

But Obama's response describes one of the saddest political transformations in recent history:

"So the fact of the matter is that if I occasionally have mistaken your policies for George Bush's policies," Obama said, "it's because on the core economic issues that matter to the American people, on tax policy, on energy policy, on spending priorities, you have been a vigorous supporter of President Bush. Now, you've shown independence -- commendable independence, on some key issues like torture, for example, and I give you enormous credit for that. But when it comes to economic policies, essentially what you're proposing is eight more years of the same thing. And it hasn't worked."

If only the McCain of the original Straight Talk Express was running today. If only candidate McCain from 2000 -- the one who really did take on the leaders of his party when they were moving in the direction of the policies proposed by George W. Bush -- were in charge of a party that has wreaked such havoc on Washington for eight years. Then perhaps he would have enough credibility to promise that his administration would offer something different.

But by giving his vice presidential nod to Sarah Palin as a last-ditch attempt to garner hard-core conservative support, McCain has shown undeniably how he controls neither his own campaign nor his own party.

If McCain does manage -- yet again -- to beat the odds and to pull off an upset on Tuesday, we sincerely hope his actual governing policies will be much different than his current campaign rhetoric would imply. But given the number of advisers that McCain would hold over from the Bush Administration -- and given the anti-intellectual, unqualified, faux-reformer that would be a heartbeat away from the presidency -- we think the nation and the world would be best served by a clean break from the past eight years.

Reviving America's global reputation

If any reader is still undecided between these two starkly different candidates, please consider this: If there ever was a time that the election of a president could jump start America's flat-lining moral standing in the world, it would be the election of Barack Obama on Tuesday. Moreover, Obama has proven to be a smart enough politician that he recognizes and will be able to make the best use of that opportunity.

Although it may seem impossible to imagine now, world opinion actually stood solidly behind George W. Bush and the United States seven years ago after a group of extremists crashed two planes into the World Trade Center in New York City. The French newspaper Le Monde had a big headline reading, "We are all Americans now." Iran was the first nation to publicly offer its condolences for America's loss -- and its now former president was making overtures of support if the U.S. eventually decided to go after al-Qaida as a common enemy. At the same time, the American people, although stunned and scared, stood behind their president, ready to make any sacrifices necessary to ensure that the terrorists would not win.

Unfortunately -- for the nation and the world -- Bush squandered that global and national goodwill and drove down America's moral standing even further than his economic policies have driven down the American dollar. (And even more unfortunately, the transformation of McCain 2000 into McCain 2008 means there is little discernible difference between the economic and foreign policies proposed by candidate McCain and those of the president he seeks to succeed.)

Obama can make the most of his historic moment because he understands that, rather than further ostracize or heap on unhelpful labels like "axis of evil," the U.S. needs to begin a process of reconciliation with Iran and other predominately Muslim nations similar to what has been happening between the U.S. and Vietnam over the past two decades -- a process in which McCain, as a Vietnam War veteran, has played a key role.

Only through increasing the numbers of personal, business, cultural, educational and political exchanges can the U.S. and the Muslim world eventually wear down their mutual distrust and begin to establish diplomatic common ground. It's also the only way to ensure that U.S. intelligence estimates in the region are based more on credible sources than on the exaggerated claims of lying leaders or power-seeking exiles.

Obama understands that these are necessary first steps to take before America can begin to reclaim her economic, military and moral prestige.

Turning the page

We don't view an Obama victory on Tuesday as the culmination of political sea change; we view it as the first step toward beginning a revitalization of the American Dream -- both for Americans themselves and for the world as a whole.

As Obama noted during his Jan. 3 victory speech after the Iowa caucuses, "Hope is the bedrock of this nation. The belief that our destiny will not be written for us, but by us, by all those men and women who are not content to settle for the world as it is, who have the courage to remake the world as it should be."

The success of an Obama presidency will depend on the degree to which he continues to inspire individuals to remake the world they've inherited. Both he and the nation have earned the opportunity to start transforming that hope into reality.

The Michigan Journal, UM student paper

2008-10-28T23:37:00.001-07:00

http://media.www.themichiganjournal.com/media/storage/paper255/news/2008/10/28/Perspectives/Editorial.The.Mj.Endorses.Barack.Obama-3510946.shtml

EDITORIAL: The MJ endorses Barack Obama

By: M.J. Editorial Board

Posted: 10/28/08

It doesn't need to be said that this upcoming election will be one of the most pivotal in American history. And it doesn't need to be said that the country is battered from eight years of failed leadership. It's all too obvious. Whoever is following President Bush will have a lot of baggage to carry; two wars, a failing economy, a tainted global image and, as The New York Times put it, "a government systematically stripped of its ability to protect and help its citizens," citing FEMA's pitifully slow reaction to help after Hurricane Katrina and the fact that poverty and unemployment are increasingly a national problem.

The fact is, as much of a slogan as it's become, we as a nation can't afford four more years of the same failed policies, and we at The Michigan Journal believe that John McCain has only established that he would provide more of the same. As if it wasn't obvious before, we'll officially say it: We think that Barack Obama has proven himself worthy of the 44th presidency, and hereby gets our endorsement.

As inexperienced as he may be, with a cool mind and sound judgment he has convinced us he is worthy to take on the task. He'll have a lot of weight on his shoulders upon entering the White House, but we believe his policies, as progressive as they are to some, will gradually repair our country, socially as well as on a global scale. We believe that he has what it takes to end an increasingly unpopular war, get the economy back up to speed and bring us up to date as a society.

We like Obama because he seems to be one with the people, and he doesn't need Joe the Plumber to tell us this. McCain has only proven, as the campaign progressed, that he is so far gone from the American public. We find his policies to be outdated, and often only beneficial to the wealthy elite. And his choice of running mate, who we see as a pathetic attempt to nab the female vote, is clearly incapable of running the nation should anything happen to McCain, which is almost a guarantee.

We find that McCain will only bring the Republican every-man-for-himself ideal back to the White House. Obama seems like he'd be a real leader, and fill the role of running a government that is set up to protect its citizens. We would like to see a President Barack Obama take office in 2009.

Kashmiri group

2008-10-28T23:30:00.000-07:00

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/001200810291140.htm

Kashmiri group endorse Obama

New York (PTI): A US-based Kashmiri group has endorsed Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama saying he has better plans to fight terrorism across the globe.

Kashmir Solidarity, which strongly opposes separatist forces in Jammu and Kashmir, said "Obama will be able to better manage both economy and foreign relations and Indo-US relations will further strengthen under his leadership."

"Though our outfit prefers the trade policies of Republican candidate John McCain, it feels that Sarah Palin as a running mate is too risky to be one step away from the White House," Chairman of the Solidarity Surinder Zutshi told reporters here.

The endorsement comes as polls show that Obama has wide support among Indian-Americans.

Poder Magazine, Hispanic

2008-10-28T14:08:00.000-07:00

http://www.poder360.com/article_detail.php?id_article=859

Tuesday 28 October 2008

Leadership for a new age

An endorsement of Barack Obama for U.S. President

Throughout his long career in the U.S. Senate, John McCain has been a friend and supporter of Latin America and the Hispanic community in the United States. Despite strong opposition from his party, he co-authored with Ted Kennedy a groundbreaking bill for comprehensive immigration reform that sought compromise, pragmatic solutions to this very complex and emotional issue. McCain has been a staunch free-trader and a consistent champion of deepening commerce and investment links in our hemisphere even as these notions became increasingly unpopular amongst the American electorate. Moreover, he has been a firm ally of democratic governments in the region in the fight against drug-traffickers and terrorist groups that threaten the very fiber of their institutions and societies. However, despite his admirable personal history and distinguished political service, this magazine believes that Barack Obama is the better choice for U.S. president on November 4th; for Latin America, for the Hispanic community, for the United States and for the world.

