There He Goes Again: Biden Puts Foot In Mouth
McCain Suspends Campaign

to Visit Obama’s Dying Grandmother

It was only a matter of time. Please allow me to paraphrase Biden by speaking of him as he speaks of John McCain. I LOVE THE GUY BUT BLESS HIS HEART HE JUST DOESN’T GET IT. Joe Biden has delivered a great gift to the McCain campaign by scaring the hell out of America by warming that we will, set certain, have an international crisis visited upon us within the first six months of an Obama campaign. I have pasted below an ABC News article about his remarks. It’s truly UNBELIEVABLE that he would say such a thing. Part of it was self-promoting to re-assure us that he would be at Obama’s side. But he makes clear that because of Obama’s youth and inexperience he will be tested by foreign leaders. We’ll see how that sits with voters–if it’s actually given serious attention. So much of the media is in the tank for Obama that it may slide by.

Meanwhile, early erroneous reports were that Barack Obama is suspending his campaign to be at the bedside of his dying grandmother. Wrong. While it is true that his grandmother is dying, it is John McCain who will suspend his campaign to be with her. Kind of the way Sarah Palin connects with real people, who is better to relate to a dying person that the leader of a campaign on life support.


Biden to Supporters: "Gird Your Loins",

For the Next President

"It's Like Cleaning Augean Stables"

October 20, 2008 7:35 AM

ABC News' Matthew Jaffe Reports: Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., on Sunday guaranteed that if elected, Sen. Barack Obama., D-Ill., will be tested by an international crisis within his first six months in power and he will need supporters to stand by him as he makes tough, and possibly unpopular, decisions."Mark my words," the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. "It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

"I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate," Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. "And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you - not financially to help him - we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."Not only will the next administration have to deal with foreign affairs issues, Biden warned, but also with the current economic crisis.

"Gird your loins," Biden told the crowd. "We're gonna win with your help, God willing, we're gonna win, but this is not gonna be an easy ride. This president, the next president, is gonna be left with the most significant task. It's like cleaning the Augean stables, man. This is more than just, this is more than – think about it, literally, think about it – this is more than just a capital crisis, this is more than just markets. This is a systemic problem we have with this economy."

The Delaware lawmaker managed to rake in an estimated $1 million total from his two money hauls at the downtown Sheraton, the same hotel where four years ago Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., clinched the Democratic nomination. Despite warning about the difficulties the next administration will face, Biden said the Democratic ticket is equipped to meet the challenges head on."I've forgotten more about foreign policy than most of my colleagues know, so I'm not being falsely humble with you. I think I can be value added, but this guy has it," the Senate Foreign Relations chairman said of Obama. "This guy has it. But he's gonna need your help. Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, 'Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?' We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now, I'm asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you're going to have to reinforce us."

"There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go, 'Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don't know about that decision'," Biden continued. "Because if you think the decision is sound when they're made, which I believe you will when they're made, they're not likely to be as popular as they are sound. Because if they're popular, they're probably not sound."Biden emphasized that the mountainous Afghanistan-Pakistan border is of particular concern, with Osama bin Laden "alive and well" and Pakistan "bristling with nuclear weapons.""You literally can see what these kids are up against, our kids in that region," Biden said in recalling when his helicopter was forced down due to a snowstorm there. "The place is crawling with al Qaeda. And it's real." "We do not have the military capacity, nor have we ever, quite frankly, in the last 20 years, to dictate outcomes," he cautioned. "It's so much more important than that. It's so much more complicated than that. And Barack gets it."After speaking for just over a quarter of an hour, Biden noticed the media presence in the back of the small ballroom. "I probably shouldn't have said all this because it dawned on me that the press is here," he joked."All kidding aside, these guys have left us in a God-awful place," he then said of the Bush regime, promptly wrapping up his remarks. "We have the ability to straighten it out. It's gonna take a little bit of time, so I ask you to stay with us. Stay with us."

October Non-Surprise: Powell Endorses Obama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh_c5bbvmqc/

Yesterday, the man who Tucker Carlson said, "sold us the war" endorsed the man who opposed the war. Joe Scarborough called him "the most important military figure of this age." I prefer to think of him as the only general since Eisenhower to win a war–a Bush war in Iraq.

