The Sage of Wichita, Jerry Ratts, once said, “That’s twice. Once more and it’s a trend, and we can send it to Lifestyles.” (You probably have to have worked long, thankless years at a newspaper to fully grok the wisdom of Ratts, but I assure you it’s there.)
By that definition, we officially have us a trend: The Rock Hill Herald has also endorsed Barack Obama, to wit:
Barack Obama, at 46, could have waited four or even eight years to run for the presidency, but decided that this year’s campaign was his moment.
We think he was right; his candidacy is ideally suited for this point in the nation’s history. Obama, more than any other candidate in either party, has based his campaign on the promise of positive change in Washington and an effort to heal the caustic partisan rift that divides not only the nation’s capital but also much of the nation.
The promise of change is nothing unique in the rhetoric of the stump. But we think Obama brings both a unique biography and an impressive set of skills to this campaign.
So I guess this means Editorial can officially drop this subject, and let the Features folks take over…
Related Posts
We, as a country, can either continue our open warfare with each other (and believe me, as a democrat in the mostly republican state, I have to spend time fighting a seige mentality), or we can recognize that all of us have wants and needs, and strengths and abilities. And thank you so much Rush Limbaugh et. al. on both sides, for lobbing frequent missles at the other side! There’s much we disagree on, but so much that we agree on! Let’s try to work together on that which we can agree! We all remember Pogo, “We have met the enemy, and he is us.” If that’s true, do we really want to destroy our enemy?
Endorsements are an outdated practice anyway,so why should anyone in the business care when two (or three) papers opine similarly?
Opinions are the bane of journalism these days. Hope you catch on to that fact some day.
Whose Stimulus Makes the Grade?
One of the benefits of an extended presidential campaign is that it presents real-world tests for candidates. Some take the form of pop quizzes assessing contenders’ instincts in a crisis. Others are more like take-home exams — the latest, and perhaps most revealing, being competing plans for an economic stimulus.
George W. Bush: B-minus.
Barack Obama: A-minus.
John Edwards: B-minus.
Hillary Clinton: C-plus.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012202614.html?nav=hcmodule
I have listened to the discussion about the stimulus package for the economy. All these talking heads are telling us what the best solution yet none of them have defined the problem yet. The problem with the economy is the same as with health care, education or anything else. The simple fact is the wages of lower and middle class working adults is about 30 years behind our current lifestyle. I can prove it by comparing my parents economy to the present day.
My step father worked at the Charleston Naval Base and made the equvialant of $40,ooo/year in today’s dollars. My mother was a housewife. There was five of us total. On his salary alone, we had a nice house, a nice late model car, food, clothes and we could go to the doctor anytime we needed to. We certainly weren’t rich but we didn’t lack for anything and we didn’t need any government subsidies for anything either. The only conclusion I can deduce is that the cost of living has far outpaced the wages of working people.
If I am wrong then please tell me how and why. If I am right then the stimulus we need is better paying jobs for lower and middle class americans.
Edwards is such a liar, he had a chance to do something and did nothing when he was senator. Don’t be okie-doke’d South Carolina. This guy is a complete fake. He is campaigning in direct opposition to his votes in the senate. Now he’s “sorry” for those votes that hurt South Carolina and the middle class (kind of like how he’s sorry for voting for Iraq war along with Hillary Clinton.)