McCain has shamelessly exaggerated Obama's supposedly radical ties and tried to place him far outside the political mainstream. Obama has twisted McCain's record beyond recognition and attempted to tie him to Republican ideologues he has fought his whole career.
Such campaigning insults the American people and degrades those who engage in it. Voters who hunger for straight talk about the most frightening economy in 70 years, or who long for hope in the face of two grinding wars, deserve better.
We endorse Obama, knowing full well that doing so involves some risk.
If he is elected on Nov. 4, he will govern with a Congress dominated by fellow Democrats. That should help him fulfill his promises to reform health care, invest in green energy and raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans. But if a President Obama believes he can simply impose his will--or even worse, must buckle to the will of doctrinaire congressional barons--he may fall prey to the one-party hubris that so damaged both the Bush presidency and the GOP brand. Obama will have to be tough enough to push back if Democrats on Capitol Hill try to draw him into the mindless partisanship he has often and rightly renounced. Polarization is a bad way to campaign; it's a worse way to govern.
Those who have known Obama the longest say he instinctively seeks win-win solutions and understands that there usually is more than one way to reach a worthy goal. Let's hope so. He has an ambitious agenda, but will inherit a federal deficit approaching $1 trillion, as well as long-term financial obligations that could cripple future generations. He'll have to make harder choices than he has been willing to acknowledge in this campaign.
If they had not become bitter rivals, Obama might have found a useful ally and role model in McCain, who has spent a lifetime marching to the beat of a different drum. In the Senate, McCain has challenged his party on immigration, taxes and torture, campaign finance and pork-barrel spending. He supported Bush's ill-informed decision to invade Iraq, then quickly became a loud critic of the president's equally flawed strategy to win the peace.
We salute McCain as an exemplary citizen and a Washington rebel. But as a presidential nominee, McCain has been a disappointment. He was late to understand the primacy of economic pain. He has failed even to define a rationale for a McCain presidency. Experience is useful, but it's not vision.
In their first debate, McCain haughtily said that Obama did not understand the difference between strategy and tactics. His campaign suggests that he doesn't, either.
Take his selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. McCain seemed too caught up in the game-changing possibilities of teaming with a woman reformer to scratch the smiling surface. Had he, McCain might have realized that Palin is utterly unprepared for the job he offered--let alone the one that might fall to her. His trust in her undermines our trust in him.
Trust is essential to the presidency. Americans want to believe that the chief executive understands their lives, will protect their interests and will not compromise their safety. They want a president who represents what America can be, not what it has been.
Electing any president involves a leap of faith--a risk. Such is the power of the office.
For a country in need of a new direction and a new tone, Barack Obama is a risk worth taking.
______________________________________________
ROCKFORD REGISTER (ILLINOIS) STAR:
Our pick for president: Obama
Posted Oct 18, 2008 @ 03:43 PM
With nothing on a firm footing --not the economy, not the war, not health care--the leader of the free world should be just that: a leader.
In endorsing Obama over Republican U.S. Sen. John McCain, we're choosing a man who we've come to know as an earnest, smart and, yes, charismatic politician who has visited this Editorial Board several times.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
