Chicago Tribune, Washington Post endorses Barack Obama

[min0 lee]

First time it has endorsed a Democrat in its 161 year history.

CHICAGO TRIBUNE ENDORSEMENT: Chicago Tribune endorses Barack Obama for president -- chicagotribune.com
CHICAGO TRIBUNE ENDORSEMENT: Chicago Tribune endorses Barack Obama for president -- chicagotribune.com

chicagotribune.com

FROM THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE EDITORIAL BOARD

Tribune endorsement: Barack Obama for president

2:33 PM CDT, October 17, 2008


However this election turns out, it will dramatically advance America's slow progress toward equality and inclusion. It took Abraham Lincoln's extraordinary courage in the Civil War to get us here. It took an epic battle to secure women the right to vote. It took the perseverance of the civil rights movement. Now we have an election in which we will choose the first African-American president . . . or the first female vice president.

In recent weeks it has been easy to lose sight of this history in the making. Americans are focused on the greatest threat to the world economic system in 80 years. They feel a personal vulnerability the likes of which they haven't experienced since Sept. 11, 2001. It's a different kind of vulnerability. Unlike Sept. 11, the economic threat hasn't forged a common bond in this nation. It has fed anger, fear and mistrust.

On Nov. 4 we're going to elect a president to lead us through a perilous time and restore in us a common sense of national purpose.

The strongest candidate to do that is Sen. Barack Obama. The Tribune is proud to endorse him today for president of the United States.

-----------------------


On Dec. 6, 2006, this page encouraged Obama to join the presidential campaign. We wrote that he would celebrate our common values instead of exaggerate our differences. We said he would raise the tone of the campaign. We said his intellectual depth would sharpen the policy debate. In the ensuing 22 months he has done just that.

Many Americans say they're uneasy about Obama. He's pretty new to them.

We can provide some assurance. We have known Obama since he entered politics a dozen years ago. We have watched him, worked with him, argued with him as he rose from an effective state senator to an inspiring U.S. senator to the Democratic Party's nominee for president.

We have tremendous confidence in his intellectual rigor, his moral compass and his ability to make sound, thoughtful, careful decisions. He is ready.

The change that Obama talks about so much is not simply a change in this policy or that one. It is not fundamentally about lobbyists or Washington insiders. Obama envisions a change in the way we deal with one another in politics and government. His opponents may say this is empty, abstract rhetoric. In fact, it is hard to imagine how we are going to deal with the grave domestic and foreign crises we face without an end to the savagery and a return to civility in politics.

-----------------------


This endorsement makes some history for the Chicago Tribune. This is the first time the newspaper has endorsed the Democratic Party's nominee for president.

The Tribune in its earliest days took up the abolition of slavery and linked itself to a powerful force for that cause--the Republican Party. The Tribune's first great leader, Joseph Medill, was a founder of the GOP. The editorial page has been a proponent of conservative principles. It believes that government has to serve people honestly and efficiently.

With that in mind, in 1872 we endorsed Horace Greeley, who ran as an independent against the corrupt administration of Republican President Ulysses S. Grant. (Greeley was later endorsed by the Democrats.) In 1912 we endorsed Theodore Roosevelt, who ran as the Progressive Party candidate against Republican President William Howard Taft.

The Tribune's decisions then were driven by outrage at inept and corrupt business and political leaders.

We see parallels today.

The Republican Party, the party of limited government, has lost its way. The government ran a $237 billion surplus in 2000, the year before Bush took office -- and recorded a $455 billion deficit in 2008. The Republicans lost control of the U.S. House and Senate in 2006 because, as we said at the time, they gave the nation rampant spending and Capitol Hill corruption. They abandoned their principles. They paid the price.

We might have counted on John McCain to correct his party's course. We like McCain. We endorsed him in the Republican primary in Illinois. In part because of his persuasion and resolve, the U.S. stands to win an unconditional victory in Iraq.

It is, though, hard to figure John McCain these days. He argued that President Bush's tax cuts were fiscally irresponsible, but he now supports them. He promises a balanced budget by the end of his first term, but his tax cut plan would add an estimated $4.2 trillion in debt over 10 years. He has responded to the economic crisis with an angry, populist message and a misguided, $300 billion proposal to buy up bad mortgages.

McCain failed in his most important executive decision. Give him credit for choosing a female running mate--but he passed up any number of supremely qualified Republican women who could have served. Having called Obama not ready to lead, McCain chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. His campaign has tried to stage-manage Palin's exposure to the public. But it's clear she is not prepared to step in at a moment's notice and serve as president. McCain put his campaign before his country.

Obama chose a more experienced and more thoughtful running mate--he put governing before politicking. Sen. Joe Biden doesn't bring many votes to Obama, but he would help him from day one to lead the country.

-----------------------


McCain calls Obama a typical liberal politician. Granted, it's disappointing that Obama's mix of tax cuts for most people and increases for the wealthy would create an estimated $2.9 trillion in federal debt. He has made more promises on spending than McCain has. We wish one of these candidates had given good, hard specific information on how he would bring the federal budget into line. Neither one has.

We do, though, think Obama would govern as much more of a pragmatic centrist than many people expect.