The youtube.com clip above is Powell’s remarks outside of Meet The Press. There and on MTP he spoke eloquently, at length, without notes as to why he supports Obama and how he has grown disturbed by McCain, his friend of 25 years.

I agree with Jack Kemp who said winning is just as important as being worthy of winning. He, of course, was more of a loser than a winner on the national stage but he knew something about not forgetting who you are. John McCain has lost that or, at least, forgotten it. The ProConPundit has spent much time and energy pushing and promoting McCain and, I might add, sticking by him when few did. I’ve earned the right to honestly be disgusted with him and nearly every damn move he’s made since he was nominated.

Many of you have e-mailed me because you think I’ve been conspicuously silent in recent times. I’ll have more to say–I always do about McCain. For now, I will deal with Colin Powell.

Rush Limbaugh and others have castigated Powell today. There is only one criticism I will make with respect to Colin Powell. Had he endorsed McCain, the same liberal crowd who is hailing him today for his objectivity would have bashed the hell out of him. They would have reminded us, as they have for years, that he failed the nation when he pushed the war for the Bush Administration while personally opposing it. It's true that there is a thin line between him being a hero and a rat to the left: endorsing Obama makes him a hero. Powell never failed the nation. He served the President well and gave his advice. As a military man, you follow orders.

Many on the right will criticize him for it. I found his words compelling. Limbaugh thinks his endorsement was entirely racial in nature. I don’t think it was entirely racial but if Obama was a white, impressive, first term senator from Illinois, I can’t really picture him endorsing him. But so what? That doesn’t take away from the criticism he has of McCain’s lack of vision, lack of laying down solid and believable plans, and running a pathetic and perversely negative campaign. I think Powell’s endorsement was as much generational as racial.

So the left accepts Powell conditionally and many on the right are disgusted with him. He is a self-described moderate Republican. If he had a tad more stature, he’d be a PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE! :-) Powell’s endorsement of Obama signals to moderates and independents and to those who are skeptical of Obama’s inexperience, that he is okay and that McCain is not. Won’t mean much to those on the right but among the people who will decide the election, it may.

Republicans will lose and will lose big. Barack Obama will name the next two supreme court judges. Roe v. Wade is here to stay folks–FOREVER. All this because John McCain decided to play to the base of his party and to the base instincts of our fears. (Those are 2 different things, by the way.)

I can’t believe I am recommending an article from the LEFT LEFT Huffington Post. It’s called, The Powell Endorsement and the End of the Republican Foreign Policy Establishment. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ilan-goldenberg/the-powell-endorsement-an_b_136313.html

I like it. Powell represents the type of Republican I am. I liked Ford over Carter, Bush over Dukakis. The Republican Party is increasingly becoming what Pope Benedict said the Catholic church should be: smaller and purer. The Pope has every right to declare that his church should be smaller rather than accept things it can’t accept. Political parties, as James Carville says, exist for one and one reason only: to win elections. Republicans will become Libertarians or Green Party folks who have great principles but can’t possibly win–unless they become in reality, beyond rhetoric, a big tent party.

Nothing Funny
W The Film

http://www.wthefilm.com/index2.html

Fighting depression and despondency over John McCain’s sure and certain loss, the ProConPundit was on vacation last week in Savannah, Georgia. I got back on Friday evening and was very much aware that it was opening night of the movie, W. I normally eschew Olive Stone movies because they tend to not bother letting the truth get in the way of a riveting story. I decided that I wanted to see W anyway because, unlike other Oliver Stone movies, the previews I saw seemed laugh out loud funny. Because it was a political movie and I think everyone is into politics like I am, I just presumed I would never be able to get into see the movie on opening night. I went to my Kenosha home and bought a ticket online for the 12 Noon showing Saturday of W at the Kenosha Tinseltown Theater. I was so proud of myself. I imagined walking ahead of the throngs of people to see the movie. Turns out I was wrong on two counts. First, I was one of 6 people who watched the movie and second, there was not one damn thing that was funny about the movie.

