Here’s a link to The State editorial board’s endorsement of Barack Obama, folks. As promised, we put it up on thestate.com early. Formally, it will appear in the paper on Wednesday’s editorial page.
Please read it, and react. Needless to say, elaboration follows — in column and video form, as we did with the Republicans.
To read my column about how our board’s discussion of the endorsement, click here.
For a video clip of me talking about the endorsement, click here.
Related Posts
“Can such unity be restored, in this poisonous political culture?”
Restored? When did we last have it? When Reagan asked Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall, during the Cuban missile crisis, when we landed on the moon, under Eisenhower or during WWII?
Or was it actually before the Civil War?
Who actually wrote the endorsement? I half expected it to still be Joe Biden.
We were actually very united on 9-12-2001. Then our current leader squandered the moment.
That was a very well written endorsement. I’ll still vote for Hillary but I could be very comfortable with Barack Obama as president.
You have got to be kidding. An endorsement should mean that you support and recommend that your readers support, your anointed one. It you endorse one of the three, where is your inward honor and and respect for yourself when you asked us to think about McCain? I do not understand your ability to even consider Obama. He is a snake oil salesman. Everything he says is for self promotion and not for what is best for this country. He does not have a clue about how to deal with foreign military and economic problems. Are you selling papers or trying to tell your readers what they want to hear without regard for what is best for the future of our country? The clock is ticking and when it strikes election day for the people to go to the polls in November, it should be a wake-up call for this nation to sink or swim. You folks that worry more about what is on TV and what sports team you want to win and all the crazy programming that is called reality TV, better get a reality check. IT IS THE ECONOMY STUPID.
I applaud the comments of The State for sorting through the merits of each of the candidates and outlining for prospective voters the reasoning that underlaid such a strong endorsement for Sen. Obama. I feel that the thrust of the endorsement captures the true spirit of the Obama campaign. Thank you for your strong endorsement.
Thank you for supporting Senator Obama. Senator Obama has been under serious attack from the Clinton political machine. They like fighting rough and dirty, and they have been doing everything possible to draw him into a fight. So they all look the same, but everyone knows they are different. Clintons – the past, Obama – the future.. God bless the United States of America..
Keep in mind when you hear Bill Clinton talking trash this week about Obama that he was a failure as a President because he lost two years of his second term – and an ability to leave a legacy – because of a lie that led to an impeachment attempt. The fact that he is lying now shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. We simply cannot afford, as Democrats, to risk losing our momentum, our majority in the legislature (Clinton lost that in 1994), and a real chance to move Democratic policies forward in DC by installing the divisive Clinton gang back into the White House.
Thanks for supporting Sen. Obama. The State editorial board has once again proved itself a beacon of journalistic integrity and in touch with the needs of South Carolinians. By presenting for the people of South Carolina a careful examination of all the great democratic candidate-leaders’ past and present records in an effort to discern the best possible candidate-leader to represent the Democratic Party and it’s ideals in the November General Election your endorsement does not fall on deaf ears. Though it may disappoint the other candidates, and bring ire from their foot soldiers – it is the best and most responsible decision to have been made. Senator Obama does have the qualities of a Statesman and a true leader and he has the abilities to address the issues that readily face our country from domestic issues such as health care and the economy to foreign issues such as Iraq and repairing the American Image. Again thank you!