We know first-hand that Obama seeks out and listens carefully and respectfully to people who disagree with him. He builds consensus. He was most effective in the Illinois legislature when he worked with Republicans on welfare, ethics and criminal justice reform.

He worked to expand the number of charter schools in Illinois--not popular with some Democratic constituencies.

He took up ethics reform in the U.S. Senate--not popular with Washington politicians.

His economic policy team is peppered with advisers who support free trade. He has been called a "University of Chicago Democrat"--a reference to the famed free-market Chicago school of economics, which puts faith in markets.

-----------------------


Obama is deeply grounded in the best aspirations of this country, and we need to return to those aspirations. He has had the character and the will to achieve great things despite the obstacles that he faced as an unprivileged black man in the U.S.

He has risen with his honor, grace and civility intact. He has the intelligence to understand the grave economic and national security risks that face us, to listen to good advice and make careful decisions.

When Obama said at the 2004 Democratic Convention that we weren't a nation of red states and blue states, he spoke of union the way Abraham Lincoln did.

It may have seemed audacious for Obama to start his campaign in Springfield, invoking Lincoln. We think, given the opportunity to hold this nation's most powerful office, he will prove it wasn't so audacious after all. We are proud to add Barack Obama's name to Lincoln's in the list of people the Tribune has endorsed for president of the United States.
Copyright ??© 2008, Chicago Tribune

 

[min0 lee]

Obama chose a more experienced and more thoughtful running mate--he put governing before politicking. Sen. Joe Biden doesn't bring many votes to Obama, but he would help him from day one to lead the country.

One would imagine how far ahead in the polls he would be if he chosen a better VP choice or a pretty face instead.

 

[min0 lee]

Washington Post

Barack Obama for President - washingtonpost.com
Barack Obama for President
Friday, October 17, 2008; A24

THE NOMINATING process this year produced two unusually talented and qualified presidential candidates. There are few public figures we have respected more over the years than Sen. John McCain. Yet it is without ambivalence that we endorse Sen. Barack Obama for president.

The choice is made easy in part by Mr. McCain's disappointing campaign, above all his irresponsible selection of a running mate who is not ready to be president. It is made easy in larger part, though, because of our admiration for Mr. Obama and the impressive qualities he has shown during this long race. Yes, we have reservations and concerns, almost inevitably, given Mr. Obama's relatively brief experience in national politics. But we also have enormous hopes.

Mr. Obama is a man of supple intelligence, with a nuanced grasp of complex issues and evident skill at conciliation and consensus-building. At home, we believe, he would respond to the economic crisis with a healthy respect for markets tempered by justified dismay over rising inequality and an understanding of the need for focused regulation. Abroad, the best evidence suggests that he would seek to maintain U.S. leadership and engagement, continue the fight against terrorists, and wage vigorous diplomacy on behalf of U.S. values and interests. Mr. Obama has the potential to become a great president. Given the enormous problems he would confront from his first day in office, and the damage wrought over the past eight years, we would settle for very good.

The first question, in fact, might be why either man wants the job. Start with two ongoing wars, both far from being won; an unstable, nuclear-armed Pakistan; a resurgent Russia menacing its neighbors; a terrorist-supporting Iran racing toward nuclear status; a roiling Middle East; a rising China seeking its place in the world. Stir in the threat of nuclear or biological terrorism, the burdens of global poverty and disease, and accelerating climate change. Domestically, wages have stagnated while public education is failing a generation of urban, mostly minority children. Now add the possibility of the deepest economic trough since the Great Depression.

Not even his fiercest critics would blame President Bush for all of these problems, and we are far from being his fiercest critic. But for the past eight years, his administration, while pursuing some worthy policies (accountability in education, homeland security, the promotion of freedom abroad), has also championed some stunningly wrongheaded ones (fiscal recklessness, torture, utter disregard for the planet's ecological health) and has acted too often with incompetence, arrogance or both. A McCain presidency would not equal four more years, but outside of his inner circle, Mr. McCain would draw on many of the same policymakers who have brought us to our current state. We believe they have richly earned, and might even benefit from, some years in the political wilderness.

OF COURSE, Mr. Obama offers a great deal more than being not a Republican. There are two sets of issues that matter most in judging these candidacies. The first has to do with restoring and promoting prosperity and sharing its fruits more evenly in a globalizing era that has suppressed wages and heightened inequality. Here the choice is not a close call. Mr. McCain has little interest in economics and no apparent feel for the topic. His principal proposal, doubling down on the Bush tax cuts, would exacerbate the fiscal wreckage and the inequality simultaneously. Mr. Obama's economic plan contains its share of unaffordable promises, but it pushes more in the direction of fairness and fiscal health. Both men have pledged to tackle climate change.

Mr. Obama also understands that the most important single counter to inequality, and the best way to maintain American competitiveness, is improved education, another subject of only modest interest to Mr. McCain. Mr. Obama would focus attention on early education and on helping families so that another generation of poor children doesn't lose out. His budgets would be less likely to squeeze out important programs such as Head Start and Pell grants. Though he has been less definitive than we would like, he supports accountability measures for public schools and providing parents choices by means of charter schools.