The casting was superb. Josh Brolin played W and he was great. One of my favorite actresses, Ellen Burstyn played Barbara Bush and was fantastic. James Cromwell played President Bush–and from now on, whenever I say President Bush, I will be referring to the real President Bush who served as our 41st President from 1988 to 1992. Cromwell was a compelling Bush. Elizabeth Banks played an adorable and bright Laura Bush. Richard Dreyfuss portrayed an evil Dick Cheney. Karl Rove was depicted as nearly perverted by Toby Jones. Thandie Newton played an idiotic Condoleezza Rice. Jeffrey Wright played Colin Powell and Scott Glenn played a stunning Donald Rumsfeld.

So much of what is told in the movie are things that are only known by people who would have never divulged them. So I didn’t think it was terribly credible. It was basically the story of the rivalry between Bush father and son, W’s dream of being a president more like Reagan than like his father, and the struggle between allies of President Bush I and the neo-cons who have influenced, formed and informed the presidency of W.

One weird moment in the movie was a lunch meeting shortly after W realized that there were no WMD. He was furious and his closest advisors were trying to explain, regroup, and appease him. Rummy was pre-occupied to the point of obsession with the pecan pie that was served.

It was a good movie to see. Don’t think it’s gospel truth but enjoyable nonetheless. One thing it wasn’t: funny.

Something Funny

Forget Saturday Night Live. If you are looking for something funny this political season, Obama and McCain and the Al Smith Dinner last week beats all. For all of John McCain's insistence that Sarah Palin realtes to real Americans if not the Washington cocktail crowd, he certainly felt right at home with them--on location in Manhattan.

It was yet another example of John McCain using the Bob Dole playbook. He is the funniest guy alive when doing stand up among elite politicians and media types yet unable to relate to regular people.

There are two links below. The first is McCain and the other two are Obama. They are pricless...especially McCain's remarks to Hillary Clinton.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irXS4Q7mUKQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkBQf4FJi-o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXKaAQ-6BiU

Who Should You Vote For?
Take the ABC Match-O-Matic Quiz.


http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/MatchoMatic/fullpage?id=5542139

Chicago Sun-Times Endorses Obama

Unlike, the endorsement of the Chicago Tribune, this endorsement is not unusual.

Americans are ready to be one country. By the millions, they yearn to bridge their differences, to find common cause, to rise above ideology, race, class and religion.

They have grown weary of the culture wars and the personal attacks, tired of the exaggerated lines that divide. They dare to imagine a more constructive discourse, a debate marked by civility and respect even in disagreement, a politics that begins with listening to each other.

Nothing else so fully explains the meteoric rise of Sen. Barack Obama. If America had preferred a master of policy for its next president, Sen. Hillary Clinton would have won the Democratic nomination. If America valued experience in public life above all else, Sen. John McCain would be trouncing Sen. Obama in the polls.

But it is Sen. Obama who won his party’s nomination, and it is he who leads in the polls. Americans across the land want to pull together, and in Sen. Obama they see a man of exceptional gifts who just might show them how.

Our endorsement for president of the United States goes to Sen. Barack Obama, Chicago’s adopted son. He has the unique background, superior intellect, sound judgment and first-rate temperament to lead our nation in difficult times.

Through the eyes of others

Sen. Obama’s strengths begin with the unusual circumstances of his childhood, a biracial and cross-cultural upbringing that imbued in him a remarkable ability to see the world through the eyes of others. A now familiar story is told of how the young Barack, as the first African-American editor of the Harvard Law Review, would go around the table listening to all views on an issue. Then he would gesture toward the quietest person in the room and ask, “Bob, what do you think?” He called the shots, but was confident enough to hear out those with whom he might disagree.

Sen. Obama’s remarkable talent for hearing all the disparate voices of America was perhaps nowhere more evident than on March 18 at the Constitution Center in Philadelphia, when he delivered an instantly historic speech on race relations. As millions of Americans watched and nodded, he boldly challenged whites and blacks to see the truth in the other’s perspective.

Guided by these same cross-cultural instincts, Sen. Obama climbed the ladder of Chicago Democratic politics — from community organizer to state senator to U.S. senator — while dodging the tag of “machine-made.” We watched in admiration, here in Chicago, as he developed alliances with the old Harold Washington coalition, but also with party stalwarts such as State Sen. Emil Jones. He mostly steered clear of unwise political entanglements, and when he did use poor judgment, he learned from his mistake. The senator no doubt learned to appreciate the enormous importance of transparency in politics when he was dogged by questions about his relationship with Tony Rezko, the political fixer. When he finally sat down with the Sun-Times and answered every question, the Rezko story lost its steam.

