Organizing for America | Stephen Fox's Blog: Editorial Page Endorsements of Obama Part II Denver Post, Chicago Tribune, San Francsico Chronicle, Los Angeles Times, Cincinnati City Beat; Please put these to good use!

Editorial Page Endorsements of Obama Part II Denver Post, Chicago Tribune, San Francsico Chronicle, Los Angeles Times, Cincinnati City Beat; Please put these to good use!

By Stephen Fox, Contributing Editor New Mexico Sun News - Oct 17th, 2008 at 9:57 pm EDT

Also listed in: 10 groups

Comments | Mail to a Friend | Report Objectionable Content

Tags: cincinnati city beat, denver post, editor and publisher, editorial page endorsements, los angeles times, San Francisco Chronicle, sky news

[For months, I have been urging and coaching and doing free editing to help Obama supporters write letters to the Editor, and always recommended to them that they consult EDITOR AND PUBLISHER, a guide to newspapers in America which lists the name of the Editorial Page Editor, to call ahead and discuss op/ed lengths rather than just letter to the editor lengths.

To see this latest blast of endorsements reaffirms my faith both in independent and discerning American Editorial Pages and the strength of my tactical approach to Presidential Politics, but above all, faith in the intelligence, compassion, and coolness of our best candidate, Obama, who has rightly convinced hundreds of millions of American he is the right choice!---note from Stephen Fox]

__________________________

How we decided: Denver Post

By Dan Haley
Up until late this week, our editorial board was torn over our
presidential endorsement.

Just like Colorado, we were divided neatly between Barack Obama and John McCain.

We had many of the same conversations in our board room that many of you have had over your own kitchen tables or in coffee shops or at cocktail parties.

Obama is too inexperienced. McCain's health care plan is a disaster.

Neither man has articulated a clear plan for the economy. Obama won't say what programs he'll cut given the economic crisis, while McCain still thinks he can balance the budget through tax cuts and lucky charms.

Sarah Palin isn't qualified to be president. Joe Biden is a blooper waiting to happen.

Of course, we even had a few nice things to say about the candidates, but being skeptics, we often gravitated back to the negatives.

That seems to be where we are as a nation, too: the negatives. Maybe Obama can change that. I have my doubts. But wouldn't it be nice?

Anyway, as you can see, we eventually found ourselves at Barack Obama.

"Typical left-wing Denver Post," many of you will mutter. Others may be surprised. Since we endorsed George W. Bush in 2004, many readers have assumed, according to the e-mails we still receive, that we're in the pocket of Republicans. (They forget, or just don't know, that we actually endorsed Al Gore in 2000.)

The Post is an independent newspaper that doesn't care what's good for Republicans or what's good for Democrats. We owe nothing to either party.

Today, with our endorsement of Obama, we lean further to the left than my own personal compass. But it's where the majority of our board is, and that's OK.

We know our endorsement is likely to anger about, oh, 47 percent of the people in Colorado. And that's OK, too.

Endorsements are meant to stoke a public dialogue.

Since 1946, when Palmer Hoyt re-established the editorial page, we've endorsed a candidate in 14 presidential races. Until today, we had endorsed seven Democrats and seven Republicans.

In 1974, in an editorial written after Hoyt's retirement, The Post wrote:

"An editorial endorsement of a candidate is nothing more nor nothing less than an opinion intended to stimulate public discussion and to give the newspaper's best judgment for its readers to ponder and weigh as they see fit. Our endorsement system is not beyond criticism. We are seeking improved government of the people, by the people, and for the people, and so far we have not found a better way to express election opinion than the endorsement system."

And since "lively disagreement is the lifeblood of opinion pages," as the late Sue O'Brien once wrote, one of our board members, Chuck Plunkett, has penned a dissent column, also found on this page.

The endorsement process often isn't pretty. It can be a fierce debate, fueled by high emotions. But it tells you where we stand today as a newspaper.

After all the debates, YouTube videos, and the endless loop of campaign ads, our hope is to give you something else of substance to chew on as you mull the election.

Editorial page editor Dan Haley can be reached at dhaley@denverpost.com.

_________________________________

LOS ANGELES TIMES

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-endorse19-
2008oct19,0,5198206.story

>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.