THERE IS A LOVE AFFIAR WITH SENATOR OBAMA THAT I JUST DONT UNDERSTAND, I THINK HE WOULD BE A TERRIBLE PRESIDENT, WE NEED A LEADER THAT WILL TAKE A STAND ON ISSUES AND NOT JUST RIDE THE FENCE. I DON’T BELIEVE IN HIM AND I PRAY THAT HE DOES NOT WIN THE NOMINATION. UNITY, HOPE AND FAITH ARE ALL GOOD TO TALK ABOUT, BUT ARE THOSE THING GOING TO PUT FOOD ON MY TABLE, OR MONEY IN MY POCKET, OR LOWER MY HEALTH CARE COST. HE LIVES IN SOMETYPE OF DREAM WORLD WHERE EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE IF YOU JUST BELIEVE. GIVE ME A BREAK,HEY THAT DOES SOUND LIKE A FAIRY TALE. HE IS A WEAK MAN, WITH NO IDEA HOW TO BE A PRESIDENT. THE REPUBLICIANS WANT HIM TO WIN THE NOMINATION BECAUSE THEY WILL EAT HIM ALIVE, THEY KNOW HE IS WEAK, THIS IS WHY THEY ALWAYS TALK GOOD ABOUT HIM, THIS IS PROBABLY THE REASON THIS PAPER ENDORSES HIM.
I can only wonder if the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire are feeling a bit of buyer’s remorse. Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, and Chris Dodd would have been far superior candidates than the three who are left now. What a failure of our political system. John Edwards tried to take the high road in the debate by reminding everyone that people care more about healthcare and Iraq than bickering. However, Biden, Richardson, and Dodd have been saying that in the debates for months, but look where that got them. Those three candidates were all qualified, competent, classy, noncontroversial individuals that would have been difficult for the Republicans to run against.
Anyway, it seems like Obama is the least worst candidate remaining among the Democrats, so I think your endorsement is spot on. But for voters who are frustrated with what’s left to choose from, hopefully voters will take their responsibilities a bit more seriously in 2012 when it comes to choosing a nominee because hype and charisma are no substitutes for depth and class.
I don’t know, Bud. Bush may have squandered the moment, but I don’t remember any terrorist attacks here since 9-11, save something in a military barracks somewhere that didn’t amount to much.
Perhaps I should have asked what leader last gave us unity, because we certainly don’t need events as traumatic and disastrous as 9-11 to bring us together.
If I said Reagan, you’d say no, Kennedy, but I’d say, no, he got himself killed, so it must have been Eisenhower, but you’d say, no, civil rights hadn’t yet happened, so that takes us back at least to Lincoln, who certainly was one of our great leaders, but lo and behold, he was a Republican, and even if his war did preclude slavery, it didn’t really unify us, because we’re still fighting about the flag at the State House and Ben Tillman’s statue, so let me suggest George Washington as the leader who last gave us unity.
Back in his day, he had a political war getting the governors of the various states to believe that the office of president was more important than the governorship of a state. He won that political war, and as a result, we’re one pretty big country, not a bunch of small ones. He made the Constitution work when the Articles of Confederation failed.
So that leaves us with Barack Obama to restore the unity Washington gave us, but even Washington owned slaves, though he eventually freed them, and he never used the presidency to oppose slavery as a public policy.
So, like I first said, what unity? Moreso than unity, what Brad’s really talking about is the civility of public discourse. With Clinton and Obama, picking the more comes down to deciding who threw the first punch.
I myself would point to Bill Clinton’s “fairy tale” comment as the first real blow to the head, and because Obama’s decidedly more inspirational than Hillary, maybe The State editorial board is right. Maybe Obama does have the best chance among Democrats to give us the unity that, ironically, seems so elusive in the United States.
But the only thing he has a chance to restore is the civility of the way we play politics. The only real unity we ever had came from having a common opponent, which caused us to forget our differences temporarily.
Forty or 50 years ago, we did things more politely in public, and it would be nice to have that back, but the only way to mistake that for actual unity would be to ignore what was going on behind the scenes, back in the days when we didn’t air our dirty laundry.
Kennedy’s assassination, and his brother’s, and MLK’s, and Vietnam, and Watergate ended all that. The Clintons’ shenanigans and the fuel they gave talk radio lowered the bar for the media and the politicians manipulating the media even farther.
So, here we are, stuck in a war of words and a war in Iraq, which raises a question:
Isn’t blogging actually contributing to the problem?
You endorse a populist demagogue with no resume and no platform, who is unable or unwilling to articulate anything more than feel-good, content-free sound bites – the perfect media candidate.