For one thing, the McCain of today seems to have strayed widely from the McCain of old. Of course, electoral pressures have abetted this transformation. But his reversals and hard veers to the right on issues of crucial importance (and that seemed so close to his heart) as immigration and tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans are disquieting. The hustle and bustle of the campaign has also exposed facets of his character and temper that, while useful for, and even becoming of, a maverick senator, appear ill-suited for a commander-in-chief in a time of war, economic crisis and political polarization. What is more, his claim to the moral high-ground in campaign tactics (he was on the receiving end of a vile hatchet job by the Bush political machine in the 2000 primaries), has fallen by the wayside. But this magazine’s endorsement of Obama is not predicated on McCain’s shortcomings. Rather, it rests on three arguments: Obama’s virtues for leadership, the symbolism of his presidency, and the benefits it could yield for the U.S. Hispanic community and our hemisphere.

That Obama’s intellect is first-class, no one can doubt. Few presidents in U.S. history can boast of being Editor of the Harvard Law Review and Professor of Law at the University of Chicago. His outlook is thoughtful, nuanced and open-minded, befitting of fast-paced, uncertain times and a reality that deals in shades of gray. The management of his campaign has been creative, nimble, forward-looking, and as close to flawless (despite its extraordinary length) as any in recent American political history. But what has shone through most in the last few months and the debates is that Obama appears to possess a first-class temperament as well. Obama’s demeanor is collected and poised, and he reacts to even the most vitriolic criticism with a smile. In an age of rising fanaticism, his instinctive moderation is a breath of fresh air.

The symbolic power of an Obama presidency cannot be underestimated. His election would provide, in a fashion, final closure on some of the darkest chapters in American history, the civil rights movement, and it would also open new horizons of aspiration and possibility for millions. The child of an African father and a white American mother, who spent a formative part of his life in Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim nation, Obama is a product of our post-Cold War, interdependent age. His immense popularity abroad (a recent poll by the Economist of 30,000 international readers reveals that 84% of them prefer him over McCain) is a testament to the fact that he is, in a sense, the world’s candidate for U.S. president. The boost from his election to America’s international stature and its dwindling reserve of soft-power, and thus to its ability to shape global affairs, could prove staggering.

The last nationwide survey of Hispanic registered voters conducted by the Pew Center in June and July of this year, showed Obama beating McCain by a 66% to 23% margin. His stands on universal health-care, immigration reform and tax relief for households earning under $200,000 a year, as well as his condition as a minority American, have struck a chord among a group that, despite great strides, remains under-privileged. Today, with the financial crisis in full-force, his support is likely much higher. The countries where these people originally hail from also stand to benefit from an Obama presidency. On the one hand, a dark-skinned, half-African U.S. President would be profoundly unsettling, if not thoroughly destabilizing, for those regimes in the region which, to one extent or another, have reaped political capital from fomenting hatred of “an arrogant, supremacist Empire”. One would hope this would help tilt them from irresponsible demagoguery and bluster, to more reasoned policies and action. Furthermore, few have realized that in a context of economic slowdown and even larger Democratic majorities in Congress, which now seems all but certain, only the prestige of a Democratic president can move U.S. policy in the direction of freer trade and greater engagement with Latin America.

Admittedly, Obama’s greatest drawback is his limited political experience. As the New Yorker’s recent endorsement of the Senator from Illinois put it, “We, too, wish he had more of it”. But, not to downplay his trackrecord as a lawyer and law-maker, experience can sometimes be a handicap, especially when tainted by a mindset that harks back to a different era. Besides, leadership in a wired, multi-polar era is much more about vision, judgment and the capacity to inspire, than about accumulated knowledge or bureaucratic ability. After all, the latter traits can be outsourced, the former can’t. This fall, words from J.F.K.’s presidential nomination acceptance speech ring truer than ever, “It is a time … for a new generation of leadership – new men to cope with new problems and new opportunities."

FL, Florida Today

2008-10-28T13:58:00.000-07:00

http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20081026/OPINION/81024039/1004

October 26, 2008

Our views: We recommend Barack Obama

Who is the right person to bridge America’s deep political divide as president?

These are precarious times for our nation.

The economic crisis, which started in Florida in 2006 with the housing and real estate market, has spread virtually everywhere and into every segment of the country.

More people are having a tough time paying their mortgage. Many worry about their employment, health care and retirement funds. Some businesses are struggling to stay open. And we’re still mired in two wars overseas.

Against that backdrop, two honorable men — Senators John McCain and Barack Obama — are competing to be the next president of the United States.

McCain has spent 26 years in Congress, is a war hero and has demonstrated an independent streak during an era of rigid party politics. He fought for campaign finance reform, tried to stop the torture of terrorism prisoners and supported comprehensive immigration reform.

Barack Obama wisely opposed the war in Iraq, has supported health care reform and has energized large segments of the public who had felt left out of the American Dream. He has brought a new generation enthusiastically to the world of politics.

Both have shown their mettle in tough nomination fights and an arduous fall campaign.

Daunting task ahead

We’re thankful for their willingness to serve, because whoever wins will face a daunting task:

He will be expected to rebalance our lives, restore our economy and re-establish our world leadership. And his job will be made more difficult by the rancor that permeates American politics.

In contemplating our endorsement, we carefully considered the candidates’ policy positions.

Both men say they will support NASA’s new moon exploration and build a new fleet of post-shuttle spacecraft to take astronauts back to the lunar surface. That’s crucial for the future of our community, which lies in the shadow of Kennedy Space Center, and we applaud them for it.

But both have clearly promised more than they can deliver in these dire economic times and the soaring federal budget deficits and staggering national debt that are among its hallmarks.

In the end, the factor we focused on most was which candidate had the potential to build coalitions and reach out to others. Not only across the aisles in Congress, but into the nation, where many people have an independent streak, even if they do have a party registration.

We contemplated making no recommendation because most Space Coast residents already have made their decision and won’t be swayed by ours. But these are critical times and few elections have ever loomed as important, so who are we to stand down?

Our problems are too big for anyone to solve standing alone. We will need to do it together.

America needs to do more than set new directions on the economy and in foreign policy. We need to set a new direction in politics.

Yes, politics will continue to be inherently contentious. But we do not believe it has to be destructive. The nation would benefit if the venom, distrust and win-at-all-cost approach employed by both parties should cease or at least moderate.

We feel the next president must make this a priority.

The clear edge

In this test, we feel Obama has a clear edge, and it’s why he has earned our endorsement.

His temperament and thoughtful style indicate he is the most likely to rise above rigid ideology and recruit a consortium of diverse advisers and constituents to the fight.

He is clearly intelligent and hard working. That, combined with substance, depth and a thoughtful, deliberate approach to complex issues, makes up for his relative lack of experience.

His coherent vision for the future also speaks to the best of America’s values, and his rare gift to inspire has drawn many citizens to his call for a new generation of leadership to ensure the American Dream.

It is incumbent upon him, if elected, to hold out that same promise for those who have supported McCain. And, in turn, for McCain’s supporters to act with equal good faith to help bridge the divide.

Obama is what America is rapidly becoming in the 21st century — multicultural, multiethnic — and has used his background and the lessons learned to appeal to the best of Americans’ nature in his historic quest to become the country’s first African-American president.

Obama is not presenting himself as a messiah, as some opponents cynically claim. Rather, he’s a person who has used his immense talents in that most American way to work hard, measure up and make a difference.

He’s the right man at the right moment to become our next president.

FL, Pensacola News Journal

2008-10-28T13:41:00.000-07:00

http://www.pnj.com/article/99999999/NEWS07/810260319/1020

October 28, 2008

For President: Barack Obama

Ten months ago, the News Journal Editorial Board recommended Barack Obama and John McCain as the best choices for their parties' presidential nominations.