Right on the issues

We agree with Sen. Obama on many of the most pressing issues of the day.

He is right when he says America must be open to talking to its adversaries. He is right when he says America must lose the swagger abroad and repair its standing in the world. He is right when he says America must stand with Israel.

Sen. Obama is right in his prescriptions for the economy, though they need expansion and vetting. He is right in his compassionate but fiscally prudent plan — unlike Sen. McCain’s plan — to help millions of homeowners avoid foreclosure.

And Sen. Obama is right on energy policy. We support his proposals to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil by a host of means — domestic drilling and nuclear energy, to be sure, but also an unprecedented national commitment to developing wind power, solar power and other forms of “clean” energy.

Tested in a marathon

It is a peculiar virtue of a marathon presidential campaign that the ordeal itself becomes a powerful test of who has the right stuff — and Sen. Obama has won that test hands down.

From the moment he announced his candidacy, on a cold Saturday in Springfield in February 2007, he has demonstrated extraordinary leadership skills, grace under fire, laudable restraint and a sincere respect for the intelligence of the voter. He has surrounded himself with excellence — imagine such competence moving into the West Wing — and built what is perhaps the most effective ground organization in the history of presidential campaigns.

Sen. Obama writes his own best speeches. He refuses to play the “gotcha” game. He runs his own campaign — it does not run him.

He has kept his cool while his opponent runs hot and cold. He shook off the advice from his senior advisers to “go negative” when the polls were more grim, the way President Kennedy coolly rejected the overly bellicose advice of his generals in the heat of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Sadly, the same cannot be said of Sen. John McCain.

Sen. McCain is an American hero. His courage as a prison of war and his 26 years on Capitol Hill command our respect. Anybody who happened to notice him struggle to shake hands with moderator Bob Schieffer at the end of the third debate had to be moved.

But somewhere along the line, McCain stopped being McCain. The maverick who always thought for himself turned his thinking over to others. He cared too much about winning.

He reversed his position on major social issues to curry favor with the Republican base. He pulled silly surprises from a hat, such as “suspending” his campaign. Most egregiously for a man of advanced age who knew how important this decision could be, he chose the unqualified Gov. Sarah Palin to be his vice president.

Right for the times

Often in America’s most difficult days, the nation has been blessed with extraordinary leaders who seemed just right for the times. We have in mind George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt.

The times again demand an extraordinary leader. Our next president will take the oath of office in a country that is at war, heavily in debt, deeply divided and sliding into a recession. He will have to make hard choices — the money won’t be there for all his ambitious plans — and he will have to work with a Congress so lopsidedly Democratic that it may be veto-proof.

Here in Chicago, we have been watching Barack Obama and sizing him up for some time. We knew him well before he introduced himself to the nation with his electrifying speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention.

We saw the strength of character, the steady temperament, the intellect, the compassion, the ability to see through others’ eyes.

The very title of Sen. Obama’s second book, The Audacity of Hope, foretold what America will need in the circumstances under which the next president takes office.

Success will require audacity, in all the best meanings of the word: nerve, spunk, grit and, especially, boldness.

And success will require a president and a people ready to embrace hope, in all the best meanings of that word: A conviction that what we want and need can be had.

Barack Obama believes in the audacity of hope. He inspires it in others. He inspires it in us.

Barack Obama should be the next president of the United States of America.

The Son of William F. Buckley, Jr. Endorses Obama

Christopher Buckley isn't Ronald Reagan, Jr. He isn't spending his life working out his daddy issues by being against everything his father was for. He also isn't like Michael Reagan: a nit wit who rides his late father's coat tails. Christopher Buckley is accomplished in his own right and a bona fide conservative...who has endorsed the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate for President.


Forgive Me Pup: I'm Voting For Obama

Let me be the latest conservative/libertarian/whatever to leap onto the Barack Obama bandwagon. It’s a good thing my dear old mum and pup are no longer alive. They’d cut off my allowance.

