Howard Kurtz – For Obama, a Most Congenial Spot – washingtonpost.com
During the 2000 campaign, the [Arizona] Republic editorialized about McCain’s “volcanic” temper and said there is “reason to seriously question whether McCain has the temperament, and the political approach and skills, we want in the next president of the United States.”
Barack Obama for Democratic nominee – Los Angeles Times
Democrats preparing to vote in Tuesday’s California primary can mark their ballots with confidence, knowing that either candidate would make a strong nominee and, if elected, a groundbreaking leader and capable president. But just because the ballot features two strong candidates does not mean that it is difficult to choose between them. We urge voters to make the most of this historic moment by choosing the Democrat most focused on steering the nation toward constructive change: We strongly endorse Barack Obama.
The U.S. senator from Illinois distinguishes himself as an inspiring leader who cuts through typical internecine campaign bickering and appeals to Americans long weary of divisive and destructive politics. He electrifies young voters, not because he is young but because he embodies the desire to move to the next chapter of the American story. He brings with him deep knowledge of foreign relations and of this nation’s particular struggles with identity and opportunity. His flair for expression, both in print and on the stump, too easily leads observers to forget that Obama is a man not just of style but of substance. He’s a thoughtful student of the Constitution and an experienced lawmaker in his home state and, for the last three years, in the Senate.
Maria Shriver Comes Out for Obama | The Trail | washingtonpost.com
By Garance Franke-Ruta
In a surprise move, California first lady Maria Shriver offered her support to Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) at a Los Angeles rally today. Oprah Winfrey, Michelle Obama and Caroline Kennedy, Shriver’s cousin, had been set to speak at the University of California, Los Angeles, and Shriver joined them onstage.
“There is no place I wanted to be but here today,” Shriver, a close personal friend of Winfrey’s, said before comparing Obama’s character to that of her state itself. “This election is about a moment. This is a moment not just for the United States of America, not just for the Democratic Party, but this is a moment for California. The more I thought about it, I thought, if Barack Obama was a state, he’d be California. Think about it: diverse, open, smart, independent, bucks tradition, innovative, inspiring, dreamer, leader.”
Delegate-rich California is the ultimate prize in Tuesday’s voting, and Shriver’s endorsement is sure to set Californians buzzing. Shriver’s husband, Calif. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), endorsed Arizona Sen. John McCain’s bid for the GOP presidential nomination Thursday, though he also had some kind words for Obama a few days earlier.
Indeed, the Illinois Democrat and the California Republican have not hesitated to speak well of each other over the past year. Last May, Schwarzenegger effusively praised Obama’s efforts to establish a national version of California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard. And, in December, Obama pointed to Schwarzenegger’s “leadership” and efforts to fight climate change in response to a question about Republicans he might consider for posts in his Cabinet.
“We’ve got to see beyond the labels that divide us,” Shriver said this afternoon. “And if that’s the kind of America I want, I think it will be very clear to you what you should do on Tuesday.”
“I’m honored to have the support of Maria Shriver,” said Senator
Obama. “Her courage in lending her voice to this movement means a
great deal to me, and reminds us why she is one of the most admired
women in America. Maria has been a strong advocate for women, a
passionate voice for public service, and an extraordinary First Lady.
Her dedication to bringing about a more compassionate, hopeful America
sets an example not just for Californians, but for all Americans.”
It has been a very long time since America had the leadership of someone who could disarm us of our pessimism, remind us of our roots and heritage and insist that we can solve America’s enormous problems together. Instead of an impassable American mountain, Obama sees a team of American mountaineers plodding toward the summit.
There, law rules, not men.
There, every citizen is equally free and accountable.
There, opportunity, ability and hard work determine our individual and collective dreams.
Not since the 1960s have we been so touched by someone who espouses the hopes and strengths of a nation.
Some will find a reason not to vote for Obama. He is too young, too inexperienced. Too liberal. Too conservative. Too black. Too white. Too soft. Too religious. Too secular. Too naive. Too full of himself.
But we see in him a vibrant American leader who understands that leadership begins first and foremost with the people and a respect for — not manipulation of — them.