With the Florida primary only 16 days away, neither was a sure bet. Still, our board liked both candidates for much the same reason: the ability to think independently from party orthodoxy.

Obama was a fresh voice amid the din of the Clinton steamroller; McCain had even bucked his party on immigration. And while a number of Florida newspapers endorsed Obama, the News Journal's recommendation of McCain was one of barely a handful.

Here's what we noted on Jan. 13:

"When he (McCain) acted like any other pandering politician, it showed ... In being himself, his essential integrity has shone through.''

Since August, the two have taken different paths. Obama has shown himself to be a leader, with policies and vision that should resonate with Northwest Florida voters specifically, and all Americans in general. McCain has floundered, unable to stick to any clear direction.

The Editorial Board feels the choice is clear: Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois is our recommendation for president of the United States.

We have watched Obama run an impressive campaign, responsive to the unfolding economic crisis, while McCain's offers little more than that he is not George Bush.

Obama has attracted some of the country's brightest minds, including investor Warren Buffett, Google CEO Eric Schmidt, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, and Paul Volcker, who was reappointed as chairman of the Federal Reserve by Ronald Reagan. McCain populated his campaign with Washington lobbyists.

McCain then raised questions about his judgment in his selection of an unqualified running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who, while energizing the "base,'' has been a flop with most voters outside of what she recklessly calls the "pro-American'' parts of our country.

And so we ask: Where is the McCain who warned that President Bush's tax cuts, without spending cuts, risked creating the deficits that followed? He now embraces them. Where is the McCain who once spoke with authority and reason on immigration reform?

"We do not torture,'' John McCain famously, and courageously, said. But he now supports a presidential veto of an anti-torture law.

Meanwhile, it is Barack Obama who has become the leader. His tax cut, according to a non-partisan tax group, will reach 81 percent of Americans. Those earning between roughly $37,000 and $66,000 — a pay grade familiar to many in our area — will see an estimated $1,118 in tax savings.

Both support strong climate change initiatives, but while both support expanded offshore drilling, Obama is much more aggressive about promoting the renewable energy needed to reduce our dependency on oil — a dependency we can't sate through drilling.

Obama is even more aggressive than McCain about the need to pursue Osama bin Laden across the Pakistani border.

But our recommendation is more than just a vetting of policy and issues. We believe Obama is better prepared to take on the future. In a world that is increasingly "flat," it is Obama who understands it better: from the economy, to conflict, to technology, to holding American values dear so that our country can, once again, be the moral beacon for the world.

John McCain spent much of the 20th century serving our nation well. We owe him our gratitude.

But Barack Obama is best suited to meet the challenges of the 21st.

TX, Fort Worth, Star Telegram

2008-10-28T13:16:00.000-07:00

http://www.star-telegram.com/225/story/996463.html

Posted on Sat, Oct. 25, 2008

RECOMMENDATION: President of the United States

Rare is the moment when it’s clear that, regardless of the outcome of an election, you are living history.

Yet with all that is unique and unprecedented about the 2008 presidential election, students of U.S. history can’t shake the undeniable feeling that America has been here before.

In 1932, and 1960. 1980. 1992.

Each of those years marked a crucial turning point in the direction the nation took, a turning point triggered by the choice the American people made when they went to the polls.

In 1932, during a crippling economic disaster, the familiar was rejected when the people elected Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

In 1960, youth, vitality and enthusiastic optimism took the day when the people elected John F. Kennedy over a dour, humorless Richard Nixon.

In 1980, after a humiliating hostage-siege by student radicals inside a U.S. embassy in a place so foreign that most Americans couldn’t find it on a map, the populace embraced an actor-turned-governor who promised to restore the country to world respect and prominence. The people elected Ronald Reagan.

In 1992, the nation faced many of the same challenges besetting us now. A teetering economy rocked by layoffs and rising prices had Americans clamoring for job creation, reforms in savings and investment, and less disparity between worker and CEO pay. America needed a new mindset and fresh leadership to move forward. The people elected Bill Clinton.

Today, the American people aren’t just asking for change; they are demanding it.

The economic inequities are no longer tolerable. As remarkable as it is to say during a time when U.S. troops are actively engaged in wars on two fronts, Americans are looking for a visionary leader who will focus first on the daunting domestic financial crisis that has upended so many lives.

The nation has experienced the worst housing crisis since the Great Depression, an enormous stock-market plunge among the worst in history, record-high energy prices, and an ongoing war in Iraq that has exacted an agonizing cost in lives, dollars and international prestige.

Americans need new leadership.

For many of the same reasons that the Star-Telegram recommended Democrat Bill Clinton in 1992, it is recommending Democrat Barack Obama in 2008.

Obama provides the prescription for America’s ills at this moment: a fine, inquisitive intellect, paired with an eloquence that allows him to articulate a message with clarity and substance; an ability to inspire people of all ages, races and ethnicities who never before were engaged in the political process; and an unflappable temperament that allows him to weather a barrage of withering personal attacks.

Under his leadership, the Obama campaign has been amazingly disciplined, efficient and effective. Those same talents will be essential for the difficult work ahead to rebuild the nation’s faltering economic institutions and restore citizen confidence.

We could fill this page and then some with side-by-side comparisons of the specifics in each candidate’s platform, but history makes clear those will likely change as soon as the gavel hits wood at the start of the 111th U.S. Congress. Ours is a representative democracy, not a monarchy. Federal lawmakers, themselves duly elected representatives of the people, have their own lists of priorities. And changing events, both domestic and elsewhere in the world, have a way of shifting the direction in which our national leaders must focus their energies.

Just remember President George H.W. Bush’s ill-fated "Read my lips: No new taxes" pledge for painful evidence of how economic reality can derail campaign promises.

Obama’s tax policy, which calls for restoring higher tax brackets that affect people earning more than $250,000 a year, could crater when it collides with the reality of Republican lawmakers.

Since the political parties’ national conventions, much has been made of the candidates’ vice presidential picks. While it is Obama and McCain who are competing for the highest honor that the American people can bestow on a fellow citizen, Joe Biden and Sarah Palin are relevant as measures of the candidates’ judgment.

Obama picked a seasoned veteran, a Delaware senator who has distinguished himself as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations and Judiciary committees. A moderate on foreign policy, Biden brings experience and an extensive network of international contacts, a definite boost in an arena where the Illinois senator needs an assist. Biden often been a leader on issues, from aid to former Soviet states in the early 1990s to U.S. involvement in the Balkans.

On the domestic front, Biden, 65, has worked extensively on crime and domestic violence issues, authoring the Violent Crime Control and Enforcement Act of 1994 and the Violence Against Women Act in 2000.

Obama’s "cautious and safe" selection of Biden may not have moved the polling needle, but it reflects Obama’s recognition that his own candidacy was daring enough in a nation so deeply divided.

McCain, 71, selected a woman who, without question, energized a Republican base that was underwhelmed with the man at the top of the ticket. Many conservatives, in their desire to back the Republican Party’s nominee, choose to forget that McCain was not their early favorite.

He was hammered in the early primaries for his support of humane immigration reform; his campaign-finance initiatives were vilified by those who consider the freedom to financially support political candidates a First Amendment right; and his commitment to balanced budgets meant he initially opposed extending President Bush’s tax cuts — a commitment McCain put aside when it became necessary to adopt the GOP’s tax-cut mantra as his own.

The Arizona senator quieted many of his early Republican critics by naming Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, 44, as his running mate. She ignited the base with "drill, baby, drill" speeches and unapologetic social conservatism, as evidenced by her pro-life, teach-creationism stands.

But that brilliant short-term tactic has proved a flawed long-term strategy. Palin’s once-captivating newness and tough-gal persona have given way to serious questions about her understanding of checks-and-balances governing on a national level. While she may be an entertaining master of the politician’s fine art of the memorable one-liner, she inspires little confidence in her readiness to be commander in chief.