Or would they? But let’s get that part out of the way. The only reason my vote would be of any interest to anyone is that my last name happens to be Buckley—a name I inherited. So in the event anyone notices or cares, the headline will be: “William F. Buckley’s Son Says He Is Pro-Obama.” I know, I know: It lacks the throw-weight of “Ron Reagan Jr. to Address Democratic Convention,” but it’ll have to do.

I am—drum roll, please, cue trumpets—making this announcement in the cyberpages of The Daily Beast (what joy to be writing for a publication so named!) rather than in the pages of National Review, where I write the back-page column. For a reason: My colleague, the superb and very dishy Kathleen Parker, recently wrote in National Review Online a column stating what John Cleese as Basil Fawlty would call “the bleeding obvious”: namely, that Sarah Palin is an embarrassment, and a dangerous one at that. She’s not exactly alone. New York Times columnist David Brooks, who began his career at NR, just called Governor Palin “a cancer on the Republican Party.”

As for Kathleen, she has to date received 12,000 (quite literally) foam-at-the-mouth hate-emails. One correspondent, if that’s quite the right word, suggested that Kathleen’s mother should have aborted her and tossed the fetus into a Dumpster. There’s Socratic dialogue for you. Dear Pup once said to me sighfully after a right-winger who fancied himself a WFB protégé had said something transcendently and provocatively cretinous, “You know, I’ve spent my entire life time separating the Right from the kooks.” Well, the dear man did his best. At any rate, I don’t have the kidney at the moment for 12,000 emails saying how good it is he’s no longer alive to see his Judas of a son endorse for the presidency a covert Muslim who pals around with the Weather Underground. So, you’re reading it here first.

As to the particulars, assuming anyone gives a fig, here goes:

I have known John McCain personally since 1982. I wrote a well-received speech for him. Earlier this year, I wrote in The New York Times—I’m beginning to sound like Paul Krugman, who cannot begin a column without saying, “As I warned the world in my last column...”—a highly favorable Op-Ed about McCain, taking Rush Limbaugh and the others in the Right Wing Sanhedrin to task for going after McCain for being insufficiently conservative. I don’t—still—doubt that McCain’s instincts remain fundamentally conservative. But the problem is otherwise.

McCain rose to power on his personality and biography. He was authentic. He spoke truth to power. He told the media they were “jerks” (a sure sign of authenticity, to say nothing of good taste; we are jerks). He was real. He was unconventional. He embraced former anti-war leaders. He brought resolution to the awful missing-POW business. He brought about normalization with Vietnam—his former torturers! Yes, he erred in accepting plane rides and vacations from Charles Keating, but then, having been cleared on technicalities, groveled in apology before the nation. He told me across a lunch table, “The Keating business was much worse than my five and a half years in Hanoi, because I at least walked away from that with my honor.” Your heart went out to the guy. I thought at the time, God, this guy should be president someday.

A year ago, when everyone, including the man I’m about to endorse, was caterwauling to get out of Iraq on the next available flight, John McCain, practically alone, said no, no—bad move. Surge. It seemed a suicidal position to take, an act of political bravery of the kind you don’t see a whole lot of anymore.

But that was—sigh—then. John McCain has changed. He said, famously, apropos the Republican debacle post-1994, “We came to Washington to change it, and Washington changed us.” This campaign has changed John McCain. It has made him inauthentic. A once-first class temperament has become irascible and snarly; his positions change, and lack coherence; he makes unrealistic promises, such as balancing the federal budget “by the end of my first term.” Who, really, believes that? Then there was the self-dramatizing and feckless suspension of his campaign over the financial crisis. His ninth-inning attack ads are mean-spirited and pointless. And finally, not to belabor it, there was the Palin nomination. What on earth can he have been thinking?

All this is genuinely saddening, and for the country is perhaps even tragic, for America ought, really, to be governed by men like John McCain—who have spent their entire lives in its service, even willing to give the last full measure of their devotion to it. If he goes out losing ugly, it will be beyond tragic, graffiti on a marble bust.

As for Senator Obama: He has exhibited throughout a “first-class temperament,” pace Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.’s famous comment about FDR. As for his intellect, well, he’s a Harvard man, though that’s sure as heck no guarantee of anything, these days. Vietnam was brought to you by Harvard and (one or two) Yale men. As for our current adventure in Mesopotamia, consider this lustrous alumni roster. Bush 43: Yale. Rumsfeld: Princeton. Paul Bremer: Yale and Harvard. What do they all have in common? Andover! The best and the brightest.