________________________________________________

CHICAGO TRIBUNE FOR THE FIRST TIME IN ITS 161 YEAR HISTORY ENDORSES
DEMOCRAT: OBAMA!

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.

____________________________________________

NOTES FROM WASHINGTON INDEPENDENT:

[It's no surprise that the liberal media would support its favorite son. However, as the Tribune notes in its editorial, this marks the first time in the newspaper's history that it has endorsed a Democrat for the nation's highest office. The Los Angeles Times has not endorsed a candidate in the presidential race since 1972, and it has never supported a Democrat before either.

The four newspapers all pointed to Sen. John McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, as a key reason for endorsing Obama. McCain has largely ignored or brushed aside questions about Palin's lack of experience -- and by extension, his judgment. The Los Angeles Times was the most scathing:

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.

_______________________________________

THE CHRONICLE RECOMMENDS: Barack Obama for president
Why Obama is the choice
The Illinois senator has shown beyond a doubt that he is the one to lead the nation in troubled times.

Friday, October 17, 2008

The stakes were extraordinarily high even before our economy began to spasm and hurtle toward the abyss.

From the start of the campaign, Americans were confronted with profound policy choices about how and when to extricate this nation from a war it initiated, how to temper a looming recession, and whether to continue Bush administration policies that had widened the gap between rich and poor, eroded individual liberties, strengthened presidential power, shifted the Supreme Court to the right, weakened relations with our allies, and delayed action necessary to slow the warming of the planet.

Then, suddenly, the emergence of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression gave Americans an opportunity to see the two major-party candidates under heightened stress. It was a rare chance to see the two senators encounter the type of pressure that comes with the job description of president of the United States.

Even though each ultimately voted for the same solution - the $700 billion bailout-their demeanors could not have been more different. Sen. John McCain magnified the aura of crisis, "suspending" his campaign to return to Washington, where his role in negotiations was at best tangential. Sen. Barack Obama was a portrait of calmness and deliberation, reminding Americans that it is possible for a leader to juggle more than one task at a time.

Obama showed steadiness in a moment of anxiety, with Americans' portfolios withering and policymakers scrambling to do something - anything - to staunch the panic. The Illinois senator was similarly deliberative - in contrast with McCain's quick-draw provocation - when Russia invaded Georgia in August.

In those crises, and in the hot lights of three debates, Obama demonstrated a presidential depth and temperament. His performance under the unrelenting scrutiny of the past 20 months has helped quell the "experience issue" for a 47-year-old senator who was elected in 2004.

Still, the breadth of the job of the presidency is such that even the most capable and experienced leader must rely on the advice and judgment of seasoned and specialized appointees. A president's success is determined not only by his aptitude, instincts and communication skills - which Obama demonstrated throughout the campaign - but also by the quality of the advisers around him. Do they have the mettle to challenge a president? Does he have the self-confidence, and the trust in them, to encourage such challenges?

Obama's selection of Sen. Joe Biden as his running mate suggests that he would encourage vigorous input in his administration. Biden, 65 and a senator since 1972, has established himself as one of Washington's pre-eminent authorities on foreign policy - and a man who is famously unafraid to volunteer his opinion.

McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, has been largely sequestered from the news media since her selection in late August. She has yet to have anything resembling a traditional news conference, where the full range of her knowledge and views can be explored. Her avoidance of questions and reliance on cue-card talking points in the one vice presidential debate did
nothing to allay doubts about whether the 44-year-old governor of two years is capable of assuming the reins of the presidency. Her selection was but an act of political calculation by McCain.

The erstwhile appeal of "maverick" McCain, 72, has been further undercut by his tack to the right on the Bush tax cuts (which he initially resisted), his newfound allegiance to the religious right (in 2000, he called its leaders "agents of intolerance") and the low tone of his campaign in recent weeks (with attempts to portray Obama as a "pal of terrorists").

While both candidates speak of "change," on the issue that matters most to Americans at this moment - the economy - there is no question about which candidate's policies represents a distinct departure from the approach of the last eight years. McCain's agenda largely reflects the orthodoxy of deregulation and top-weighted tax cuts that defined Republican politics for almost 30 years. McCain has poured forth more proposals to stimulate the economy with cuts on capital gains taxes and allowing certain early withdrawals on retirement accounts. He also has floated a plan to purchase troubled mortgages to help homeowners avoid foreclosure and stay in their
homes.

