Home of Impeachment Movement Paper Endorses Obama

[Vinca]

Today's editorial in the Brattleboro (Vermont) Reformer endorses Barack Obama for president. Also on the local ballot on March 4 is a resolution to arrest Bush and Cheney if they step foot in the town. You've got to love Vermont!

A Chance For Change Tuesday, February 26

Two months ago, when the process of picking a presidential candidate began in earnest, we all figured that the Vermont Primary would be irrelevant. With the highly compressed calendar of primaries and caucuses, we were certain that a probable nominee would be chosen by the time we vote on March 4. Instead, we're seeing the most hard-fought battle in the Democratic Party since Ted Kennedy took on Jimmy Carter in 1980. And due to the closeness of the race, the Vermont Primary has suddenly become meaningful and our votes have suddenly become important.

Normally, we don't make endorsements in primary races. But the importance of this contest between Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama compels us to weigh in.

We believe that the choice between Clinton and Obama is a choice between the probability that nothing will change in a Clinton administration and the ever-so-slim possibility that some change might happen in an Obama administration.

Don't get us wrong. We believe Clinton and Obama are both infinitely better than John McCain or any of the other candidates who sought the Republican presidential nomination. But now that the choice is between Clinton or Obama for the Democratic nomination, our support goes to Obama.

We know all the knocks against Obama. His critics say he's too young and too inexperienced. They said that about John F. Kennedy in 1960.
They say he is all charm and little substance. They said that about Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932. Will Obama rise to the level of FDR and JFK? It would be unfair to compare him to either.

But we do believe that the overworked theme of the 2008 campaign, change, is not merely a cliché. This is a watershed moment for America, one of those once-in-a-generation elections that may affect the course of our nation for decades to come.

The damage that George W. Bush and his administration has done is incalculable. Who is the best person to begin cleaning up the mess and restoring this nation's greatness?

Clinton voted to commit the United States to an invasion of Iraq in 2002, an action that Vermont's congressional delegation was wise enough not to take. That vote alone, we believe, makes her suspect when it comes to making foreign policy choices based on facts rather than on political expediency.

Clinton has been virtually silent on the abuses of executive power by Bush, which leads us to believe that she will likely embrace the expanded powers that Bush has claimed for himself. She will continue the tradition of triangulating which her husband began. She seems to have little use for people power and grassroots politics.

Obama opposed the Iraq war from the beginning, and seems more likely to end the U.S. occupation of Iraq than Clinton. He seems less likely to claim the powers of an imperial presidency. And, he rejects the cynical "50 percent plus 1 vote" electoral math of the Clinton political team.

To us, the most hopeful part of Obama's candidacy is its inclusiveness and how it has captured the imaginations of younger voters. This is the fruit of DNC chairman Howard Dean's decision to makes the Democrats a 50-state party again and to send party money and resources to the so-called red states. The huge voter turnouts in states where Democrats haven't been competitive in decades is a tribute to Dean's idea of putting organization and attracting new voters ahead of shaking down fat cats for more money for TV ads.

Obama has the kind of connection with people that makes the Kennedy comparisons inevitable. After suffering through the inarticulate stupidity of George W. Bush, Americans are ready to embrace someone who can think and talk clearly without a script in his hand. But it's not just intelligence. It's using the words "we" and "us," instead of "me" and "I." It's speaking about hope and change instead of fear and anger. It's saying "Yes, we can" instead of saying, "Well, it depends."

Clinton represents the tired old politics of the Baby Boomers, the refighting of old battles. She is the standard-bearer for the worst instincts of the Democratic Party, as exemplified by the hollow shell the party became when Bill Clinton was president.

Obama represents new blood and new energy in the political process. Whether this energy will translate into action is anyone's guess, but again, it is the difference between the slight chance of seeing change and the near certainty of seeing the status quo continue.

We are willing to take that chance. That is why the Reformer backs Barack Obama in the Vermont Democratic Primary on March 4.

http://www.reformer.com/editorials/ci_8365024