Barack Obama: Democrats Deserve a Nominee for ChangeWednesday, April 16, 2008 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
On Tuesday, Pennsylvanians will have the unusual luxury of voting in a Democratic presidential primary that promises to be truly relevant. Like two opposing armies marching to a new Gettysburg, the forces of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton come to this latest battlefield symbolizing two views of America -- one of the past, one of the future. Pennsylvania Democrats need to rise to the historic moment.
For us it is the candidates' vision and character that loom as the decisive factors in this race. For as dissimilar as they are, the two share much in common. It starts with their mold-breaking candidacies. Whoever wins the nomination will vie for a special place in U.S. history -- to be either the first African-American or the first female commander in chief.
Although their backgrounds are different, they have come to the same conclusion, one now shared by many Americans, that the Bush administration has taken the nation on a profoundly wrong course both at home and abroad. The excitement that has animated this primary season -- the surge of new voters, the change of party registrations -- is an expression of the nation's hunger for change.
For as hard as they have run against each other, both candidates are united in running vehemently against President Bush and all his works -- another common theme that came out in their visits to the Post-Gazette editorial board on successive days this week. Sen. Clinton was the more explicit in her disdain: George W. Bush "is one of the worst, if not the worst, president we have ever had."
Not surprisingly, the policies they advocate have much in common and are generally the polar opposites of those espoused by the current administration.
On the domestic front, the prescriptions they offer on issues such as health care, the environment and education declare that government must be an agent of change to benefit the lives of ordinary Americans, not a power that shrinks from regulating or directing for fear of offending a core ideology.
In their expansive plans, Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton do have their own emphases and differences -- Sen. Clinton's health-care plan, for example, would cover more Americans than Sen. Obama's, but both would be a vast improvement on the status quo that leaves 47 million Americans uninsured and continues to soar in expense.
On foreign policy, both are united in their desire to bring the troops home from Iraq while improving the strategic situation in Afghanistan, the place of unfinished business where the al-Qaida spiders first spun their deadly web for 9/11 and are coming back thanks to the Iraq diversion.
On Iraq, for those inclined to remember, Sen. Clinton carries more baggage, for she voted to approve the war in the first place. For those inclined to forgive, she would seek to repair relations with allies strained by the Iraq misadventure, as Sen. Obama also would.
There is one last common ground for these candidates: They are both uncommonly smart, thoughtful and very well-versed in the issues. They care about people and they care about the workings of government. They are prepared.
Their strengths promise, in short, the one thing that the Bush administration has so shockingly lacked: competency. There will be no intellectually lazy president in the White House if either succeeded to it, no outsourced thinking to the vice president or the secretary of defense, no cheerfully shallow praise for unqualified political appointments, no enduring cause for embarrassment by the American people.
So forget all the primary skirmishing. Sen. Obama is every bit as prepared to answer the ring of the 3 a.m. phone as Sen. Clinton. Forget this idea that Sen. Obama is all inspiration and no substance. He has detailed positions on the major issues. When the occasion demands it, he can marshal eloquence in the service of making challenging arguments, which he did to great effect in his now-famous speech putting his pastor's remarks in the greater context of race relations in America.
Nor is he any sort of elitist. As he said yesterday in effectively refuting this ridiculous charge in a meeting with Post-Gazette editors, "my life's work has been to get everybody a fair shake."
This editorial began by observing that one candidate is of the past and one of the future. The litany of criticisms heaped on Sen. Obama by the Clinton camp, simultaneously doing the work of the Republicans, is as illustrative as anything of which one is which. These are the cynical responses of the old politics to the new.
Sen. Obama has captured much of the nation's imagination for a reason. He offers real change, a vision of an America that can move past not only racial tensions but also the political partisanship that has so bedeviled it.
To be sure, Sen. Clinton carries the aspirations of women in particular, but even in this she is something of a throwback, a woman whose identity and public position are indelibly linked to her husband, her own considerable talents notwithstanding. It does not help that the Clinton brand is seen by many in the country as suspect and shifty, bearing the grimy stamp of political calculation counting as much as principle.
Pennsylvania -- this encrusted, change-averse commonwealth where a state liquor monopoly holds on against all reason and where municipal fiefdoms shrink from sensible consolidation -- needs to take a strong look at the new face and the new hope in this race. Because political business-as-usual is more likely to bring the usual disappointment for the Democrats this fall, the Post-Gazette endorses the nomination of Barack Obama, who has brought an excitement and an electricity to American politics not seen since the days of John F. Kennedy.
Illinois Senator Projects Sense of Leadership the Nation NeedsAny election, almost by definition, is about the fu ture. That's true even as, all too often, the discussion gets bogged down in the past, the present and politics.
The next president will preside over the next four or eight years, a period that promises to be as transformative -- even as traumatic -- as any we've known in our history. There are forces in play, from economics to the environment, from terrorism to energy, that are beyond the capacity of any single individual, no matter how powerful, to control.
But make no mistake, whom America elects as its next president will make a big difference in how we as a nation engage the future and confront a long menu of challenges. Whom Democrats select as their nominee to face Republi can Sen. John McCain is critical in es tablishing the nature of the choice Amer icans will confront in the General Election. And how Pennsyl vania votes in the April 22 Democratic primary may well prove to be the decisive milestone in an exciting political contest between two exceptional candidates.