A better health-care system also is crucial to bolstering U.S. competitiveness and relieving worker insecurity. Mr. McCain is right to advocate an end to the tax favoritism showed to employer plans. This system works against lower-income people, and Mr. Obama has disparaged the McCain proposal in deceptive ways. But Mr. McCain's health plan doesn't do enough to protect those who cannot afford health insurance. Mr. Obama hopes to steer the country toward universal coverage by charting a course between government mandates and individual choice, though we question whether his plan is affordable or does enough to contain costs.

The next president is apt to have the chance to nominate one or more Supreme Court justices. Given the court's current precarious balance, we think Obama appointees could have a positive impact on issues from detention policy and executive power to privacy protections and civil rights.

Overshadowing all of these policy choices may be the financial crisis and the recession it is likely to spawn. It is almost impossible to predict what policies will be called for by January, but certainly the country will want in its president a combination of nimbleness and steadfastness -- precisely the qualities Mr. Obama has displayed during the past few weeks. When he might have been scoring political points against the incumbent, he instead responsibly urged fellow Democrats in Congress to back Mr. Bush's financial rescue plan. He has surrounded himself with top-notch, experienced, centrist economic advisers -- perhaps the best warranty that, unlike some past presidents of modest experience, Mr. Obama will not ride into town determined to reinvent every policy wheel. Some have disparaged Mr. Obama as too cool, but his unflappability over the past few weeks -- indeed, over two years of campaigning -- strikes us as exactly what Americans might want in their president at a time of great uncertainty.

ON THE SECOND set of issues, having to do with keeping America safe in a dangerous world, it is a closer call. Mr. McCain has deep knowledge and a longstanding commitment to promoting U.S. leadership and values.

But Mr. Obama, as anyone who reads his books can tell, also has a sophisticated understanding of the world and America's place in it. He, too, is committed to maintaining U.S. leadership and sticking up for democratic values, as his recent defense of tiny Georgia makes clear. We hope he would navigate between the amoral realism of some in his party and the counterproductive cocksureness of the current administration, especially in its first term. On most policies, such as the need to go after al-Qaeda, check Iran's nuclear ambitions and fight HIV/AIDS abroad, he differs little from Mr. Bush or Mr. McCain. But he promises defter diplomacy and greater commitment to allies. His team overstates the likelihood that either of those can produce dramatically better results, but both are certainly worth trying.

Mr. Obama's greatest deviation from current policy is also our biggest worry: his insistence on withdrawing U.S. combat troops from Iraq on a fixed timeline. Thanks to the surge that Mr. Obama opposed, it may be feasible to withdraw many troops during his first two years in office. But if it isn't -- and U.S. generals have warned that the hard-won gains of the past 18 months could be lost by a precipitous withdrawal -- we can only hope and assume that Mr. Obama would recognize the strategic importance of success in Iraq and adjust his plans.

We also can only hope that the alarming anti-trade rhetoric we have heard from Mr. Obama during the campaign would give way to the understanding of the benefits of trade reflected in his writings. A silver lining of the financial crisis may be the flexibility it gives Mr. Obama to override some of the interest groups and members of Congress in his own party who oppose open trade, as well as to pursue the entitlement reform that he surely understands is needed.

IT GIVES US no pleasure to oppose Mr. McCain. Over the years, he has been a force for principle and bipartisanship. He fought to recognize Vietnam, though some of his fellow ex-POWs vilified him for it. He stood up for humane immigration reform, though he knew Republican primary voters would punish him for it. He opposed torture and promoted campaign finance reform, a cause that Mr. Obama injured when he broke his promise to accept public financing in the general election campaign. Mr. McCain staked his career on finding a strategy for success in Iraq when just about everyone else in Washington was ready to give up. We think that he, too, might make a pretty good president.

But the stress of a campaign can reveal some essential truths, and the picture of Mr. McCain that emerged this year is far from reassuring. To pass his party's tax-cut litmus test, he jettisoned his commitment to balanced budgets. He hasn't come up with a coherent agenda, and at times he has seemed rash and impulsive. And we find no way to square his professed passion for America's national security with his choice of a running mate who, no matter what her other strengths, is not prepared to be commander in chief.

ANY PRESIDENTIAL vote is a gamble, and Mr. Obama's r??©sum??© is undoubtedly thin. We had hoped, throughout this long campaign, to see more evidence that Mr. Obama might stand up to Democratic orthodoxy and end, as he said in his announcement speech, "our chronic avoidance of tough decisions."

But Mr. Obama's temperament is unlike anything we've seen on the national stage in many years. He is deliberate but not indecisive; eloquent but a master of substance and detail; preternaturally confident but eager to hear opposing points of view. He has inspired millions of voters of diverse ages and races, no small thing in our often divided and cynical country. We think he is the right man for a perilous moment.

 

[min0 lee]

times online

An American Choice -Times Online
An American Choice
Barack Obama has shown the character, intelligence and judgment to be president. He is the better candidate for the White House
It is for the American people to choose the next president of the United States. Anyone who is not a citizen should proffer advice on the question only with the greatest humility and tact. The price paid in money or in blood for the decisions of the president falls mainly, even if not exclusively, on Americans. And the nuances of political discussion, so important in selecting leaders, are often hard for outsiders to grasp.