Had McCain, whom we chose as the best Republican nominee in the primaries, selected a woman with more political and governing experience — someone like Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or U.S. Rep. Kay Granger — it would have demonstrated better judgment and put more credence in his oft-repeated slogan of "Country first."

Of course, the 47-year-old Obama is often criticized for his own lack of experience, and it’s a fact that his governing résumé is not as long as we’d like for a new president.

But he has surrounded himself with talented and knowledgeable advisers from whom he draws counsel and historical context, people such as former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker and investor and philanthropist Warren Buffett.

And U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards of Texas, a nationally recognized veterans champion with strong military support and deep connections in the U.S. Army and at the Pentagon, was vetted as an Obama VP possibility.

Even Obama’s toughest detractors on the experience front must admit he has inspired thousands through his public speaking. At his best, he impresses with his clarity, intelligence and the ability to plainly explain sometimes-complicated policy proposals. His critics call it "airy-fairy silly rhetoric" and liken his appeal to "celebrity" fascination. But there’s substance there, and it goes beyond his ideas.

Fear drives domestic and foreign markets. Fear can ignite people and politicians to overreact — or paralyze them from acting.

Sadly, fear drives otherwise rational people to make irrational, even hurtful statements.

Obama isn’t afraid to articulate people’s fears and acknowledge their anxieties and then try to help them move beyond them. That was most evident in his speech on race, in which he spoke plainly about frustrations and resentments of both black and white Americans and called on them to look instead to common hopes in order to solve collective problems.

Those thinking and speaking skills, coupled with an unflappable demeanor, are the hallmarks of a deft diplomat who can not only stand on the world stage for the photo-op but also sit backstage, in close quarters, where the hard work takes place.

Good leaders know how to listen, negotiate and collaborate, and those only happen when people speak with each other. Obama offers a fresh approach to U.S. diplomacy after eight years of too much silence or, worse, verbal non-engagement.

John McCain’s love of country and passion for public service are indisputable. He can never be thanked enough for the suffering and sacrifice he endured on behalf of his fellow soldiers during his honorable and heroic military service.

In a different time and under different circumstances, he likely would have been our choice for president.

But 2008 is not his time.

There is no perfect presidential candidate. If fully funded, the policy proposals put forward by both candidates, with their unaffordable promises, would exacerbate the country’s already-outrageous budget deficits. Obama’s position on free trade is troubling, but what he’s saying on the stump in an attempt to garner labor votes in swing states is harsher than what has been articulated in his books. In a right-to-work-state like Texas, which plays a vital role in NAFTA’s economic space, political and business leaders are not interested in changing the free-trade agreement.

We remain unconvinced by the harsh and often hateful criticisms of Obama’s character and his motivation for seeking the White House. That’s fear talking, and it is unbecoming in a nation that professes to believe every child can achieve the dream of serving our country through elected office.

Barack Obama’s performance throughout this two-year presidential campaign has been extraordinary. He has never blown his cool under enormous pressure and vicious attacks. He has continued to speak of bringing our nation together to work for the "more perfect union" that our forefathers envisioned.

That is indicative of what Americans can and should expect of a commander in chief when the unexpected occurs — and it will occur.

The Star-Telegram recommends Barack Obama for president of the United States.

CO, Coloradoan

2008-10-28T13:09:00.000-07:00

http://www.coloradoan.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti cle?AID=2008810260323

October 26, 2008

Obama the choice to lead through crises

Board not unanimous; McCain gets strong support

Barack Obama earns the Coloradoan editorial board endorsement for president of the United States.

Yet - reflecting much of the national electorate - this was a split vote with strong support also shown for John McCain.

The endorsement also mirrors the challenges the new president will have in uniting this nation amid a divisive presidential election, plummeting economy and ongoing war in Iraq.

Experience was the key word in this endorsement. Obama's lack of experience is either a positive or a negative.

Positive, because this nation is in dire need of a fresh approach after eight years of a Republican administration that failed to improve the lives of our citizens. Positive, because Obama is willing to try new approaches to resolve lingering problems. He has sown a sense of hopefulness, particularly among young people, that this country will thrive again. It's a trust he cannot squander.

Negative, because his lack of executive experience and relatively short term in elected office is the epitome of an unknown. And unknowns are frightening in the wake of numerous crises.

Still, Obama was better able than McCain to articulate his economic plan. Providing middle-class tax relief is essential to boost investment, spending and confidence. Ending tax breaks for companies that take jobs overseas and encouraging public contracts with companies that operate with Americans in mind are common sense approaches.

McCain's knowledge about foreign policy eclipses Obama's. Yet, his relative weakness remains how he will deal with the economy. His emphasis on job growth is appreciated. While opening new markets for the United States sounds good, he will need to boost job opportunities right here first. His campaign would have been more effective had it retained the reformist approach with details he offered in 2000.

The maneuver room for whoever is elected is zero. Trust in the federal government is at an all-time low; the nation is at war; no money or tolerance exists for new programs; and the United States' credibility and stance is too much at stake to fail any foreign policy "tests."

Obama appears the most ready for this challenge.

Vote for Obama for president.

PA, Tri-County Sunday, Courier Express

2008-10-28T12:42:00.000-07:00

http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=20178101&BRD=2758&PAG=461&dept_id=572984&rfi=8

Our opinion: Obama for president

10/25/2008

Our endorsements are not intended to tell readers how to vote. Rather, they suggest how this newspaper would vote if newspapers could cast votes. We hope they help to clarify thinking for voters, but readers should make up their own minds.

We do not support John McCain for President.

We do not support Barack Obama for President.

But on Nov. 4, Americans will need to choose McCain, the Republican, or Obama, the Democrat.
There are other candidates, including some who might even be better than these two incumbent senators. McCain and Obama are both flawed by their go-along attitudes that precipitated our current trillion-dollar housing/financial crisis. Both are also flat-out lying to the American people, by continuing to promise new spending that, in the wake of the financial meltdown, is unaffordable fiction.

But Americans cannot afford to throw away votes on unwinnable protests. The nation needs Presidential leadership - and Congressional statesmanship - as badly as it did in 1933, when Franklin Roosevelt misstepped here, overreached there, but led the United States out of the Great Depression.

Since American voters must make this choice between flawed candidates, we take a deep breath, utter a prayer, and offer ours: Barack Obama.

Obama is not aligned with the Republican executive branch members who have shredded the Constitution, prolonged and mismanaged the war in Iraq, failed abjectly to find Osama bin Laden despite a seven-year search, and presided over the collapse of the nation's housing and banking systems.

An Obama administration will get more incumbents out of executive branch positions than will a McCain administration. The Republicans blew it during the past eight years; they do not deserve re-election.

Obama is praised in some quarters as a compelling speaker - and derided in other quarters as not much more than a booming voice. But there is something to be said for Obama's calm, professorial approach and ability to inspire.

We think Obama's selection of Delaware Sen. Joe Biden was more presidential and less political than was McCain's selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who is bright, articulate, energetic - and unqualified to fill the Presidency should the need arise.

On the issues we don't put a lot of credence in what either candidate is saying. As noted above, both men are bloviating hogwash six months out of date, pre-meltdown. They're trying to win a cross-country race with steam engines (hot air, to be precise) when we have already entered the internal combustion gasoline engine age.

Obama is vulnerable to pro-life views on abortion - but McCain is vulnerable to those same pro-life sentiments on Iraq.

Our next President will be forced into a reactive, defensive strategy during his first months in office. Obama's chances of working cooperatively with a likely Democratic-controlled Congress are better than are McCain's, especially given the legacy of bitterness between Congressional leaders and the departing Bush-Cheney administration.