Obama seeks to leapfrog Washington’s harsh political rhetoric and gridlock for all the right reasons. While some might ask why him, why now, we ask: Why not?
ABQjournal Opinion: Vote for Obama, Not Politics as Usual
[Obama] confounds the reflexes that have been drilled into voters, like “the assumption that young people are apathetic. The assumption that Republicans won’t cross over. The assumption that the wealthy care nothing for the poor, and that the poor don’t vote. The assumption that African-Americans can’t support the white candidate; whites can’t support the African-American candidate; blacks and Latinos can’t come together,” Obama told supporters after finishing ahead of Hillary Clinton in South Carolina’s primary. …
It may be hard for citizens, who for so long have been in the habit of voting against the greater evil, to cast a vote “for” something. If so, vote against negative campaigning. Vote against division and the gridlock it encourages. Vote against being taken for granted by politicians who think they know what buttons to push. Vote against this dead-end status quo that predates the White House’s current occupant and involves both parties.
Or just be positive and vote for Sen. Barack Obama. At worst, he’s guilty of campaigning on the promise of hope.
When Republicans Endorse Obama | Newsweek Politics: Campaign 2008 | Newsweek.com
Susan Eisenhower is more than just another disappointed Republican. She is also Ike’s granddaughter and a dedicated member of the party who has urged her fellow Republicans in the past to stick with the GOP. But now Eisenhower, who runs an international consulting firm, is endorsing Barack Obama. She has no plans to officially leave the Republican Party. But in Eisenhower’s view, Obama is the only candidate who can build a national consensus on the issues most important to her—energy, global warming, an aging population and America’s standing in the world.
“Barack Obama will really be in a singular position to attract moderate Republicans,” she told NEWSWEEK. “I wanted to do what many people did for my grandfather in 1952. He was hugely aided in his quest for the presidency by Democrats for Eisenhower. There’s a long and fine tradition of crossover voters.”
Eisenhower is one of a small but symbolically powerful group of what Obama recently called “Obamacans”—disaffected Republicans who have drifted away from their party just as Eisenhower Democrats did and, more recently, Reagan Democrats in the 1980s.
Does John ‘100 Years’ McCain Agree With Bush’s Signing Statement On Iraq?
Earlier this week, when President Bush signed the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, he issued a little-noticed signing statement, claiming that provisions in the law — including the barring of funds for permanent bases in Iraq — could be disregarded.
Democrats in Congress were quick to condemn Bush’s stealth measure. …
Conspicuously absent from the debate over Bush’s signing statement is Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). In the past, McCain has spoken out aggressively against signing statements, saying they are “wrong” and that they “should not be done“:
“I would never issue a signing statement,” the Arizona senator said at a Rotary Club meeting in Nashua, adding that he “would only sign it or veto” any legislation that reached his desk as president.
Perhaps McCain is keeping silent because he shares Bush’s goal of an indefinite, long-term presence of American troops in Iraq. Last month, McCain said it would be “fine with” him “if we maintain a presence in” Iraq for “a hundred” years.
The question arises as to what’s more important to McCain: his anti-signing statement pledge or an indefinite presence in Iraq?
A lot of Democrats I know respect McCain and would find him a tolerable president. (Most of them don’t know he’s anti-choice.) A picture is worth a thousand words. Duhbya used dirty tricks to crush McCain in 2000. In 2004, McCain clings to Duhbya. Is this sick, tired, old man our next president? mjh
AP: Romney accuses McCain of Nixon-like tactics – News
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney accused his rival John McCain of adopting underhanded tactics from Richard Nixon, the GOP president who resigned in disgrace.
“I don’t think I want to see our party go back to that kind of campaigning,” Romney said in his most pointed rebuttal yet to front-runner McCain’s claim that the former Massachusetts governor favors a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq. Romney denies this charge, and most media analyses have concluded that Romney wasn’t using ‘timetable’ in the same way Democratic candidates have.
McCain’s decision to level the timetable charge this week without leaving Romney time to rebut it before Florida Republicans voted in their primary “was reminiscent of the Nixon era,” Romney said. McCain ended up winning the Florida contest Tuesday.