No, Lee, we didn’t endorse Edwards.
Let’s face it. Becoming president means selling your soul to several different special interest groups, convincing them that you will do what they want. In order to do that, you have to keep the talk as much in generalities as you possibly can, because if you get into specifics, you’re going raise too much ire.
So where to go with specifics? Attack the other person, so you keep up interest–the media always needs an exciting story. Bi-partisanship, cooperation, consensus, the stuff good government is made of–that doesn’t make interesting TV spots. Best, too, if the candidate has a charismatic personality, so she/he can gloss over the lack of specifics.
The State has probably endorsed the two best candidates in both parties. We can only hope they both make it, but of course even then, specifics will be in short supply in the campaign.
State–
Thanks for your endorsement of Obama. He is clearly the president for the 21st century. This man has the cleanest spirit of all the candidates and will do a lot to restore America’s belief in itself and abroad.
Thank you for your very thoughtful endorsement of Sen. Obama. You clearly laid out exactly why I am a ardent Obama supporter.
It was Bill Clinton’s actions while in the White House that has brought the federal government to such a point of division. It will not be another Clinton (or the same Clinton) to restore the peoples’ faith in government and to get much-needed work done.
Obama is clearly not the candidate that you should have endorsed. His continuous avoidance of answering questions is unbelievable. He seems to have his head in the clouds when he’s debating on stage. And for his honesty, research “Rezco.”
The endorsement was very well written and i agree.
The thought of another round of billary politics simply depresses me. I also suspect that Hillary is not running to be the first woman president who stands on her own but, as a trojan horse for Bill to skirt the constitutional amendment.
We have already suffered through the current presidency where the constitution has been stomped on and ignored, we don’t need another.
Besides, we are facing serious problems that we simply cannot afford another highly divisive and angry presidency where the country hates each other.
Afterall, it is apparent that the Clintons have severely damaged and divided their own party to the point of breaking it apart should she be the ‘pretender nominee’ for Bill, but, there would be no resolving the divide between democrat and republican.
Concidering the markets are nosediving now, can we really afford this style of governing again?
I know many republicans of all races who can live with an Obama presidency and find him to be a likable and capable man. This bodes well for repairing our own divides and getting past the destruction of the past two presidents.
Obama is highly intellectual and able. He knows and has taught constitutional law and has respect and high regard for that most precious document.
He is a man of good moral character and has a very impressive record in the Illinois senate.
He is the one person who can get us through the rocky times we now face.
the sad truth is there will never be unity in the government is named either Bush or Clinton – their time has past
Those people who say things like lookup Reczko — you FORCE the tit for tat because you put posion int he atmosphere
Look up NORMAN HSU – Clinton’s indicted bundler – and the $850,000 she had to return since December
As Obama said- none of them are perfect in this regard (In Iowa John Edwards had a 527 run by his former campaign manager who had power of attorney for Polly Mellon a 97 year old woman who “donated” $500,000 to the 527)
The point being – we need campaign finance reform, we need unity and we need a new outlook so politic can return to governing and policy —
Sen Clinton says “this is not a game to me”
If that was true was is everything in and about the Clinton campaign “gamed”
Truth or Dare?
Dare to stand up to the machine – that redo of the Mac ad that was done a while ago seems really prescient
Good endorsement – and the right endorsement for these times
Hey, Fred, no need to shout. I hear what you say, but I think you’ve missed a few points. You say that he’s all ‘fairy tale’ kinda talk. This is a man who graduated at the top of class (in law) from a top university. He could have named the job he wanted. He took a low paying job in Chicago working with those who had no jobs and no homes, to help them get jobs and a place to live. He advocates real health care change, and has said that he will empower the government to actually negotiate prices with our pharmaceutical companies–a far cry from Bush’s refusal to do so–and the reason that every other country gets our medications so much more cheaply! He says, and his history shows, that he will listen to anyone. It also shows that, while he will work for a common cause, that having listened, he will stand his ground if he can’t get a consensus that is good for those he is serving. No, Fred, we have had enough of Mr. Bush’s own personal “reality,” where we have no positive standing in the world, no destruction of WMDs (actually no WMDs to destroy), no means of really winning a war, no plans for getting out of a country we’ve destroyed (forget about a “Marshall Plan” solution), a tanking economy, and a massive debt to China. No we don’t need anymore of this ‘psycholand.’ We need a person who has the brains to work, who is willing to listen to others, and who can craft solution to these problems from the many variables. I truly believe Senator Obama is far and away the best person running to do that.