Yet it would be naive to think that readers of a British newspaper have no stake in the outcome of the contest between Barack Obama and John McCain. Both the economic and the foreign policy of the White House incumbent have a big impact on other nations.

Any American who doubts this might, with profit, reflect upon the history of Tony Blair's Government. A party of the Centre Left found its policy profoundly changed by the selection of a conservative president in 2000. As this episode demonstrates, the politics of our two nations are intertwined.

So, while it is only one small element in a big decision, it may be that now that the debates are over, some Americans wish to know how their election appears to many British people.

The rise of Barack Obama seemed supremely unlikely a year ago. It was not just the formidable Clinton machine that stood in his way. It was also history. Only fifty years ago, across the South, it was impossible for an African-American to eat at a lunch counter, attend college or vote alongside white Americans. In the years when Martin Luther King marched, and preached and died for civil rights, the very idea of a black man in the Oval Office would have been fanciful.

So race cannot be ignored in this election, even by those who do not live in America. For if the United States were to choose its first African- American, Britain's ally in the fight for liberty and democracy would be sending out a message. It would be that through peaceful struggle, and democratic protest, oppression can be overcome, freedom can be won and tolerance can be victorious. An Obama inaugural presidential address would deliver an eloquent sermon on Western values before its first word had been uttered.

Both charisma and novelty can take a candidate so far. But Mr Obama has needed much more, and the more he has needed speaks well of him as a potential president.

First, he has needed a certain steeliness. On the platform Mr Obama can soar; in private it is his stillness that impresses. His opponents level against him the charge that he is a machine politician, rather than a bright-eyed reformer. Yet this charge can as easily be turned to Mr Obama's advantage. It suggests that he is tough, as he will need to be.

Secondly, he has needed to show that he is not a captive of his party's Left. The biggest question, for a European, over an Obama presidency is whether he would prove able to face up to the security challenges. It is impossible to be certain. But his words, for instance on Pakistan and Iran,have been reassuring.
Finally, he has needed to show himself good in a crisis. And here he has been decisively better than his Republican opponent. On the economy he has been better advised, shown better judgement, and been better at keeping his cool.

Senator John McCain is an authentic hero. He has also been a brave politician. His moment, however, has gone. His campaign has failed to inspire and his eccentric choice of a running-mate was irresponsible.

Americans still have many questions about Mr Obama. This election is not over. But The Times, reflecting upon an American choice, hopes that the outcome will be an Obama victory.

 

[min0 lee]

Los Angeles Times

Barack Obama for president - Los Angeles Times

Barack Obama for president - Los Angeles Times
From the Los Angeles Times
Endorsement
Barack Obama for president
He is the competent, confident leader who represents the aspirations of the United States.

11:01 AM PDT, October 17, 2008

It is inherent in the American character to aspire to greatness, so it can be disorienting when the nation stumbles or loses confidence in bedrock principles or institutions. That's where the United States is as it prepares to select a new president: We have seen the government take a stake in venerable private financial houses; we have witnessed eight years of executive branch power grabs and erosion of civil liberties; we are still recovering from a murderous attack by terrorists on our own soil and still struggling with how best to prevent a recurrence.

We need a leader who demonstrates thoughtful calm and grace under pressure, one not prone to volatile gesture or capricious pronouncement. We need a leader well-grounded in the intellectual and legal foundations of American freedom. Yet we ask that the same person also possess the spark and passion to inspire the best within us: creativity, generosity and a fierce defense of justice and liberty.

The Times without hesitation endorses Barack Obama for president.

Our nation has never before had a candidate like Obama, a man born in the 1960s, of black African and white heritage, raised and educated abroad as well as in the United States, and bringing with him a personal narrative that encompasses much of the American story but that, until now, has been reflected in little of its elected leadership. The excitement of Obama's early campaign was amplified by that newness. But as the presidential race draws to its conclusion, it is Obama's character and temperament that come to the fore. It is his steadiness. His maturity.

These are qualities American leadership has sorely lacked for close to a decade. The U.S. Constitution, more than two centuries old, now offers the world one of its more mature and certainly most stable governments, but our political culture is still struggling to shake off a brash and unseemly adolescence. In George W. Bush, the executive branch turned its back on an adult role in the nation and the world and retreated into self-absorbed unilateralism.

John McCain distinguished himself through much of the Bush presidency by speaking out against reckless and self-defeating policies. He earned The Times' respect, and our endorsement in the California Republican primary, for his denunciation of torture, his readiness to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and his willingness to buck his party on issues such as immigration reform. But the man known for his sense of honor and consistency has since announced that he wouldn't vote for his own immigration bill, and he redefined "torture" in such a disingenuous way as to nearly embrace what he once abhorred.

Indeed, the presidential campaign has rendered McCain nearly unrecognizable. His selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate was, as a short-term political tactic, brilliant. It was also irresponsible, as Palin is the most unqualified vice presidential nominee of a major party in living memory. The decision calls into question just what kind of thinking -- if that's the appropriate word -- would drive the White House in a McCain presidency. Fortunately, the public has shown more discernment, and the early enthusiasm for Palin has given way to national ridicule of her candidacy and McCain's judgment.