I’ve read Obama’s books, and they are first-rate. He is that rara avis, the politician who writes his own books. Imagine. He is also a lefty. I am not. I am a small-government conservative who clings tenaciously and old-fashionedly to the idea that one ought to have balanced budgets. On abortion, gay marriage, et al, I’m libertarian. I believe with my sage and epigrammatic friend P.J. O’Rourke that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take it all away.

But having a first-class temperament and a first-class intellect, President Obama will (I pray, secularly) surely understand that traditional left-politics aren’t going to get us out of this pit we’ve dug for ourselves. If he raises taxes and throws up tariff walls and opens the coffers of the DNC to bribe-money from the special interest groups against whom he has (somewhat disingenuously) railed during the campaign trail, then he will almost certainly reap a whirlwind that will make Katrina look like a balmy summer zephyr.

Obama has in him—I think, despite his sometimes airy-fairy “We are the people we have been waiting for” silly rhetoric—the potential to be a good, perhaps even great leader. He is, it seems clear enough, what the historical moment seems to be calling for.

So, I wish him all the best. We are all in this together. Necessity is the mother of bipartisanship. And so, for the first time in my life, I’ll be pulling the Democratic lever in November. As the saying goes, God save the United States of America.

Chicago Tribune Endorses Obama

Founded in 1847:

Tribune Has NEVER BEFORE endorsed a Democrat.

However this election turns out, it will dramatically advance America's slow progress toward equality and inclusion. It took Abraham Lincoln's extraordinary courage in the Civil War to get us here. It took an epic battle to secure women the right to vote. It took the perseverance of the civil rights movement. Now we have an election in which we will choose the first African-American president . . . or the first female vice president.

In recent weeks it has been easy to lose sight of this history in the making. Americans are focused on the greatest threat to the world economic system in 80 years. They feel a personal vulnerability the likes of which they haven't experienced since Sept. 11, 2001. It's a different kind of vulnerability. Unlike Sept. 11, the economic threat hasn't forged a common bond in this nation. It has fed anger, fear and mistrust.

On Nov. 4 we're going to elect a president to lead us through a perilous time and restore in us a common sense of national purpose.

The strongest candidate to do that is Sen. Barack Obama. The Tribune is proud to endorse him today for president of the United States.

On Dec. 6, 2006, this page encouraged Obama to join the presidential campaign. We wrote that he would celebrate our common values instead of exaggerate our differences. We said he would raise the tone of the campaign. We said his intellectual depth would sharpen the policy debate. In the ensuing 22 months he has done just that.

Many Americans say they're uneasy about Obama. He's pretty new to them.

We can provide some assurance. We have known Obama since he entered politics a dozen years ago. We have watched him, worked with him, argued with him as he rose from an effective state senator to an inspiring U.S. senator to the Democratic Party's nominee for president.

We have tremendous confidence in his intellectual rigor, his moral compass and his ability to make sound, thoughtful, careful decisions. He is ready.

The change that Obama talks about so much is not simply a change in this policy or that one. It is not fundamentally about lobbyists or Washington insiders. Obama envisions a change in the way we deal with one another in politics and government. His opponents may say this is empty, abstract rhetoric. In fact, it is hard to imagine how we are going to deal with the grave domestic and foreign crises we face without an end to the savagery and a return to civility in politics.

This endorsement makes some history for the Chicago Tribune. This is the first time the newspaper has endorsed the Democratic Party's nominee for president.

The Tribune in its earliest days took up the abolition of slavery and linked itself to a powerful force for that cause--the Republican Party. The Tribune's first great leader, Joseph Medill, was a founder of the GOP. The editorial page has been a proponent of conservative principles. It believes that government has to serve people honestly and efficiently.

With that in mind, in 1872 we endorsed Horace Greeley, who ran as an independent against the corrupt administration of Republican President Ulysses S. Grant. (Greeley was later endorsed by the Democrats.) In 1912 we endorsed Theodore Roosevelt, who ran as the Progressive Party candidate against Republican President William Howard Taft.