Thank you for endorsing Barack Obama. Your well written endorsement is much appreciated by those of us also supporting Sen. Obama.
I am a 50 year old white woman and cannot remember ever being inspired by a political candidate like I have been by Barack Obama. I can only imagine the good his inspirational message of unity can do for all of us, especially our sons and daughters.
Sen. Obama has replaced cynicism with hope and replaced doubt with faith for many of us. The gift he has given to us cannot be minimized and must be supported by taking that inspiration and putting it to work.
Thank you.
What a wonderfully written endorsement.
I am a 33 year old white man. My first voting election happened to be 1992 – a very exciting first election! I was so enthusiastic about Bill Clinton. I grew up in a pretty poor family in southern California under Ronald Reagan waiting for something to “trickle down”. Something did all right.
In high school, I watched George H.W. Bush ignore half the country and the world and push past Kuwait and invade Iraq.
And along came Bill. I was going to help change things! And so he got my vote.
As I continued to come of age in the early 90’s, I watched the country *continue* to split and divide. Wasn’t he supposed to bring us together? I liked his policies, and I liked him, but … why were Americans growing farther apart?
Older and wiser friends helped me to see: an agenda is still an agenda. If you run on an agenda, you only need 51% of the vote to be with you. And then you can ignore half the country. That rule works for everyone, and it’s strangling the soul of America.
I believe we’re caught in a cycle, one that the mere acknowledgment of amounts to a “loss”. We’re trapped in the past, caught in the eddies of a dynasty that cycles between Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, right, left, right, left.
Half of the country – 49% – have a “highly negative” opinion of Hillary. She’s not even in the oval office … how can she lead when we already know half of the country strongly dislikes her, rightfully or otherwise?
Barack Obama can break the cycle. Not only is he a hyper-intelligent human being, an experienced leader, a natural organizer … he’s not *of* the politics of fear that grip everyone else in the race.
I would be all right with Hillary Clinton. Her policies happen to fall in line with my own views. But Barack Obama is the only candidate who can take us all forward *together*.
Thank you for endorsing Barack Obama. Hope is important … I hope we all come together and vote to move forward!
Thia just in: The Director for Public Service and Policy Research at the University of South Carolina is named Robert Oldendick.
I rest my case.
I belive John Edwards is the only one that is ready for the white house in Jan 09. He is willing to fight the special interest that is running washington. If you go to http://www.opensecrets.org you will see all the money taken by clinton by big oil, insurance, real estate, lobbyist etc. We need to clean up washington.
Edwards/obama unbeatable ticket
I think you owe it to your readers to go into a little more detail about Obama.
You should research his voting record and explain to people why he voted against English being the primary language in the USA. I can’t believe this was an issue in the first place. If he’s the unifier that you claim, how does allowing groups of people to maintain their own culture and language unify one d— thing? Every nation that has had this situation has had nothing but tension, tragedy and trouble.
Next, research the church he belongs to and explain to your subscribers what the church stands for and what their philosophy is.
You can go to the Trinity Universal Church of Christ and learn about one of Obama’s significant mentors. Jereiah Wright, his pastor, is anything but a unifier.
You’ve probably heard the term “drive by media”. The State’s endorsement of Obama bears out the meaning of that term
I for one am growing weary of the media attacks on Bill Clinton.