It is one of those strange, unpredictable flukes of politics that Pennsylvania even matters. Virtually everyone expected the contests in both parties to have been settled several weeks and primaries ago. That was not to be for the Democrats, and we in Pennsylvania are the richer -- and perhaps wiser -- for having Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama working their hearts out to win votes in their quest for the nation's highest office.We salute the efforts of both candidates and their success in energizing the electorate.
Amid the political sparing that has seemingly grown more testy as the campaign has gone on, it would be easy to lose sight of the fact that the positions of the two Democrats on most issues are quite similar. Much of the debate has been about nuance more than major substantive differences.
But there are differences, major differences reflected in style, attitude and personal history. These differences are seen most strikingly in Obama, who comes across as very much the candidate of the future, while Clinton comes across as the candidate of the past. Obama offers real change in the White House, while Clinton offers more of what Americans are tired of in Washington. Obama offers the prospect of cooperation, while Clinton offers the virtual certainty of more confrontation and political gridlock.
Clinton, as the first female candidate to have a serious chance to win the presidency, has her share of enthusiastic supporters. But Obama has managed to transcend politics in a way that has attracted interest and enthusiasm from people across the political spectrum. And perhaps most impressive of all, he has won over young people and brought them into the discussion on a scale that may be unprecedented. It is amazing how many adults have said it was their kids who got them to take a deeper look at the Illinois senator.
That is a hopeful development. But it also is instructive. Young people are the future. And they see and sense something in Obama that coincides with their hopes and aspirations for themselves and for the kind of world they want to live in.
Running in 1992, presidential candidate Bill Clinton was fond of referring to himself as "the candidate from Hope," a reference to his hometown in Arkansas. In Obama, the Democrats have "the candidate of hope," and their best prospect of running a competitive and uplifting campaign against McCain this fall.
The Patriot-News editorial board endorses Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Obama Inspires
We can't remember the last time a presidential election generated so much excitement. And by excitement we mean people who've been inspired to act, folks who've sat out past elections but have been driven to get involved this time.
And so we find ourselves part of that bunch.
While the Courier Times Editorial Board usually sits out primary elections, we're motivated to get involved this year and offer an endorsement.
One big reason is that Pennsylvania matters for a change. The state's late primary date has rendered its election results meaningless in most presidential election years. The races are usually decided by now. Not this year. This year we have an opportunity to make a difference.
While Sen. John McCain has emerged as the GOP standard-bearer, giving Republicans no choice on Election Day, the Democrats are still fighting it out — and fighting hard. Indeed, Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have spent plenty of time in our state and each has made repeat visits to Bucks County, a telling gauge perhaps of how much the candidates value our county — and our votes.
Historic race
Another reason we chose to get involved is the historic nature of the Democratic race. For the first time a major political party will nominate either a woman or an African American as its presidential candidate. And neither would be a sacrificial lamb.
Both are strong candidates and talented individuals with accomplished records, clear leadership ability and thoughtful agendas speaking to their viability and readiness. And national polls strongly suggest that either candidate would pose a strong challenge to McCain; indeed, both appear to have the edge on the Republican at his early stage.
While we hate to oversimplify and characterize the Democrats as in agreement on the major issues, they do hold similar views. Both oppose the war in Iraq, for example, support some form of national health insurance, would end or reform No Child Left Behind and oppose the Bush tax cuts.
There are differences, of course. And we encourage readers to review our Voters Guide, which will arrive with Thursday's newspaper, for an issue-by-issue comparison.
While we believe the candidates' views on the issues are important — in fact, they provide the foundation for our recommendation today — we have been moved by other factors to offer a recommendation.
New perspective
Chief among them is motivation. Like many of you, we're excited. We've been inspired by candidates who not only promise change, but who embody change. By virtue of who they are they would, we believe, bring a new and refreshing perspective to the Oval Office. We also believe both candidates are committed to replacing the old politics of confrontation with a new era of cooperation — in Washington and around the world.
We look forward, as millions of Americans do, to that change.
But between these two agents of change, one stands out. Barack Obama inspires like no other candidate; indeed, like no other individual on the national stage. He has mobilized new voters and young people in general to get involved in the political process for the first time. And his themes of hope and change, which ring so authentic, have likewise invigorated many who otherwise might have sat out the election.
High character
Obama is intelligent, articulate and has demonstrated a strong ability to understand the issues. He's also shown character under fire. And he's run an incredibly savvy campaign for a first-time presidential candidate.
In fact, the professional way he's conducted his campaign and the deft organization he's put together, which has outmaneuvered Clinton, is impressive. We believe Obama would bring the same professionalism to the executive branch of government since he isn't tied into lobbyists and special interests.
Perhaps most importantly, Obama is more likely to get us out of Iraq since, unlike Clinton, he didn't vote for the war in the first place and has been a constant critic of the war. And, more so than Clinton, we believe he'd be successful in spearheading a diplomatic solution to the war by drawing friends and enemies into the discussions, something he has openly advocated. Finally, we believe Obama's gift for oratory would inspire unity in a nation that is now — and too often in the past has been — divided.
For these reasons we are inspired to endorse Barack Obama as the Democratic nominee for president.
No comments:
Post a Comment