Obama's selection also was telling. He might have scored a steeper bump in the polls by making a more dramatic choice than the capable and experienced Joe Biden. But for all the excitement of his own candidacy, Obama has offered more competence than drama.

He is no lone rider. He is a consensus builder, a leader. As a constitutional scholar, he has articulated a respect for the rule of law and the limited power of the executive that make him the best hope of restoring balance and process to the Justice Department. He is a Democrat, leaning further left than right, and that should be reflected in his nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court. This is a good thing; the court operates best when it is ideologically balanced. With its present alignment at seven justices named by Republicans and two by Democrats, it is due for a tug from the left.

We are not sanguine about Obama's economic policies. He speaks with populist sweep about taxing oil companies to give middle-class families rebates that of course they would welcome, but would be far too small to stimulate the economy. His ideas on taxation do not stray far from those put forward by Democrats over the last several decades. His response to the most recent, and drastic, fallout of the sub- prime mortgage meltdown has been appropriately cautious; this is uncharted territory, and Obama is not a master of economic theory or practice.

And that's fine. Obama inspires confidence not so much in his grasp of Wall Street finance, but in his acknowledgment of and comfort with his lack of expertise. He will not be one to forge far-reaching economic policy without sounding out the best thinkers and practitioners, and he has many at his disposal. He has won the backing of some on Wall Street not because he's one of them, but because they recognize his talent for extracting from a broad range of proposals a coherent and workable program.

On paper, McCain presents the type of economic program The Times has repeatedly backed: One that would ease the tax burden on business and other high earners most likely to invest in the economy and hire new workers. But he has been disturbingly unfocused in his response to the current financial situation, rushing to "suspend" his campaign and take action (although just what action never became clear). Having little to contribute, he instead chose to exploit the crisis.

We may one day look back on this presidential campaign in wonder. We may marvel that Obama's critics called him an elitist, as if an Ivy League education were a source of embarrassment, and belittled his eloquence, as if a gift with words were suddenly a defect. In fact, Obama is educated and eloquent, sober and exciting, steady and mature. He represents the nation as it is, and as it aspires to be.

 

[min0 lee]

Amazing, how everyone including those here at IM fell in love with Palin....she's now looked as a mistake. While Biden is not a great choice .............

 

[min0 lee]

Denver Post another Republican paper

Barack Obama for president - The Denver Post

Barack Obama for president
He's the right man to lead America back to prosperity

By The Denver Post
The Denver Post
Article Last Updated:10/17/2008 04:45:43 PM MDT
In just 16 days, a presidential campaign that has raged for almost two years will at last come to an end.
In that time, America has undergone profound changes. And for most Americans, those changes have not been for the better.
When the first, absurdly early straw polls were taken in Iowa in 2007, America was torn by a war in Iraq that seemed unwinnable. But the economy seemed reasonably sound.
That preoccupation with the war may help explain why Republicans passed over Mitt Romney's successful record of job creation in favor of war hero and foreign-policy specialist John McCain. On the Democratic side, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who wasn't even in Congress when the war began, bested Sen. Hillary Clinton in part because she voted to authorize the war.
Americans, as we now know, wanted change.
But as this race nears the finish line, America's priorities have changed, too.
The "surge" has reduced the level of violence in Iraq and President Bush has begun modest troop withdrawals. Sens. McCain and Obama differ mostly about the details and pace of future withdrawals.
But the speed and virulence of the worldwide liquidity crisis, caused by the collapse of the junk mortgage market, has stunned most Americans and has led voters, who now review their shrinking retirement funds and rising unemployment rates with alarm, to focus overwhelmingly on America's economic ills.
Given this inescapable economic agenda, The Post believes Barack Obama is better equipped to lead America back to a prosperous future.
It's time to change course.
Frankly, neither Obama nor McCain has a comprehensive plan to end the economic crisis, or to even calm our jittery nerves. But Obama's promise to surround himself with this country's top economic thinkers, such as Warren Buffet, is at least somewhat comforting.
In unsteady times, it may seem obvious to gravitate toward the veteran politician, but in this campaign, it's been the newcomer who has had the steady hand.
This fast-breaking global meltdown overwhelmed both campaigns and the final weeks of a hard-fought political contest are hardly the place for the cool, bipartisan thinking needed to get us out of this mess. Fortunately, bipartisan efforts by the Bush administration and Congress have at least bought America time to begin crafting long-term economic reforms.
Looking at McCain's and Obama's specific proposals, we unfortunately find much to dislike in both port- folios. We can live with Obama's call to raise taxes on families earning more than $250,000 a year. And, in fact, we've long thought it fiscally irresponsible to wage two wars on tax cuts.
However, we're concerned he may increase capital gains taxes at a time when the economy is starved for investment capital. Indeed, we'd favor eliminating capital gains taxes entirely if such profits are reinvested in another enterprise within one year.
We also would urge Obama to expand investment tax credits for businesses, to put profits back to work creating new jobs.
America's other most pressing long-term economic problem is health care.
Obama's plan, while not perfect, is far superior to McCain's catastrophic ideas. How does it affect the economy?
Consider this: General Motors now pays more than $1,500 for health care benefits, mostly for retired employees, on each new car sold.
America's competitors in Japan, Germany and China don't share such costs because their national health care plans are funded through broad-based taxes. Somehow, America must level the playing field.
McCain wants to eliminate the corporate tax deduction on existing health care plans, a cruel corporate surtax averaging $3,500 per employee. That tax hike would force employers to drop coverage for tens of millions of workers. The lucky workers who still had employer-paid benefits would have to pay income taxes on them â?????? a $3,000 tax increase on a typical middle-income Colorado worker. And this massive tax increase on employers and employees alike comes from a man who asked repeatedly in the last debate: "Why raise anybody's taxes?"
Why, indeed, Sen. McCain?
We can't imagine a Democrat- controlled Congress would pass McCain's reckless health care tax. But even proposing such a scheme shows his woeful lack of understanding of America's economic underpinnings.
As to Obama, we confess we fear that a compliant Congress may be all too eager to approve his plans. That's why it's critical for him to reach across the aisle and draw the best team he can assemble to get America working again. Why not ask Romney to chair his health-care reform task force, or even serve as his economic recovery "czar"? There's precedent for such a move, since Wendell Willkie helped sell President Franklin D. Roosevelt's vital wartime lend-lease program after losing his presidential race to FDR in 1940.
What's the chance that Obama will reach out in such a bipartisan fashion? Actually, he has a long record of doing exactly that. We don't mean his brief tenure in the Senate so much as his successful run as a community organizer in Chicago.
Republicans love to mock Obama's history as a community organizer. But here was a man with no money to offer, no patronage to dispense, no way to punish his opponents. All he could do was to work with people from all walks of life, liberals and conservatives, business people and the unemployed, and bring them together in common cause for a better community. Could there really be better preparation to reunite a worried and divided America to again pursue our "more perfect union"?
If Americans were only worried about foreign affairs, McCain's stalwart service in the military and experience on the national stage would make him the more credible commander in chief. But our eyes have turned homeward and, in this hour, Obama has the eloquence and vision to bring us back together.
As novelist Christopher Buckley said in endorsing Obama, the Illinois senator "has a first-rate intellect and a first-rate temperament."
With the help and prayers of the American people, we believe those talents can also make Barack Obama a great president.