The Tribune's decisions then were driven by outrage at inept and corrupt business and political leaders.

We see parallels today.

The Republican Party, the party of limited government, has lost its way. The government ran a $237 billion surplus in 2000, the year before Bush took office -- and recorded a $455 billion deficit in 2008. The Republicans lost control of the U.S. House and Senate in 2006 because, as we said at the time, they gave the nation rampant spending and Capitol Hill corruption. They abandoned their principles. They paid the price.

We might have counted on John McCain to correct his party's course. We like McCain. We endorsed him in the Republican primary in Illinois. In part because of his persuasion and resolve, the U.S. stands to win an unconditional victory in Iraq.

It is, though, hard to figure John McCain these days. He argued that President Bush's tax cuts were fiscally irresponsible, but he now supports them. He promises a balanced budget by the end of his first term, but his tax cut plan would add an estimated $4.2 trillion in debt over 10 years. He has responded to the economic crisis with an angry, populist message and a misguided, $300 billion proposal to buy up bad mortgages.

McCain failed in his most important executive decision. Give him credit for choosing a female running mate--but he passed up any number of supremely qualified Republican women who could have served. Having called Obama not ready to lead, McCain chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. His campaign has tried to stage-manage Palin's exposure to the public. But it's clear she is not prepared to step in at a moment's notice and serve as president. McCain put his campaign before his country.

Obama chose a more experienced and more thoughtful running mate--he put governing before politicking. Sen. Joe Biden doesn't bring many votes to Obama, but he would help him from day one to lead he country.

McCain calls Obama a typical liberal politician. Granted, it's disappointing that Obama's mix of tax cuts for most people and increases for the wealthy would create an estimated $2.9 trillion in federal debt. He has made more promises on spending than McCain has. We wish one of these candidates had given good, hard specific information on how he would bring the federal budget into line. Neither one has.

We do, though, think Obama would govern as much more of a pragmatic centrist than many people expect.

We know first-hand that Obama seeks out and listens carefully and respectfully to people who disagree with him. He builds consensus. He was most effective in the Illinois legislature when he worked with Republicans on welfare, ethics and criminal justice reform.

He worked to expand the number of charter schools in Illinois--not popular with some Democratic constituencies.

He took up ethics reform in the U.S. Senate--not popular with Washington politicians.

His economic policy team is peppered with advisers who support free trade. He has been called a "University of Chicago Democrat"--a reference to the famed free-market Chicago school of economics, which puts faith in markets.

Obama is deeply grounded in the best aspirations of this country, and we need to return to those aspirations. He has had the character and the will to achieve great things despite the obstacles that he faced as an unprivileged black man in the U.S.

He has risen with his honor, grace and civility intact. He has the intelligence to understand the grave economic and national security risks that face us, to listen to good advice and make careful decisions.

When Obama said at the 2004 Democratic Convention that we weren't a nation of red states and blue states, he spoke of union the way Abraham Lincoln did.

It may have seemed audacious for Obama to start his campaign in Springfield, invoking Lincoln. We think, given the opportunity to hold this nation's most powerful office, he will prove it wasn't so audacious after all. We are proud to add Barack Obama's name to Lincoln's in the list of people the Tribune has endorsed for president of the United States.

Try to remember the magic that we shared
In time your broken heart will mend
I never used you, you knew I really cared
I hate to see it have to end
But it's over
Sad eyes, turn the other way
I don't wanna see you cry
Sad eyes, you knew there'd come a day
When we would have to say 'goodbye'

It’s over. Barack Obama will be the next president of the United States. It’s over. It pains me to say it. As much as I believe anything, I believe John McCain would be–as we have never needed before-- a great president. It’s over. Obama is ahead beyond the margin of error in every state that John Kerry won in 2004. In the rarest turn of events, Indiana and North Carolina, reliably Republican, are within Obama’s reach. Virginia and Florida were carried by Bush and those are also within Obama’s reach. There are a few things, not to be dismissed but also not likely, that could bring about a defeat for Obama:

1. Polls do not take into account the number of white people who will not vote for a black. If McCain is behind within the margin of error or under 10 points, this could be a factor.
2. The Clinton’s do not want Obama to win. I would not underestimate their dirty tricks in the weeks ahead.
3. Jeremiah Wright, Fr. Pfelger and "I’ve never been proud to be an American before." These themes will be highlighted in the weeks ahead.
4. Another Georgia-Russia type incident that underscores McCain’s experience.
5. Mac Attack. McCain never does so well as when he is down for the count. Against all odds, McCain could stage a comeback.

