Must Read - Philly Daily News Endorsement
Contrary to Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign slogan, we believe Barack Obama is more likely to be "ready on Day One" to lead us in a new direction. Because of his experience.
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/opinion/20080417_VOTE_FOR_BARACK_OBAMA.html
Here is an exceprt:
A candidate's campaign may be the best indicator of how she or he will govern. If so, an Obama administration would be well-managed, inclusive and astonishingly broad-based. It would make good use of technology and communicate a message of unity and, yes, hope.
It would not be content with eking out slim victories by playing to the narrow interests of the swing voters of the moment while leaving the rest of the country as deeply divided as ever. Instead, an Obama administration would seek to expand the number of Americans who believe that they have a personal stake in our collective future - and that they have the power to change things.
It would motivate them to hold their representatives accountable for making it happen. That is, after all, the only way to get us out of Iraq, to address global warming, to make us energy-independent. It's the only way to resist the forces arrayed against providing universal health care, rebuilding our infrastructure and returning our schools to world-class status. It's the only way to give our children the means to compete with children in other parts of the world who are healthier, better-educated and have more opportunities than many of our own.
An Obama administration would be freer of the the corrupting influence of big-money donors and corporate interests. Obama has raised $240 million overall, with half coming in contributions of less than $200. People who contribute to political campaigns can feel they "own" a candidate and so Obama would owe allegiance to the wide swath of America that has financed his campaign.
Based on his experience in running a quarter-billion-dollar enterprise with thousands upon thousands of volunteers, we could expect an Obama administration to be well-managed and cost-effective, with the president choosing forward-thinking advisers committed to his program, demanding that they work as a team and pay attention to details.
He would be steady and calm, given neither to irrational exuberance or outbursts of anger. He would make mistakes, that's for sure, but he could be expected to recognize them, adjust, and move forward.
He would adjust his views to reality rather than trying to adjust reality to his views.
Everyone needs to read this endorsement. If anyone ever "got it", it's the Philly Daily News. I encourage everyone to read the endorsement in its entirety.
It's excellent.
April 17, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please recommend this as well so that more can read it.
April 17, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
But wait...Arent they calling for people to vote for Obama because of the way his campaign has been run (by his political pros of course), does that mean they endorse these same people running the country?...Think Karl Rove... I sure hope not.
April 17, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is the candidate who is responsible for the campaign and how it is run. It is completely clear that no Rovian operatives have3 any influence on the Obama campaign.
April 17, 2008 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
But wait...Are you calling for people to vote for Clinton in spite of the way her campaign has been run (by her political pros of course), does that mean you endorse these same people running the country?...Think Mark Penn...I sure hope not.
April 17, 2008 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, nice straw man! Good thing they're not praising the campaign tactics of Karl Rove. Or Mark Penn for that matter.
April 18, 2008 2:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great stuff. Thanks for posting.
Obama's campaign should consider using part of this endorsement in a PA television ad. Maybe along with a PA-friendly surrogate driving home the same message.
April 17, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
They say all the same things I see. I keep reading the same things from people who have watched him closely or from those like Bill Richardson, who know him.
It almost sucks to have a candidate who makes you feel this good and keeps living up to your expectations because the other side keeps making it into some kind of stupid trap - you get accused of cultism or being a bot.
It's annoying.
April 17, 2008 9:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wouldn't it be nice to be proud not only of your country, but of your government too.
And what a nauseating thought to think of a government of back door, snarling, rat fights in every corridor of government if Hillary Clinton was at the helm. Hasn't anybody noticed that everybody near Hillary is ALWAYS in an uproar. The whole campaign organization is a cesspool of toxic emotions and it trickles down from the top. Hillary is a warlike person. We had a chllingly explicit view of that last night when she threatened Iran with nuclear attack on behalf of countries we aren't even aligned with and who abuse their citizens. Israel is an ally, but not every burg in the middle east is. And war should never be the first option and we should always work with the rest of world. We don't need Dick Cheney in a pant suit.