 

[lnvanry]

Amazing, how everyone including those here at IM fell in love with Palin....she's now looked as a mistake. While Biden is not a great choice .............

Biden is the the biggest reason why I'm prolly going to vote for Obama.

 

[min0 lee]

Biden is the the biggest reason why I'm prolly going to vote for Obama.

Really? Why would that be?

 

[busyLivin]

The Washingon Compost & The One's "hometown" paper endorsed Obama...I'm shocked.

Anyone who's read the Trib lately knows where it's been heading for a long time... They practically put Obama into the Senate.

 

[lnvanry]

Really? Why would that be?

I like Biden...he was my favorite out of everyone during the primaries.

 

[min0 lee]

The Washingon Compost & The One's "hometown" paper endorsed Obama...I'm shocked.

Anyone who's read the Trib lately knows where it's been heading for a long time... They practically put Obama into the Senate.

I find the reasons why they are endorsing Obama interesting, especially when it comes from a Republican paper.

Not so much with McCain in the other thread I started.

 

[min0 lee]

Al Bundy Stumps For Obama

Al Bundy stumps for Obama
Barack Obama Friday found a novel way to appeal to the white blue-collar voters he badly needs to win in Ohio: Get Al Bundy to campaign for him.

And so Ed O'Neill, the actor who portrayed the embattled husband and father on "Married with Children" came to Youngstown, Ohio, to stump for the Democratic nominee.

O'Neill got a big welcome from the crowd at Youngstown State University, which had gathered to hear Sen. Hillary Clinton. "I haven't been here in 10 years," O'Neill said, 'and I usually don't get involved in politics."

Then he recalled growing up here, and urged a vote for Obama. The crowd in this working-class town loved it.

 

[min0 lee]

Peg Bundy is a better candidate than Palin.

 

[min0 lee]

Signs that Republican Colin Powell will support Barack Obama for president

BY THOMAS M. DEFRANK
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF

Updated Friday, October 17th 2008, 7:06 PM

WASHINGTON - After months of playing political Hamlet, Colin Powell is finally ready to tell America who he likes for President - and the smart money says Barack Obama is Powell's choice.

Sources close to the retired four-star general and American icon cautioned that Powell's support for Obama over John McCain might stop short of a formal endorsement when he's interviewed on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday.

Given Powell's cautious nature, he might decide to make his endorsement of Obama implied, rather than explicit. Even so, a well-informed source told the Daily News:

"After Sunday people aren't going to have any doubt who he's voting for."



Two other colleagues Powell has consulted in recent weeks told The News that while Powell admires McCain, he's roubled that the GOP candidate has surrounded himself with hardline national security advisers.

"McCain has too many neocons working for him," said one Republican source familiar with Powell's thinking.
Powell is also irked that McCain's political handlers orchestrated disingenuous leaks to reporters during the Democratic convention that Powell was a leading candidate to be McCain's running mate.