Some among us worry about Obama's Socialist tendencies, non-mainstream associates, etc. We see those as concerns, not as crises. We put some faith in the Constitutional separation of powers that prevents Presidents from enacting policy changes without the concurrence of Congress and, in some cases, the Supreme Court.

And we reject the racist, ageist and sexist vitriol that has demarcated this campaign on the sidelines. Barack Obama and John McCain are good Americans. Those who say otherwise are dividing the country when it most needs unification.

As we said above, our choice of Obama is a selection, not an endorsement. It represents our considered opinion, nothing more.

But, as also noted above, newspapers don't vote. Americans do.

Make your endorsement known on Nov. 4 in the voting booth.

- Denny Bonavita, Nick Hoffman

PA, Scranton Times Tribune

2008-10-28T12:16:00.000-07:00

http://www.scrantontimes.com/articles/2008/10/28/editorial/editorial/sc_times_trib.20081026.d.pg3.tt26edit1_s1.2039464_edi.txt

Barack Obama for president

It is almost redundant to say that an impending presidential election is one of the most important in history. The election of a president is not simply about elevation of an individual to high office but about the future of the world’s oldest and greatest democracy.

Published: Sunday, October 26, 2008 4:18 AM EDT

It is almost redundant to say that an impending presidential election is one of the most important in history. The election of a president is not simply about elevation of an individual to high office but about the future of the world’s oldest and greatest democracy.

Even greater anticipation of this presidential election is abundantly justified, however, by the perfect storm of deeply troubling issues facing the United States, in terms of the economy, security and all of their related issues.

The questions of how to reinvigorate the world’s most powerful economy and restore America’s standing in the world go directly to presidential leadership.

Change of course requires new leadership

Pressing economic and security conditions, separately, are massive issues. Together, they point to the overarching requirement for the man who will be elected president: the leadership ability to inspire Americans to a new era of greatness.

As this campaign has progressed, it has become clearer with time that Barack Obama is well-suited to the awesome tasks ahead. The Times-Tribune endorses him for president.

Make no mistake. John McCain is a great patriot who has served his country well. But John McCain, the candidate in this election, is not the John McCain of 2000 — the “maverick” who eschewed blind ideology in favor of a fact-based response to the nation’s problems.

Over the course of this campaign, Mr. McCain has veered from that course in order to secure the favor of the same narrow party base against which he once rebelled. His irresponsible choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate was a cynical play to the base, a case of politics before country. Asked what her job would be as vice president, Mrs. Palin offered a reply citing a few specific tasks and revealing ignorance of the Constitution. The vice president’s real job is to be ready to be president, and Mrs. Palin does not meet that requirement. It’s one thing for her not to know it; it’s an indictment of Mr. McCain’s judgment that he has pretended not to know it.

Selecting a running mate is one of the most important decisions that every presidential candidate makes. In Mr. Obama’s case, his carefully considered selection of U.S. Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, a Scranton native, is the flip side of Mr. McCain’s rash decision to choose Mrs. Palin, in that it is far more about effective governance than politics. Mr. Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is an experienced, accomplished hand at some of the most important policy matters that will greet the new administration.

Insightful, practical policies put forth

Mr. Obama is, as his critics charge, relatively inexperienced. But throughout the course of the long presidential campaign, Mr. Obama has demonstrated a keen intellect and ideal temperament. The result is a policy pragmatism, as in economic proposals that recognize the primacy of free markets while acknowledging the need for effective regulation in the public interest — a decidedly centrist approach. Mr. McCain, by contrast, says that he is uncomfortable with economic issues and primarily touts extension and expansion of the Bush-era tax cuts — policy rooted in ideology rather than the troubling facts on the ground.

Like many residents in the region, we have a particular concern about Mr. Obama’s long-standing approval of broad abortion rights. Whether he fulfills his vow to work toward fewer abortions through means other than outlawing it will be a fundamental test of his veracity.

America’s problems call for new leadership. In that regard, Mr. Obama has the potential to be a truly transformational figure. There has been much speculation about the potential impact of race on the election and an Obama presidency. But the truer transformation in his election would lie in a different demographic. He represents a generational shift and a view definitively rooted in the future rather than the past. He will strive to heal our wounds abroad and call Americans to common purpose at home. His time is now.

Optimist, Abilene Christian University

2008-10-28T11:56:00.000-07:00

Republican endorser.

http://media.www.acuoptimist.com/media/storage/paper891/news/2008/10/24/Opinion/Endorsement.Obama.Our.Candidate-3505200-page2.shtml

Endorsement: Obama, our candidate

Optimist staff

Issue date: 10/24/08 Section: Opinion

Two qualified men emerged from the exhausting nominating process as their party's choice for the office of the President of the United States.

Sen. John McCain is a man who has fought for his country at home and abroad and has shown through his more than 25 years as a Congressman and Senator that he is not afraid to clash with his party or work across the aisle to get things done in Congress.

Sen. Barack Obama is a man whose rise in politics has taken the lawyer with a "funny name and big ears" to the top of his party. Obama's unique American success story has reignited hope in government, and he promises to bring the change most Americans say they want to see in the White House.

Each of these men have spent almost two years on the campaign trail trying to convince the American people, pundits and party faithful each is the right man to inherit a host of domestic and foreign crises facing the nation after eight years of Republican rule.

Each man has laid out his policies - in debates, at rallies, on television, on the radio and on the Web. Both men have been the subject of and have survived political attacks. Both of these men are qualified, talented and proud Americans.

Only one of these men is the leader this country needs as it faces unprecedented domestic problems and inevitable foreign policy decisions: Sen. Barack Obama.

We believe Sen. Obama has risen above Sen. Mc-Cain in the race to the White House as the leader that is more qualified to address the host of difficult decisions this country's next leader will face come Jan. 21. We endorse Sen. Obama as the candidate this country needs in its time of economic and foreign crises.

The primary issue on voter's minds is the current status of the global market and the future of the American economy. Neither candidate has lain how they exactly plan to approach this problem nor how they would trim their proposed budgets to address this issue, but Obama has earned our confidence and the confidence of the American people when it comes to the economy, according to several national polls.

Obama's focus on maintaining American competitiveness by improving education - a front that President Bush failed to make progress on - shows his knowledge of how America has succeeded in the past: innovation. The most effective way to engender innovation is by supporting education.

Sen. Obama's pragmatic approach and sincerity of speech is refreshing when compared to the hot-tempered and erratic tone of Sen. McCain during the campaign. As seen by the variety and volume of his supporters, Obama appeals to a diverse demographic and has earned the majority of Americans' confidence when it comes to the economy.

Obama aims to fight the economic inequality
generated during Bush's presidency by proposing tax cuts for the staple of the American economy: the middle class.

Sen. McCain's desire to continue Bush-style tax cuts and his apparent disinterest and ignorance on economic issues shows how he is not the man this country needs in its time of economic crisis.

We are drawn to Obama also because of his ability to mend America's damaged image throughout the globe during Bush's years at the helm. Obama is a comsmopolitan who has shown time and time again that he will work with our allies and take steps away from the calloused and condescending foreign policy of McCain and the man he voted with 89 percent of the time since 2001.

As for the two wars our country continues to fight, Obama has been steadfast in his insistence to withdraw American troops from Iraq - a war that we unjustly entered - and refocusing the effort in Afghanistan. We believe this approach is correct, as the men who attacked our country on Sept. 11, 2001, are in Afghanistan and the mountains of Pakistan, but we worry that Obama will abandon the progress that the surge of troops have brought in Iraq.

In this precarious moment in American history, this country needs change. We believe Obama is the right man to bring that change, and is more prepared than his opponent to guide this country out of the perilous waters we have been sailing for the
past eight years.

NC, Charlotte Observer

2008-10-28T11:45:00.000-07:00

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/104/story/276643.html

Our choice: Barack Obama for president

Observer editorial board: Illinois senator's judgment, approach give him the nod.