Obama draws on some of the traditional Democratic themes: a more active government role in regulating businesses and trade agreements, more tax relief for the middle class, and stimulating the economy with public-works projects.

Both candidates have been less than forthcoming about how their tax-cut and spending plans might be derailed if the economy continues to tank or the bailout proves less effective and more expensive than anticipated.

At the start of the year, it looked as if the war in Iraq might be the defining issue of 2008. The United States has spent hundreds of billions of dollars - and lost more than 4,100 troops - since President Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq more than five years ago. McCain's stubborn insistence on "victory" before withdrawal runs the danger of extending the quagmire.

Meanwhile, the threat of terrorism has not gone away. As Obama has noted, the invasion of Iraq diverted resources and attention from what should be the main front on terrorism: the rugged terrain along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, where al Qaeda and, presumably, its leader, Osama bin Laden, retreated after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.

Beyond Iraq, the president who walks into the Oval Office on Jan. 20, 2009, will need to rebuild alliances that have been frayed by the unilateralist approach of the Bush White House. McCain has mocked Obama for his willingness to open dialogue with Iran and other rogue nations, but, again, the go-it-alone, world-opinion-be-damned approach of the past eight years has not made us safer. The challenges of our times - curbing global warming, addressing the global economic crisis, combatting terrorism - require international cooperation.

Throughout a campaign that has been intense - and at some points ugly - Obama has kept his composure and maintained a vision of optimism that has drawn an unparalleled wave of young people into the political process. His policies and his persona have offered hope to a nation that is deeply polarized, swimming in debt, mired in war and ridden with anxiety. He taps into that treasured American reservoir - patriotism - with his calls for sacrifice and national service.

Barack Obama is the right president for these troubled times.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/17/EDLP13H6V9.DTL

____________________________

BY GREG MITCHELL EDITOR AND PUBLISHER:

NEW YORK The Obama-Biden ticket maintains its strong lead in the race fornewspaper endorsements, picking up 12 more papers in the past day, including the giant Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune on Friday afternoon. This brings his lead over McCain-Palin by this measure to over 3-1 so far, at 51-16, including most of the major papers that have decided so far. In contrast, John Kerry barely edged George W. Bush in endorsements in 2004, by about 220 to 205.

The readership of the 51 newspapers backing Obama now stands at 6,299,363 daily circulation. He gained two biggies yesterday in The Washington Post and San Francisco Chronicle, and today picked up the Modesto Bee in addition to the L.A. Times, plus el Diario La Prensa and La Opinion.

The Columbian in Washington was an unexpected win for Obama, since the newspaper endorsed President Bush in the 2004 election. Obama has now picked up at least seven "flip-flops" of this type.

The Mountain Valley News in Colorado adds to McCain's endorsement list, bringing his total to 16 newspapers. The daily circulation of hisnewspapers now stands at 1,502,163.

________________________________________

SKY NEWS:

In Pennsylvania, Conservative radio host Michael Smerconish said he was also throwing his support behind Mr Obama.

"John McCain is an honorable man who has served his country well. But he will not get my vote. For the first time since registering as a Republican 28 years ago, I'm voting for a Democrat for president."

And there are reports that former Secretary of State Colin Powell - who served the last three Republican presidents including George W Bush - may come out in support of the Democrat too.

Sky News political analyst Jon-Christopher Bua said: "Although no one endorsement can turn the tide for a candidate, each one helps push some segment of the undecided voters closer to their choice.

He added: None of this is very good news for John Mc Cain."

The latest endorsements come after the Republican failed to land a knock-out blow in the third and final presidential debate in New York and as voters swing behind Mr Obama in states which have previously been Republican strongholds.

The Illinois Senator now has an eight point lead in Virginia which hasn't backed a Democrat since 1964. He is also challenging Mr McCain in Indiana. The state has only backed a Democrat once since 1940.

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

Cincinnati CityBeat:

As Election Day creeps ever closer, it's time for CityBeat to start
publishing election endorsements and help those remaining undecided voters get their act together. Given our niche in Greater Cincinnati as a voice for progressive causes, we've recommended candidates and ballot issue positions since our founding in 1994 and take that role seriously.

Let's begin with the big enchilada this fall, the presidential race. It should come as no shock that CityBeat endorses Sen. Barack Obama to be the next President of the United States.

There's no shock in our choice because Obama is truly the only candidate on the presidential ballot who can turn this country around. And the country needs turned around in a big way and in a hurry.

The litany of Bush administration failures and scandals is too long to list here, but we can boil down the past eight years to these truths: Bush and his cronies have abused the power of the federal government (torture of accused terrorists and others, domestic spying of U.S. citizens, politicization of U.S. Attorneys, etc.) while failing to make the government effective where it should be (poor Iraq War planning and reconstruction, poor oversight of the financial markets, poor management of disaster aid, etc.).

In short, they've overstepped government boundaries when restraint was required and blew off responsibilities when they felt like it. An Obama presidency will move 180 degrees from Bush's cynical, disinterested, manipulative approach.

Obama has run a serious, focused, organized and inspirational campaign for president and at every step of the long, long process has emerged both victorious and humble. His management of the big picture atop a two-year-long 50-state campaign organization bodes very well for his ability to lead the Democratic Party, Congress and the country over the next four to eight years.

Much of the excitement around Obama flows from his compelling personal story, starting (and in some cases ending) with his standing as the first African-American major party presidential nominee and soon to be the country's first black president.

It's difficult to overstate the significance of this accomplishment, as his election would impact the country and world in so many ways, but it would also be wrong to reduce Obama simply to a symbol.

As with anyone, who Obama is and how he behaves tie directly back to how he was raised and the decisions he made along the way as an adult. Brought up by a single white mother, white grandparents and an Asian stepfather in exotic Hawaii and Indonesia, dealing with abandonment by his own father, trying to find a path in both the black and white worlds while assimilating with the establishment at Ivy League universities, Obama faced and overcame challenges before age 30 that few of us can relate to.

He learned his politics fighting against and later collaborating with the Daley Machine in Chicago, and he caught some breaks along the way.

Would Obama have been elected to the U.S. Senate in Illinois if his better-known Republican rival hadn't flamed out in a sex scandal? Would he have beaten Hillary Clinton if she hadn't made so many tactical mistakes
throughout the early Democratic primary season? Would he be on the verge of becoming president if John McCain were running even a halfway decent campaign? Who knows?

Ultimately, the most impressive thing about Obama's run for the presidency is that his campaign has come across as planned out, strategic and thoughtful. Imagine a president who plans, strategizes and thinks. A crazy concept, we know, but that sort of leader is desperately needed right now.

Obama will enjoy about a two-year honeymoon as president. Both houses of Congress will have more Democrats, and the Senate might even feature a filibuster-proof 60-40 Democratic advantage.

Obama will have the necessary support in Congress to enact his reform plans for health care, financial markets, taxes, the wars in the Middle East and just about everything else. Given how the polls look these days, he should beat McCain so decisively that he'll be able to claim a "mandate" from voters for fundamental change.

He'll also inherit two of the most daunting problems of modern times: the threat of Middle Easternbred terrorism against the West and the global financial meltdown. Both situations continue to drain attention and money that could be used to improve everyday life for most of us via better schools, fairer health care, better retirement plans, cleaner environment, better transportation and better planning.

If Obama isn't able to get his team focused on accomplishing his stated goals and if world events interfere with his plans, the public will be ready to punish him and the Democrats in the mid-term Congressional elections in two years -- much like they punished President Clinton in 1994. So he has two years to get something done.

Obama reminds us of the two most popular Democratic presidents since World War II, John Kennedy and Bill Clinton. Like them, he's youthful, optimistic and oozes personal charm and warmth. He represents the "best and brightest" of his generation.

The warning for Obama, of course, is that both Kennedy and Clinton are often remembered more for their personal foibles than for their breakthroughs and accomplishments. Still, they remain revered presidents in many American households.

Will Obama be able to join the ranks of the revered? Will he fulfill his promises? Will he really be different?

One thing is for sure: When Barack Obama takes the oath of office at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 20, 2009, the world changes and everything becomes possible. That sounds like a future we can all believe in.

Reader Comments	Comments RSS
Comments are closed for this post.

No comments have been written yet.

Content on blogs in My.BarackObama represents the opinions of community members and in no way should be interpreted as endorsed or approved by the campaign.