The News reported in August that when McCain met with Powell in early summer to lobby for his endorsement, Powell told the Arizona senator he wouldn't join the ticket under any circumstances.

Obama also privately lobbied Powell after the primaries and has called the general frequently since in hopes of making the sale. McCain, by contrast, has been AWOL; Powell hasn't heard from him in months.

"He wishes McCain could give him a reason to vote for him, but he hasn't yet," a Powell associate told The News.
Powell told both suitors their politics were a bit too off-center for his tastes: Obama too liberal, McCain too conservative.



Powell's backing would be the jewel in the crown for either beneficiary.

The former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Secretary of State is one of America's most admired figures. A clear tilt toward Obama by a Republican of Powell's stature would constitute a severe psychological blow to McCain's chances for a comeback victory.

"An endorsement would be huge," a Democratic strategist predicted, especially among undecided independent voters more likely to be swayed by a high-profile figure than rank-and-file party members.

Powell knows McCain far better than Obama and gave $2,300 to his then-struggling primary campaign in August 2007. At the time, however, he told McCain the contribution was because of their long friendship and wasn't an endorsement.

At the same time, Powell is known to admire Obama's swift rise to national prominence and recognizes the Democrat's symbolic importance to African-American aspirations and racial progress.

In April, Powell praised Obama's skill in assembling a first-rate campaign operation. "That gives me some indication that [despite] his inexperience in foreign affairs or domestic affairs, he may also be somebody who can learn quickly," he said.

 

[Hoglander]

That's to much to read and I'm white. I will say this though... I am feeling poorer and feeling more abused by republican white trash than ever before.

I'm down with trowing out the white trash.

 

[brogers]

Someone included this quote in a letter to the editor today in my local paper. It is simply something to think about:

You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatreds.
You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away a man's initiative and independence.
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.

 

[busyLivin]

I find the reasons why they are endorsing Obama interesting, especially when it comes from a Republican paper.

The trib? Republican?

Illinois was a red state for a long time until George Ryan. It's now one of the most reliably blue states. The trib is far from republican.

How popular would a "republican paper" be in the ultra-liberal Chicago? They are just trying to pump up this story like they pump up everything for Obama. Anyone from Chicago knows what the trib's become.

(I've lived here my whole life!)

 

[DOMS]

Someone included this quote in a letter to the editor today in my local paper. It is simply something to think about:

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.

When you hear people voice their opinions on this topic, you get to know what kind of a person that are.

They fall into two general types: those that'll endeavor to reach that level and enjoy the perks and those that lament that others have those advantages.

Put in layman's terms: winners and bitches.

 

[bio-chem]

Put in layman's terms: winners and bitches.

damn it I just changed my sig about 30 seconds ago, and now i may have to change it again

 

[brogers]

When you hear people voice their opinions on this topic, you get to know what kind of a person that are.

They fall into two general types: those that'll endeavor to reach that level and enjoy the perks and those that lament that others have those advantages.

Put in layman's terms: winners and bitches.

I agree, and a better analysis of Obama's taxation (redistribution) plan would be not "spreading the wealth" as he said but "spreading poverty."

Make the big bad successful people feel your pain!!

 

[TexanTA1996]

Might have meant something if it was a long time ago. They endorse him right before he's about to win the election, front runners.

 

[min0 lee]

The trib? Republican?

Illinois was a red state for a long time until George Ryan. It's now one of the most reliably blue states. The trib is far from republican.

How popular would a "republican paper" be in the ultra-liberal Chicago? They are just trying to pump up this story like they pump up everything for Obama. Anyone from Chicago knows what the trib's become.

(I've lived here my whole life!)

I have more jokes like that.

 

[Hoglander]

Up until this year I have voted as a republican. I just hope it doesn't take as long to figure out as it did me, kids. "Power corrupts." That's it in simple terms that republican wannabes can grasp, IMHO. I've gained much as a republican in the 80s and 90s only to see crash down. You'll learn.

 

[min0 lee]

Here's the list, it's not complete yet.


Obama/Biden


Alabama
Tuscaloosa News

California
Contra Costa Times (50) (D)
Daily Breeze
Fremont Argus (D)
Fresno Bee (68) (D)
Hayward Daily Review (D)
La Opini??³n (87) (D)
Long Beach Press Telegram
Los Angeles Daily News (78) (D)
Los Angeles Times (4) (N)
Marin Independent Journal
Modesto Bee
Monterey County Herald (D)
Oakland Tribune (D)
Pasadena Star-News
Sacramento Bee (25) (D)
San Bernadino Sun (R)
San Francisco Chronicle (12) (D)
San Gabriel Valley Tribune
San Joaquin Herald
SJ Mercury News (31) (D)
San Mateo County Times (D)
Santa Cruz Sentinel (D)
Stockton Record * (R)
Tri-Valley Herald (R)
Walnut Creek Journal

Colorado
Cortez Journal
Denver Post (36) (R)
Durango Herald
Gunnison Times (N)
Ouray Plain Dealer

Florida
Daytona Beach
Miami Herald (30) (D)
Naples News
News-Journal (100) (D)
Orlando Sentinel (33) (D)
Palm Beach Post (62) (D)
Sarasota Herald-Tribune (86) (D)

Georgia
Atlanta Journal-Constitution (18) (D)

Hawaii
Honolulu Star-Bulletin (D)

Idaho
Idaho Stateman (D)

Illinois
Chicago Tribune (8) (R)
Chicago Sun-Times (21) (D)
Arlington Hgts Daily Herald (72) (D)
Rockford Register Star

Indiana
Fort Wayne Journal Gazette
Richmond Palladium Item

Iowa
The Hawk Eye
Mason City Globe Gazette
Storm Lake Times (D)

Kentucky
Lexington Herald-Leader (93) (D)

Maine
Bangor News
Brunswick Times Record

Massachusetts
Boston Globe (14) (D)
Standard-Times (D)

Michigan
Detroit Free Press (22) (D)
Michigan Chronicle
Muskegon Chronicle (D)

Minnesota
St Cloud Times

Missouri
Columbia Daily Tribune
Kansas City Star (28) (D)
St. Louis Post-Dispatch (27) (D)

Nevada
Las Vegas Sun

New Hampshire
Cabinet Press
Concord Monitor
Nashua Telegraph

New Jersey
Asbury Park Press (73) (R)

New Mexico
Las Cruces Sun News
Santa Fe New Mexican (D)

New York
Buffalo News (55) (D)
New York Daily News (5) (R)
El Diario/La Prensa

North Carolina
Asheville Citizen-Times (D)
Greenville Daily Reflector
Durham Herald Sun
News & Observer (56) (D)
Wilmington Star News

Ohio
Akron Beacon Journal (82) (D)
Cleveland Plain Dealer (17) (N)
Canton Repository (R)
Dayton Daily News (85) (D)
Times-Reporter
Springfield News Sun (D)
Toledo Blade (83) (D)

Oregon
East Oregonian (D)
Mail Tribune
Oregonian (23) (D)
Register-Guard (D)
Salem Statesman Journal

Pennsylvania
Philadelphia Inquirer (16) (D)
Express-Times (R)
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (42) (D)

Tennessee
Chattanooga Times
Commercial Appeal (69) (D)
Tennessean (66) (D)

Texas
Austin American-Statesman (60) (R)
The Eagle (N)
Houston Chronicle (9) (R)
Lufkin Daily News (D)

Utah
Salt Lake Tribune (81) (R)

Virginia
Falls Church News Press (D)

Washington
The Columbian (R)
The Olympian
Seattle Times (37) (D)
Seattle Post-Intell. (78) (D)
Tri-City Herald
Walla Walla Union-Bulletin
Yakima Herald

Washington, DC
Washington Post (7) (D)

West Virginia
Charleston Gazette (D)

Wisconsin
State Journal (R)

 

[min0 lee]

I can respect a man who earns his money the honest way, what I hate are the ones who steal from the poor.
I pay my taxes which is one of the highest in this country and I don't bitch about it, combined we both make good money.

 

[min0 lee]

The trib? Republican?

Illinois was a red state for a long time until George Ryan. It's now one of the most reliably blue states. The trib is far from republican.

How popular would a "republican paper" be in the ultra-liberal Chicago? They are just trying to pump up this story like they pump up everything for Obama. Anyone from Chicago knows what the trib's become.

(I've lived here my whole life!)

Illinois
Chicago Tribune (8) (R)
Chicago Sun-Times (21) (D)
Arlington Hgts Daily Herald (72) (D)
Rockford Register Star

 

[lnvanry]

Mino, the Trib is NOT repub. I've living in Chicago and read the newspaper for a few years....if you're source claims its a repub media outlet....then place no credibility on the source.

This maybe the first time the trib has gone out and endorsed a candidate (which I'm sure has to do with the fact that Obama and Chicago have a "special" relationship) but the paper is not republican...it was a Lincoln supporter about a 100 years ago...yes, lincoln was a repub...but c'mon dude, organizations change over that time duration.

peronsonally, I don't respect the trbis opinion on anything (including sports)...its a corrupt organzation that puts out the material that Daley asks for.

BusyLivin', I know you where I'm coming from on this

 

[min0 lee]

Mino, the Trib is NOT repub. I've living in Chicago and read the newspaper for a few years....if you're source claims its a repub media outlet....then place no credibility on the source.

This maybe the first time the trib has gone out and endorsed a candidate (which I'm sure has to do with the fact that Obama and Chicago have a "special" relationship) but the paper is not republican...it was a Lincoln supporter about a 100 years ago...yes, lincoln was a repub...but c'mon dude, organizations change over that time duration.

peronsonally, I don't respect the trbis opinion on anything (including sports)...its a corrupt organzation that puts out the material that Daley asks for.

BusyLivin', I know you where I'm coming from on this

Ok, so it's not a republican paper, the D's are for papers that endorsed Kerry in 2004, an R's are for papers that endorsed Bush.

 

[min0 lee]

This endorsement makes some history for the Chicago Tribune. This is the first time the newspaper has endorsed the Democratic Party's nominee for president.

This quote came from the Newspaper.