ALL of the campaigns — including Mr. Obama’s — are employing every political tactic to their advantage which is legally available to them. To think otherwise is naive. In fact, it was Mr. Obama who promised us, following his NH defeat, the “rough and tumble” politics of Chicago. Perhaps we saw this in the ugly radio ad his supporters ran in Nevada.
The more important point is this: the majority of Democrats do NOT support Hillary because of anything Bill says. I for one wish he’d take a vacation until January 2009. What IS increasingly clear, however, is that Obama has failed to successfully make the case based on his own merits. At debates, he has the opportunity to persuade us, and he does not. He is great in front of a teleprompter, but without that aid, comes across as unprepared and petulant. Or, as Lou Dobbs said last night, “out of his element.”
While it may be appealing and convenient for Obama and his media fans to find a scapegoat (in Bill Clinton) for Obama’s own weaknesses, the American people are smart enough to sort out truth from spin.
Your candidate will continue printing money just like all the rest.Except one. Buying our way out of our problems with fake money is like going “all in” in texas hold’em-it works great right up until it doesn’t.
Many of the candidates speak of their religion to impress voters for their support. The Clintons have used the R (religion) card. However, the namecalling, accusations, and false statements from them do not speak of religion, integrity, or any presidential attribute. When Obama attempts to address our Nation’s issues, Hillary turns the event into a negative situation. What kind of president will she make if she resorts to namecalling and shouting matches with lawmakers or foreign leaders? Would crying also help negotiations with a foreign country or Congress? Another concern is this co-presidency – Hillary/Bill. Who will run the country while these two are delighting in degrading the Republicans and rival Democrats? Will Bill get side-tracked by another woman and disgrace the White House? Obama is a man of integrity and extensive knowledge with a plan to unite Americans and Washington to work together to turn this great Nation around. This is serious business; our futures are at stake. This is not a time for mudslinging, crying, and namecalling.. Vote Obama.. By the way, I am an ordinary American who has had enough of the Clinton’s antics and scandals.
Obama is Diversion
Below are a few points for those of you who are considering voting for Obama as the Democratic candidate to pursue the Presidency. Please read and consider these points thoroughly before casting your vote:
1. Obama is a Diversion;
2. Over the last two years, the large powerful conservative new agencies owned by influential Republicans have purposely given Obama either neutral or positive news reporting in his run for presidency, amplifying his exposure and ratings amongst Democrats;
3. The neutral/positive news reporting of Obama has split Democrats in choosing between Clinton or Obama as the Canidate to run for President;
4. The conservative news agencies and powerful Republicans politicians are trying to manipulate the Democrats to choose Obama to run for President;
5. When Obama is chosen to run for President, the conservative news agencies WILL turn on Obama by inciting (through negative reporting) the fears of Americans, and the Presidency will go to a Republican candidate;
6. Please do not be manipulated and vote for Clinton (or urge them to unite). Democrats should unite together behind Clinton or else the Republicans will literally steal the presidency; or
Obama and Clinton should unite or Obama should step-down to ensure a Republican is not elected to the presidency.
This is in no way anti-Obama.(Bless you Obama for running; however unfortunate the timing, considering the above).
The point of the above is to make us Democrats aware of a very possible scenario. We dealt with very similar manipulation the last eight years (remember Karl Rove?) and need to wake up. There is much at stake to let the powerful Republican politicians manipulate our vote.
This is no means an attack on Republican citizens or Obama supporters, and much respect to you. Please consider the above points.
SPREAD THE WORD. EMAIL TEXT MESSAGE AND BLOG TO OTHER DEMOCRATS.
Why don’t you say that Obama is the only candidate who “plausibly can say that he wants to work with lobbyists like Antoin Rezko across the political spectrum to line his own pockets and gain fast political traction?” THIS ENDORSEMENT IS INDEFENSIBLE! Brad Warthen, wake up! You’re going to vote Republican anyway, so Obama’s a great choice for you…