Posted: Friday, Oct. 24, 2008

When the 21st century began, America was still widely regarded and well respected as the international economic leader, defender of oppressed nations, moral leader of the world. That was before 9-11, the war on terror, an adventurous invasion and poorly planned occupation of Iraq and the collapse of major financial institutions here and around the globe.

A presidency that began with the practical promise of compassionate conservatism is lumbering to its ignominious end after a series of scalding revelations that too often have shown indifference to the environment, disregard for the plight of the poor and insufficient respect for the high ideals that made America different in the 20th century.

Against that backdrop, this year's presidential election offers a choice like no other in memory: John McCain, a decorated veteran who survived five years as a prisoner of war before forging an admirable record of bipartisanship in the U.S. Senate for nearly three decades; or Barack Obama, a young, thoughtful, inspirational speaker who has attracted millions of Americans back to the electoral process with his message of transformational change and bright hope for the future.

This choice is complicated by the puzzling election-year disappearance of the Sen. John McCain whom many Americans have admired since his military days, when he might have taken the easy way out of detention to return to America. That he refused to do so is a shining example of heroism. His subsequent Senate service and his independence of thought brought him admirers across party lines who saw in him hope for a government motivated not by partisanship but by a commitment to solving problems involving the best thinkers across the political spectrum.

We don't know what happened to that John McCain. In his pandering to the political right on some issues and his impulsive selection of a woefully unprepared governor as his vice presidential candidate, McCain has created doubts about his judgment that did not previously exist, and exposed how his reputation as a maverick can seem more recklessness than courage. In doing so he has frittered away confidence in his ability to deal with a discouraging array of problems that will confront the next president.

By contrast, Sen. Barack Obama's inexperience in executive matters constitutes less of a concern than ordinarily it might. His intellect, his calm, rational approach to difficult issues, his coolness during the heat of debate and his sense of humor and humility offer something millions of Americans have yearned for in national politics – the ability to examine issues thoughtfully, to listen to competing interests and to develop solutions that more closely meet the needs of all.

Elsewhere in today's newspaper readers will find a Voters Guide that compares the presidential candidates' stands on a number of issues. In some cases they have shown similarities, such as on immigration and a path to citizenship, or their interest in reducing air pollution. They also show key differences, such as abortion policy. Obama supports the Roe v. Wade decision allowing abortion; McCain once said he supported it but for years has opposed it. We're more comfortable with the nominations Obama would be likely to make to the Supreme Court. On Iraq, McCain strongly supported the surge that led to less violence but is unwilling to set a withdrawal deadline. Obama would withdraw combat troops by mid-2010 but leave some U.S. forces to help train Iraqis to defend themselves.

There are sharp differences on other issues, including health policy. McCain wants to provide tax credits for health care and work with states to provide more access. Obama has a broader approach that would provide comprehensive care, including for pre-existing conditions, for Americans.

That's an example of the more inclusive, positive approach that distinguishes Obama's campaign and which has attracted so much interest in this election. In an era that begs for a return to the standards of decency and respect for the rule of law that made America great, Obama offers thoughtful proposals for a rational way to respond to the nation's needs. The Observer enthusiastically endorses Barack Obama for president.

NC, Asheville Citizen Times

2008-10-28T11:37:00.000-07:00

https://verify1.newsbank.com/cgi-bin/ncom/ACTB/ec_signin

Nation clearly needs change; Obama is better-suited...Historians may one day look back and say this election was a turning point, the time when America sealed its fate as a nation in decline or when democracy and capitalism prevailed and the nation reinvented itself.

The nominees - Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona - offer voters very different approaches to leadership and to solving the problems that face the country.

Those who know him say Obama is a disciplined, deliberative person who has a distaste for theatrics and who remains unruffled under pressure.

By contrast, McCain's temper is well documented, as is his propensity to alienate even fellow Republicans by his aggressive and sometimes profane style of confrontation during disagreements.

Obama's tax proposals are more favorable to the beleaguered middle class, his energy policies more likely to result in job creation and eventual energy independence and his plan to address the health care crisis more likely to result in a healthier nation. We believe his temperament and approach to issues represent the nation's best hope for addressing the gargantuan challenges that await the next president.

McCain, a brave warrior and a dedicated, lifelong public servant, has surrounded himself with advisers who fail to recognize the urgency to make fundamental policy changes, instead harkening back to failed tax and energy strategies. In a dangerous world increasingly bound together by a global economy, McCain's choice for vice president, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, feisty as she is, does not have the requisite exposure to foreign affairs to take the reins of government should McCain become incapacitated or die in office.

By contrast, Obama's proposals represent a clearer-eyed recognition of the crises that face America and the changes that must be made if we are toreverse an unsustainable course. His choice for vice president, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, a 26-year veteran in the Senate who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee, clearly has the credentials to be president should the need arise.

America can't afford to muddle through another four years. We are near thetipping point in too many areas vital to our future as a nation. We need the steadiness, the sound judgment and the approach to problem-solving that Barack Obama and Joe Biden would bring.

Barney Smith

2008-10-28T11:24:00.000-07:00

Retired Generals and Admirals

2008-10-28T11:17:00.000-07:00

Josh from West Wing

2008-10-28T10:55:00.001-07:00

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/28/12958/807

Charles McC. Mathias Jr.

2008-10-28T10:42:00.000-07:00

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/28/52157/356

Charles McC. Mathias, Jr. served in Congress from Maryland for 26, years, in the House for 3 terms beginning in 1961, three terms in the Senate, retiring at the end of the term in 1987. He was beloved, and probably could have held his seat indefinitely. At Haverford College we were proud to call him one of our own, and he was known throughout his career as thoughtful and hardworking. He was infamous for his personal frugality - he drove the same beat-up car for around 200,000 miles. And he never assumed his high elected office made him superior.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/27/AR2008102702407.html

My Choice: Obama

By Charles McC. Mathias Jr.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008; A17

In one week, Americans will face a momentous choice. We must decide which of two talented, patriotic individuals is better suited to set the course for the nation and steer it through a stormy sea.

I have known John McCain for many years, even before he was first elected to the House of Representatives in 1982. And like so many other television viewers, I have come to know Barack Obama as he has made his spirited quest for the highest office in the land through this long and unprecedented campaign.

Sens. Obama and McCain have vastly different backgrounds and strikingly different visions of how America should navigate these tumultuous times. For me, the decision on who should be the next president transcends private friendship or political affiliation. My decision is based on the long-range needs of our country and which of these two candidates I feel is better suited to recharge America's economic health, restore its prestige abroad and inspire anew all people who cherish freedom and equality. For me, that person is Barack Obama.

This decision, and this hard-fought race, have been difficult for me. In 1860, my great-grandfather ran for the Maryland Senate from Frederick on the anti-slavery Republican ticket. At the top of that ticket was Abraham Lincoln. In 1912, my grandfather rallied to Theodore Roosevelt and the Bull Moose. Most of the Mathias family has voted Republican ever since. In 1964, as a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives, I astounded many of my friends and supporters by voting for Barry Goldwater, despite disagreeing with many of his views and despite his lack of support in my congressional district. I publicly endorse the Democratic candidate for president with a sense of the historic significance of the choice before us all.

I believe that Obama's inspirational leadership, contemplative nature and well-reasoned, forward-looking policies offer our troubled nation a real opportunity to face and overcome its many challenges at home and abroad.

On an array of domestic issues, including health care, education, tax policy, the environment and alternative energy sources, Obama promises a clean break from the recent past and tangible hope for a return to fiscal responsibility, economic security and true environmental stewardship, all of which are essential to restoring our greatness. Now, Obama must be aware of the hopes that he has raised through his discussion of these issues. Many people will rightly take his words as his commitment and will judge him accordingly.