April 17, 2008 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was talking about this earlier - but the whole thing is very reminiscent of our other presidential dynasty. With George Bush, we've been dragged into his Gigantic Oedipus Complex.
With the Clintons, we're dragged into "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolfe", with the roles reversed. Hillary is the whiskey soaked George and Bill is the promiscuous bitch, Martha.
This is what is royalty is like boys and girls - government is the realm of the personal for these people - they think they are America.
And they can get fucked, royally.
April 17, 2008 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
So well said. I like you more every day.
April 18, 2008 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I never called you a bot, I called you an ObamaDupee.
And speaking of Oprah (er endorsements). She had visions of kingmaker, putting the first black in the WH. But, she got kicked to the curb in favor of Rev Wright. Guess who gets the key to the Lincoln Bedroom (won't have to speculate about who's sleeping there anymore), and the first chair at the head table at every WH Prayer Breackfast(none of that one time visit ala Bill Clinton.
And now she has gone and left "the church", bet she and Steadfast won't get invited to Inaug Ball
April 17, 2008 10:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Karela,
Your post above has some great images (rat fights), and memorable lines (Cheney in a pant suit).
However, as a fellow Obama supporter, comparing a potential Obama administration to a potential Clinton administration has become less interesting to me. I think comparisons to what McCain might create are more to the point.
It seems that Obama is also making an effort to shift gears towards winning the general.
And McCain/Cheney, now there is a sobering thought...and one that may become reality if we don't stop it.
So my suggestion to you, Kerela, is to please continue to use your powerful way with words...to the greatest possible positive effect.
April 17, 2008 11:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a great endorsement editorial. I'm skeptical about how influential editorial endorsements are: look at all the papers, including Texas papers, that endorsed Kerry in 2004. But the Philly Daily News endorsement can't hurt, and I sure hope it helps -- for all the reasons set out in it.
April 17, 2008 11:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is running and running. Running for office involves behind-the-scenes campaign managers and advisors. One such is Obama's advisor Axelrod. Axelrod got Patrick elected as governor of Massachusetts in 2006.
But there is a second kind of running: running things once you are in office. Because there has been a two-year lapse since the Axelroad candidate got in, we can see how effective he seems to be. And one of the signs lies in the results of the Massachusetts primaries. If you remembe, both Massachusetts Senators Kerry and Kennedy endorsed Obama. And Massachusetts voters supported Hillary Clinton. Why is that?
I think after RUNNING FOR OFFICE the Axelrod candidate WAS NOT RUNNING THINGS WHILE IN OFFICE! Axelrod did not give post-election maintenance to the Massachusetts voters.
DON'T EQUATE THE CAMPAIGN WITH GOVERNMENT. Resist the Glitz. Don't get axel-railroaded into another four years of improvisation.
April 18, 2008 6:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
VaughnB
You have a good point. Surely, though Hillary would be worse in managing the massive complex issue of governance as she is unable to manage a campaign and she was a colossal failure at managing healthcare.
I think the amazing thing about Obama is that he has managed to keep VOLUNTEERS on message. Folks are not getting paid to deliver a consistent message and he is. His campaign is a well-0iled machine.
Just think we were told that the Clintons were the mightiest machine in politics and they look to be complete chaos and dissarray compared to Obama and how they continue to switch the message over and over and over.
If we go by Hillary's 'character' what we know is that her administration will be one of double talk and embellishment bordering on outright lies and complete with outright lies as she deems necessary. Hillary will not be open to the press, she will change the rules in the middle of the game and she will stick with a failing strategy despite all indicators of failure as she will see that as not quitting.
Something about those character traits sounds oddly familiar to precisely what we have in the White House today. The only difference being the present 'decider' doesn't think he is smarter than most folks and has a better grasp of the details where he can talk folks under the table and use power to hold sway.
Hillary is a powermongerer and a warmongerer on top of that she has assured us she is not DUMB.
She will be ten times worse than Dumbya.
Frankly, I think we should just tell Hillary the same thing she told middle class white voters in 92
Screw her.
April 18, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sure feels good to think about what that's going to be like again after these 7+ years...
April 18, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink