NYT endorses Clinton, McCain

What is sadder than the pretty thin reasoning for the endorsement of Clinton is the obvious politics behind the NY Times editorial board decision. They had made up their mind 10 days ago (prior to the worst of the negative Clinton avalanche) and then moved up the publication from Sunday for fear of having the news change in South Carolina on Sat (but not, supposedly, to influence the voters of South Carolina or to counteract the negative articles being written about the Clinton mud-slinging at the moment).

Given how close the decision seems to have been and how they essentially decided on the fact that Hillary was the hometown senator they knew, I think the editorial board would have been wise not to endorse at all or hold off until closer to the New York primary. (But then again there is the presence of two Clinton speechwriters on the board, so ...)

What's to like?

NAFTA? Welfare reform? Dont Ask, Don't Tell? The Communications Decency Act? Easing media ownership laws? Defense of Marriage Act?

This is some of the legislation Bill Clinton signed into law in an effort to save his presidency after the disastrous failure of Hillary's healthcare reform bill lost congress to the Republicans.

Obama is right, Clinton didn't shift the American debate our way. The Clintons just triangulated their way through the 1990's doing their best to ameliorate the worst aspects of Republican legislation.

In the end the man who told us if we worked hard and played by the rules broke the rules, got caught and allowed the Republicans to stifle any gains he could have made for us. We lost congress and he couldn't even help Al Gore become his successor.

If we nominate Hillary and she gets elected you can expect more of the same small bore efforts. These two won't build the huge mandate we need for the great changes that have to be made. There will be no coattails. They won't change the debate. They're not even trying.

It's really sad to imply Sen. Barack is less qualified than Sen. Clinton. What is her experience. Is it b/c she was a co-president during her husband presidency? What did she accomplished that is significant? Both her & her husband feel they are entitled for the presidency. What we need is a President who brings people/the country together. We need a fresh idea not recycle the same persons. Mrs. Clinton & her husband brought disgrace to the Presidency. How soon we forgot. Both of them do anything to be elected. No class. Undignifyed couple. The NY Times endorsement is very sad to say the least.

"Indeed, the Clintons’ joint career in public life seems oriented toward securing victory and personal vindication.
Sen. Obama’s campaign is an argument for a more unifying style of leadership. In a time of great partisanship, he is careful to talk about winning over independents and even Republicans. He is harsh on the failures of the current administration ­ and most of that critique well-deserved. But he doesn’t use his considerable rhetorical gifts to demonize Republicans. He’s not neglecting his core values; he defends his progressive vision with vigorous integrity. But for him, American unity ­ transcending party ­ is a core value in itself.
Can such unity be restored, in this poisonous political culture? Not unless that is a nominee’s goal from the outset. It will be a difficult challenge for any candidate; but we wait in the hope that someone really will try. There is no other hope for rescuing our republic from the mire. Sen. Obama would also have the best chance to repair the damage to America’s global reputation. A leader with his biography ­ including his roots in Africa and his years spent growing up overseas ­ could transform the world’s view of America. He would seize that opportunity. He would close the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, which has damaged America’s moral standing, and strive to rebuild many diplomatic relationships. Despite America’s bitter partisan divide, all sides should agree on this: In such an environment, little gets done. Congress has been largely useless under both Republican and Democratic leadership. Setting aside the ideological conflict for conflict’s sake to get anything worthwhile done has fallen severely out of fashion. And America certainly has things to get done.
From terrorism and climate change to runaway federal entitlement spending, there are big challenges to be faced. Sen. Obama is the only Democrat who plausibly can say that he wants to work with Americans across the political spectrum to address such subjects ­ and he has the integrity and the skills of persuasion that make him the best-qualified among the remaining Democratic hopefuls to address these challenges. He would be a groundbreaking nominee. More to the point, he makes a solid case that he is ready to lead the whole country. We see Sen. Barack Obama as the best choice in Saturday’s Democratic primary." State.com Opinion.
Has anyone noticed that Senator Obama is really trying to run a campaign with dignity? My husband and I volunteered on his campaign in New Hampshire and the most important thing we were instructed to do by his organizers was while knocking on doors or making phone calls "do not say anything negative about the other candidates". What Senator Obama is doing now is just defending the lies and mis truths that the Clintons are saying about him. I lived in Chicago for 25 years and I've been following the senator for many years. He is what we need in this world. Honesty, integrity, peace, and grace. God bless you Senator Obama. Obama '08