New York Times endorses Obama
The New York Times added its voice in endorsing Democrat Barack Obama for president.
"Hyperbole is the currency of presidential campaigns, but this year the nation’s future truly hangs in the balance," begins the editorial, which was published today and posted online Thursday night.
"The United States is battered and drifting after eight years of President Bush’s failed leadership. He is saddling his successor with two wars, a scarred global image and a government systematically stripped of its ability to protect and help its citizens — whether they are fleeing a hurricane’s floodwaters, searching for affordable health care or struggling to hold on to their homes, jobs, savings and pensions in the midst of a financial crisis that was foretold and preventable.
"As tough as the times are, the selection of a new president is easy. After nearly two years of a grueling and ugly campaign, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois has proved that he is the right choice to be the 44th president of the United States. Mr. Obama has met challenge after challenge, growing as a leader and putting real flesh on his early promises of hope and change. He has shown a cool head and sound judgment. We believe he has the will and the ability to forge the broad political consensus that is essential to finding solutions to this nation’s problems.
The Times is scathing about Republican John McCain.
"In the same time, Senator John McCain of Arizona has retreated farther and farther to the fringe of American politics, running a campaign on partisan division, class warfare and even hints of racism. His policies and worldview are mired in the past. His choice of a running mate so evidently unfit for the office was a final act of opportunism and bad judgment that eclipsed the accomplishments of 26 years in Congress."
UPDATE: Somewhat belatedly, the McCain campaign this afternoon issued a rather sarcastic response to the Times endorsement.
"Just after the New York Times ended months of intense speculation by announcing its endorsement of Barack Obama, the company's corporate credit rating was lowered to 'junk' status -- an appropriate reflection of the paper's editorial judgment as well as the quality of its reporting," Michael Goldfarb, a McCain spokesman, said in a statement.
The Times joins The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and other major newspapers, in backing Obama. As of today, 127 newspapers, including the Globe, had endorsed Obama, and 49 had endorsed McCain, according to Editor & Publisher's count.
Comment
Permalink
EmailThis blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.
About Political Intelligence
News from the Washington Bureau
Health care headache for House Democrats
Health care opponents intensify late attack
Patrick wraps up two-day visit to Washington
Public’s opinions of health care overhaul efforts have familiar ring
Frank reconsiders legislation after worry raised on loopholes
Moderate Democrats fear shift to GOP
BU professor turned Pakistan envoy draws flak
In battle over credit abuses, Warren wields a plan
New England’s GOP moderates aiming to reverse ’08 setbacks
In Kennedy’s towering shadow, Senator Kirk discreetly toils
INside Boston.com
- Home
- |
- Today's Globe
- |
- News
- |
- Business
- |
- Sports
- |
- Lifestyle
- |
- A&E
- |
- Things to Do
- |
- Travel
- |
- Cars
- |
- Jobs
- |
- Homes
- |
- Local Search
The "broad political consensus" is true. Obama attracts more Republican support than McCain attracts Democrat. McCain is alienating even some of his own party with his tactics. The next President can't be the Divider that Bush is.
The greatest influence in the life of a man, is his wife. No question about it. Barack Obama's wife, Michelle, is noted for two things in this campaign.
She said:
"My country is a mean country" and also said," I have never been proud of America."
I question the judgement of the New York Times and also their owned newspaper the Boston Globe that would endores the husband of such a wife that would make such damaging comments against her country!!
A Socialist newspaper endorsing a Socialist Party candidate. Go figure!
Reported by WorldNetDaily (10/24/08):
Evidence has emerged that Sen. Barack Obama belonged to a socialist political party that sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.
Several blogs, including Powerline, previously documented that while running for the Illinois state Senate in 1996 as a Democrat, Obama actively sought and received the endorsement of the socialist-oriented New Party, with some blogs claiming Obama was a member of the controversial party.
The New Party, formed by members of the Democratic Socialists for America and leaders of an offshoot of the Community Party USA, was an electoral alliance that worked alongside the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. The New Party's aim was to help elect politicians to office who espouse its policies.
Among New Party members was linguist and radical activist Noam Chomsky.the New Party News, the party's official newspaper, which show Obama posing with New Party leaders, list him as a New Party member and include quotes from him. The party's Spring 1996 newspaper boasted: "New Party members won three other primaries this Spring in Chicago: Barack Obama (State Senate), Michael Chandler (Democratic Party Committee) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary). The paper quoted Obama saying "these victories prove that small 'd' democracy can work."
Many of the New Party's founding members were Democratic Socialists for America leaders and members of Committees of Correspondence, a breakaway of the Communist Party USA. Obama attended several DSA events and meetings, including a DSA-sponsored town hall meeting Feb. 25, 1996, entitled "Employment and Survival in Urban America." He sought and received an endorsement from the DSA.
Shocking....NOT. They've implicitly endorsed Sen. Obama throughout the entire season. And the peon Globe has been at least as biased.
Evidence has emerged that Sen. Barack Obama belonged to a socialist political party? That evidence is BLOGS hahahahah. Evidence exists that Palin supports America-hating seperatist party. Not BLOGS either actual proof of her on video supporting them.
Obama has proved himself?????? What has he done so far? He's only running for President -- he hasn't done anything as Senator, or any of the jobs he's held. He's run a lot of ads, which speaks nothing. He's participated in some debates, and he did poorly in all of them. He stutters when interviewed. He can't talk intelligently about any political issue. He has shook hands with European leaders, but as Biden says, he would be 'tested' by these leaders if he becomes president. Bottomline, why does a Presidential candidate have to prove himself during his campaign? Shouldn't they be qualified already before they run? The truth is that everybody knows that Obama is NOT qualified to be President. The Democarts are just trying their best to prove that he won't be a disaster. Hence the proclamation that Obama has proved himself.
Nice quotes from NYT comment:
A nauseating editorial. You call yourself a newspaper of record. The tone of the editorial is worthy of Pravda or a state newspaper in a totalitarian State like the Soviet Union of the past. Even veiled criticism was pernmitted in the old Soviet Bloc but not in New York. Why does Barack Obama need the relentless cheerleading and nausesous un-critical flattery of the media elite and of Hollywood. Is it because there is no substance to him and that he is little more than a celebrity? All those who will vote for McCain are dismissed with contempt. This editorial diminishes the NYT and confirms me in my choice to vote for a Great American who does not need unthinking adulation.
— John O'Sullivan, Fla
OBAMA FOR THE WIN!