On the international front, his thoughtful and responsible approach to extricating our troops from Iraq, reallocating our finite resources elsewhere in the war on terrorism, and reviving effective use of our diplomatic corps all warrant our support. To be successful in these endeavors, Obama must be an active student of history. In attempting to bring peace to the Middle East, for example, he should recognize that the United States has played a role in the region since Franklin Roosevelt went to Saudi Arabia to meet with King Abdul-Aziz. Obama must appreciate that he is not writing on an empty page and will need to be sensitive to that which has come before him.

Obama represents the better choice to successfully address the issues that dramatically affect the health and well-being of our nation today. The fact that he is also a black American adds special significance for me as someone who was witness to and participated in at least a part of the past century's discourse on civil rights.

Throughout my career in public office, I was involved in the effort to come to terms with our country's troubled history of race relations. I am proud to have helped enact several of the landmark civil rights laws that have been the cornerstones of our national response to the inequities perpetuated by racism. This is a moment in our national life that could scarcely have been contemplated at the beginning of my career, and one that I believe our country should savor. This election is a milestone in the journey of our society to greater openness and flexibility, qualities that will serve us well as we confront the global challenges of the 21st century.

In these extraordinary times, Barack Obama has made a better case for why he is the right choice for president. He has earned my vote.

The writer, a Republican, represented Maryland in the U.S. House from 1961 to 1968 and in the U.S. Senate from 1969 to 1986.

Forbes, on Obama's Health Plan

2008-10-28T10:31:00.000-07:00

http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2008/10/27/obama-healthcare-reform-oped-cx_dmc_bd_1028cutlerdelong.html

Commentary
Obama Can Cure Health Care's Ills
David M. Cutler and J. Bradford DeLong 10.28.08, 12:01 AM ET

Every other North Atlantic country spends less than half what we spend on medicine. Every other North Atlantic country is healthier than America.

This extraordinary gap--between how much we spend on health care and what we get for it--is not because our doctors, nurses and pharmacists are unskilled or undedicated. On the contrary, they are the best in the world. But they are embedded in a poorly designed system that gives us low value for our money.

Taking the long view, the inefficiency of our health system is the biggest threat to economic growth over the next two decades--bigger, even, than the current financial crisis. The doubling of health insurance premiums since 2000 has forced employers to choose between cutting wages, cutting benefits and hiring fewer workers. The result is lost profits and lost wages, in addition to pointless risk, insecurity and a flood of personal bankruptcies. Without serious changes, this problem will only get worse.

Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama wants to address the health care crisis head-on. Like Franklin Roosevelt, who faced equally large challenges, Obama will try many strategies and be guided by results, not predetermined ideological conviction. The strategies he proposes fall into four general areas.

One element of reform is information: Doctors, patients and administrators simply do not know enough about which treatments work and which are ineffective or harmful. An estimated one-third of medical costs go toward care with no value. Obama proposes to jump-start the long-overdue information revolution in health care with $50 billion to computerize the medical system and spread the word about best practice.

A second element is to fix perverse incentives in medical care. Doctors and hospitals today are paid for performing procedures, not for helping patients. Insurers make money by dumping sick patients, not by keeping people healthy. Obama proposes to base Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements on patient outcomes in a coordinated effort to drive the entire payment system toward paying for improved health rather than just more care.

A third element is to help the small players--individuals and small firms--get the same deals as large buyers. Obama proposes purchasing pools where individuals and small firms get the same low rates as large firms and sick people get coverage the same way as the healthy. Our current system of excluding the sick from coverage does not make their costs disappear but rather assume other, less efficient guises.

A fourth element is prevention. In today's health-care market, less than one dollar in 25 goes for prevention--despite the fact that three-quarters of medical care is for conditions that could be prevented. Guaranteeing access to preventive services will improve health and, in many cases, save money.

As the reforms take hold, costs will drop. As costs drop, insurance will become more affordable. Millions previously priced out of the market will be able to buy insurance. Add on tax credits for those still unable to afford coverage and for small businesses, and everyone will have access to affordable, portable insurance.

By contrast, Republican presidential nominee John McCain believes that the central problem in health care is that people have too much insurance and, because of it, consume too much medical care. McCain seeks to reform the health care system by taxing and punishing businesses that offer employer-sponsored insurance. Once they are forced to drop coverage, he holds, their workers will find themselves in the non-group health insurance market, where they will buy less generous plans and go to the doctor less often. Modest tax credits would help some, but nowhere near all, of the uninsured afford coverage.

We are skeptical of the value of McCain's plan for three reasons. First, the tax increase McCain proposes and the resulting dislocations it creates are the last thing American business needs now, when it's in the midst of a severe economic crisis. Second, the non-group market is nowhere near as rosy as McCain makes it out to be. People who buy insurance in that market now are risk rated, see their pre-existing conditions excluded from coverage or priced higher and are never secure in their coverage. The McCain plan would amplify, not fix, these problems.

Third, the McCain health plan has a huge financing hole--between $1 and $2 trillion over the next decade. Only the most draconian Medicare and Medicaid cuts would make the plan work. But such cuts would be devastating for the very providers that are needed to make health reform work.

It is clear to us that Barack Obama's health care reform plan is much better for the country, and much more likely to be successful, than John McCain's.

David M. Cutler, the author of Your Money Or Your Life: Strong Medicine for America's Health Care System, is the Otto Eckstein professor of applied economics at Harvard's department of economics and Kennedy School of Government. He is also an adviser on health care to Barack Obama. J. Bradford DeLong, who blogs at http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/, is a professor of economics at U.C. Berkeley. Both authors are research associates at the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Junior Johnson, NASCAR

2008-10-28T10:16:00.000-07:00

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/27/9392/0684

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7620893

Dear libnnc,

Join me in supporting Barack My family and I have given this election a lot of thought.

Our country is in a rough spot, and we're going to need some serious change. There's only one candidate ready to deliver it -- and that's Barack Obama.

Every day I talk to someone else who's never voted for a Democrat, but now they're voting for Barack Obama. They realize that Barack understands what we're going through here in North Carolina. And they're ready for change.

So I've made up my mind, and I'm ready to get involved. I know that I could never have won a race without my pit crew, and I know Barack can't win this one without us.

Can you sign up to volunteer this last crucial week?

When I talk to folks about why I support Barack, I just tell it like I see it.

There's been a lot thrown at him this election, and he's stayed calm, positive, and focused. I know a little something about how important it is to stay cool under pressure.

And with all the dangers in our world today, that's the kind of rock-solid leadership our country needs.

These days, I run a small country ham and pork skins business. Barack Obama will fight for a fair economy where small businesses like mine have the freedom to grow, and he'll defend the Second Amendment to protect the hunter's way of life.

But the most important reasons I'm speaking out for Barack Obama are named Robert and Meredith, my two children. My wife Lisa and I talked it over, and honestly, we know in our gut that their future is more secure if Barack Obama is president.

At the end of the day, there's just nothing more important than that.

That's why I'm going to talk to my neighbors this week, and I'm asking you to do the same. This election in North Carolina is going to be one of the closest ever, and we all need to lend a hand.

Join me by volunteering this week:

http://nc.barackobama.com/NC100kHours

I've been in a lot of races in my life. But this may be the most important one of all. So let's all get in gear and win it together.

Yours,

Junior Johnson

P.S. -- I know what it means to run an aggressive race, but I also know what it means to compete with integrity. Have you gotten one of these pre-recorded calls that are flooding our state smearing Barack Obama's character and questioning his patriotism? That's crossing the line, and North Carolinians deserve better. Help fight back by canvassing this week to tell your neighbors the truth about Barack:

Blue Grass musicians

2008-10-28T09:52:00.001-07:00

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/28/95114/512

A toe tapping fun look at Blue Grass musicians endorsing Obama.