A McCain comeback is what I am hoping for. So far, my predictions have been right-on. I predicted McCain would be the nominee when no one else did. I predicted Sarah Palin would be his running mate along with three other, preferable choices. I hope I am wrong in this prediction.

You Can Call Me Joe
Palin Wins Battle, McCain Loses War


Sarah Palin is a remarkable women, brilliant in her shrewdness. She began by introducing herself to Joe Biden, on microphone, saying, "It’s so nice to meet you. May I call you Joe?" You could have blown the ProCon one over with a feather. What a statement. She communicated to a nation how much of a Washington outsider she was. There isn’t a waiter in Washington, DC that could have met him for the first time or dared to have asked him if he could call him Joe. It was great.

For the record, Gwen Ifill is a left wing pig. She’s writing a book predicated on Obama’s victory and didn’t think she should recuse herself from creating the questions for this debate.

Lets talk pluses/minuses
Joe Biden

+ Pluses
He knows his stuff.
He loves this country.
Barack Obama will be a better, more competent President for having Joe Biden at his side.

-Minuses

He CONTINUALLY began his remarks saying, "Gwen." It looked as though he was having an INSIDE THE BELTWAY conversation with his pal, Gwen Ifill. By contrast, Palin spoke directly to the American people.

In the split screen that I watched, every time Sarah Palin was speaking, Biden was doing his impression of Al Gore in the 2000 debates. Instead of sighing, Biden had an impatient grin on his face as though he was suffering through his step-daughter’s piano recital, all the while emotionally rolling his eyes toward kindred spirit Gwen Ifill.

Biden lied repeatedly. Several times he SPECIFICALLY stated things McCain voted for which McCain, in fact, voted against. Likewise, he stated things McCain was opposed to that he actually supported.

Sarah Palin

+Pluses

She connected with America. She showed common sense and poise, and given her very limited experience on the national stage, carried herself very well.

She pounded Biden and Obama.

She had passion and vision for a McCain presidency.

She surpassed expectations. Expectations were that she stumble and combust. She didn’t.

-Minuses

While conservatives love her–and I’ll have more to say about that later, she did nothing to establish to anyone outside of the Republican base, and frankly within it to a degree, that she is prepared to be the Vice-President of the United States.

Its cute that she can wink and flirt and change the subject. The fact is she should be able to answer any damn question anyone asks of her. Please, lets take the gloves off. Hello? This is the United States of America. We are running someone for Vice-President that won’t hold a press conference and won’t be interviewed unless forced to. Conservatives: hear me out. I agree that the media is against her. I also agree that in a two hour interview with Katie Couric, the only parts of that interview promoted widely were the least favorable to Palin. I agree, no contest.

At the same time, it is shameful and disgraceful that during a time of national economic crisis, John McCain would join Sarah Palin in a follow-up interview with Katie Couric not to talk about anything important. Instead McCain went off on Couric for the gotcha questions foisted upon Palin. Again, I agree that the media hates her. Even given that, it is not a gotcha question to ask the would be Vice-President about specific supreme court rulings she disagrees with, let alone asking her what newspapers she reads. It was embarrassing.

When asked during the debate about gays and lesbians, Palin was noticeably uncomfortable. I’m sorry. It’s 2008. Gays and lesbians are here to stay. The ProConPundit doesn’t support gay marriage but does support domestic partnerships/civil unions. She is way too young to be so uptight about this issue. Not for nothing, the church that she belongs to has support groups for people trying to overcome homosexuality. That workshop takes place in the classroom next to the people who think the world is flat. When asked about gays and lesbians, she said, "We have diversity in our family. Lots of different people." Please, give me a break. She’s whacked.

I have long defended John McCain in the experience over change argument. In judgement, arguably the most important judgement a nominee can make, he blew it. He made a choice that would appease conservatives, who would have voted for him anyway, instead of choosing someone who would appeal to the moderates and independents who will decide this election.