SEATTLE TIMES ENDORSES OBAMA & BIDEN: A smart and steady hand on foreign policy and other matters.

[kpete]

Barack Obama for president

As president, Barack Obama can get America moving forward again.


Barack Obama

An economic Katrina is shattering the confidence of hardworking, middle-class Americans. The war that should never have been in Iraq is dragging on too long. At a time of huge challenge, the candidate with the intelligence, temperament and judgment to lead our nation to a better place is Sen. Barack Obama.

Obama should be the next president of the United States because he is the most qualified change agent. Obama is a little young, but also brilliant. If he sometimes seems brainy and professorial, that's OK. We need the leader of the free world to think things through, carefully. We have seen the sorry results of shooting from the hip.

As our country lurches from one financial or energy crisis to the next, American taxpayers remain burdened with the cost of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan — to the tune of $12 billion a month.

...............

American optimism has been wracked by President George Bush and a previous Republican Congress. If you want change, you do not keep what is essentially the same team in power. You try something different. You vote for the stronger matchup, Obama and Sen. Joseph Biden, a smart and steady hand on foreign policy and other matters.


more at:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorialsopinion/2008190671_obamaed21.html

[maseman]

1. Who did they endorse in 2000 and 2004?

This is great news. The news endorsements should be starting soon.

I'm surprised they did this before the debates though.

[SeattleGirl]

6. Bush in 2000. Can't remember who they endorsed in '04.

When I read their 2000 endorsement of Bush, I wanted to go down to The Times' offices and throttle the editorial staff. x(

[politicasista]

10. They endorsed Kerry in 04. Don't know why they didn't endorse Gore

Since Bush has proven to be a miserable failure.

[krawhitham]

7. Kerry in 2004 - Bush in 2000

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorialsopinion/2002016659_kerryed27.html

http://www.gwu.edu/~action/natendorse5.html

[Quantess]

2. How could any major newspaper in Seattle NOT endorse Obama

and expect to keep their readers?

[regnaD kciN]

3. The Seattle Times is NOT conservative...

They endorsed Kerry in '04, Clinton in '92 and '96, and Dukakis in '88.

The only time they went Republican was in 2000, and that was when the publisher (who's personally obsessed with estate-tax repeal) overruled his editorial board and made the endorsement himself. But even he couldn't bring himself to do the same four years later (and actually flamed Dubya pretty badly for bungling his job).

Sorry, but the Seattle Times endorsing a Democrat, particularly in a presidential race, is pretty much Standard Operational Procedure.

[lcdnumber6]

11. Except for their "investigative journalism" hit jobs on Gregoire the past few months...

and their endorsement of Republicans in closely contested races in '04. As the editorial board said: "Several Democratic incumbents are almost automatic shoe-ins because Republicans did not offer serious challengers":

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20041031&slug=wraped31.

Frankly I am pleasantly surprised with their enthusiastic endorsement of Obama, and this early in the final weeks of the race. Or...should I be paranoid?

[anonymous171]

4. Wow. That's a surprise.

I stopped reading the Seattle Times after they endorsed McGavick.

Good for them and good for Obama! :kick:

[mediaman007]

5. I would think that most endorsements will favor O'bama.

If these editorial boards are won over by anything McCain or Palin bring I'll be dumbfounded. After all, these editorial boards are composed of the "elites!" (sarcasm)

[usregimechange]

8. Kick!

[Demeter]

9. And It's Off to the Greatest!

Wonderful news!