Elisabeth Kadlec, Military Wife

2008-10-28T09:42:00.000-07:00

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/stories/2008/10/28/kadleced_1028.html

Military wife ponders her vote for next president

By ELISABETH KADLEC

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Until a few years ago, I am almost embarrassed to say, I never voted. Then I became the wife of an Army officer. For me, choosing a candidate is not based on which party I tend to side with, but which candidate will make the best choices for the armed forces and my family.

When we married our spouses, I am sure that none of us were signing up to be single parents. But in essence that is what we become. Many people I know, like my husband, have already been deployed more than three times, and will go again. Most of these deployments are to Iraq or Afghanistan. It always amazes me when people ask me if my husband has to go back. I even laugh at this question!

I think it shows that the public has no idea how many troops make up the armed forces and how many are deployed at a time. Somehow, that message has been lost when we talk about the war. I am pretty much resolved that my husband will be deployed almost every other year. You can only imagine what this does to a family, and how important it is to us that smart decisions are being made for military members.

When trying to decide which presidential candidate will make a better choice, I’ve considered two things. First, I want my husband home. He is deployed now and I am tired of taking care of the household and raising a family alone. The only option I see to keep my husband home for a longer length of time is pulling troops out of Iraq or an extreme downsizing of the numbers of troops.

However, downsizing of the troops may also be dangerous for those who remain. Not enough forces in Iraq or Afghanistan means those who are still there may not have enough protection. There is also the probability that enemy insurgents, such as al-Qaida, may be able to increase their power if we do not have a presence in the Middle East.

My husband’s beliefs are the second issue that has me undecided on who to vote for. My husband has been to Iraq three times, and I assume he understands more than I do about the importance of being in Iraq and who would make a better commander in chief. A die-hard Republican, he is voting for Sen. John McCain. The thought of voting against his beliefs would tear at me if he or any other soldier were hurt as the result of bad decisions made by a president I chose (even though I realize my vote is not the deciding factor).

To help me decide, I researched each candidate’s plans for Iraq. McCain believes that the United States should not pull out of Iraq until it is able to govern itself as a democratic nation and keeps its citizens safe. In addition, McCain feels that if we pull out before our goals are met then we will have to resend troops later, and at a greater economic cost. Overall, McCain has no time line for the war in Iraq.

Sen. Barack Obama feels that because the United States is over there, Iraq itself has not taken responsibility for rebuilding its country economically or keeping the peace. If elected, Obama plans on creating a strategy with Iraqi officials to withdraw American troops so that most are home within 16 months. Obama’s main position on Iraq is that it is time for Iraq to become responsible so that it can become a stable, prosperous country.

I now have to decide if the good that we do in Iraq is worth our sacrifices. But it’s hard to care if Iraq is prospering when my husband has missed half of our children’s lives. What kind of life does that leave for our military members? It is also hard to side with keeping our troops in Iraq when I do not feel we should have gone there in the first place. Yes, we captured Saddam. But at what cost? Is there any tangible good that has come out of it for American citizens? Will it ever end? I understand that several goals have been met and it is getting better over there. But when you look at how many years the fighting has gone on in the Middle East, are we really being realistic to think that Iraq will become a stable, democratic country? This is a hard decision.

On Nov. 4, my vote will be counted along with all military families. Not all military families’ political beliefs are the same as mine. However, I believe that we can all agree on the following: We miss our spouses. We want our soldiers to be safe. We want smart decisions to be made. Does that mean that Obama or McCain is the right choice? I have chosen to vote for Obama.

• Elisabeth Kadlec, a mother of two, lives in Fayetteville.

Anne Applebaum, Washington Post Op/Ed Columnist

2008-10-28T09:36:00.000-07:00

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/27/AR2008102702406.html?sub=AR

Why McCain Lost Me

By Anne Applebaum
Tuesday, October 28, 2008; A17

Yesterday, while reading the latest polling data on John McCain, Sarah Palin and their appeal -- or growing lack of it -- to " independent women voters" it suddenly dawned on me: I am one of these elusive independent female voters, and I have the credentials to prove it. For the past couple of decades, I've sometimes voted Democratic, sometimes Republican. I'm even a registered independent, though I did think of switching to vote for John McCain in 2000. But because the last political party I truly felt comfortable with was Thatcher's Conservative Party (I lived in England in the 1980s and 1990s), I didn't actually do it.

The larger point, though, is that if I'm not voting for McCain -- and, after a long struggle, I've realized that I can't -- maybe it's worth explaining why, for I suspect there are other independent voters who feel the same. Particularly because it's not his campaign, disjointed though that has been, that finally repulses me: It's his rapidly deteriorating, increasingly anti-intellectual, no longer even recognizably conservative Republican Party. His problems are not technical; they do not have to do with ads, fundraising or tactics, as some have suggested. They are institutional; they have to do with his colleagues, advisers and supporters.

I should say here that I know McCain, slightly: He spoke at a party given for a book I wrote a few years ago, though I think that was as much about the subject (communist prison camps) as the author. But it's not his personality I admire most. Far more important is his knowledge of foreign affairs, an understanding that goes well beyond an ability to name the Pakistani president. McCain knows not only the names, he knows the people; and by this I mean not just foreign presidents but foreign members of parliament, foreign journalists, foreign generals. He goes to Germany every year, visits Vietnam often. He can talk intelligently about Belarus and Uzbekistan; I've heard him do it. Let's just say that's one of the things that distinguish him from our current president, who once confessed that "this foreign policy stuff is a little frustrating."

Another thing I liked about McCain was the deliberate distance he always kept from the nuttier wing of his party and, simultaneously, the loyalty he's shown to a recognizably conservative budgetary philosophy. Fiscal conservatism, balanced budgets, sober spending -- all of these principles have been brushed away as so much nonsense for the past eight years by Republicans more interested in grandstanding about how much they hate Washington. McCain was one of the few who kept talking about them. He was also one of a shockingly few to understand that there is nothing American, let alone conservative, about torture, and that a battle for civilized values could not be won by uncivilized means.

Finally, I admired McCain's willingness to tackle politically risky issues such as immigration, the debate about which has long been drenched in hypocrisy. Those who want to ban it are illogically denying both the role that immigrants, especially the millions of illegal immigrants, already play in the U.S. economy as well as the improbability of forced deportations; those who want to allow it without restriction don't acknowledge the security risks. McCain tried to put together a bipartisan coalition in an effort to find a rational solution. He failed -- blocked by the ideologues in his party.

If these traits appealed to me, they probably would have appealed to other independents, too. Why, then, has McCain spent the past four months running away from them? The appointment of Palin -- inspired by his closest colleagues -- turned out not to be a "maverick" move but, rather, a concession to those Republicans who think foreign policy can be conducted using a series of cliches and those in his party who shout down the federal government while quietly raking in federal subsidies. Although McCain has one of the best records for bipartisanship in the Senate, he's let his campaign appeal to his party's extremes. Though he is a true foreign policy intellectual, his supporters cultivate ignorance and fear: Watch Sean Hannity's " Barack Obama and Friends: A History of Radicalism" on YouTube if you don't believe me. Worse, McCain has -- in a fatal effort to appeal to the least thoughtful, most partisan elements of his base -- moved away from his previous positions on torture and immigration. Maybe that's all tactics, and maybe the "real" McCain will ditch the awful ideologues after Nov. 4, if by some miracle he happens to win. But how can I know that will happen?

Here's what I do know: I would give anything to rewrite history and make McCain president in 2000. But in 2008, I don't think I can vote for him. Barack Obama is indeed the least experienced, least tested candidate in modern presidential history. But at least if he wins, I can be sure that the mobs who cry "terrorist" at the sound of Obama's name will be kept far, far away from the White House.

applebaumletters@washpost.com