February 7, 2008
The Nation endorses Obama: “Obama’s Promise”
Interesting logic based on non-facts, as usual. Emphasis added.
Hayes argued in our cover story last week, Obama has also exhibited a more humane and wise approach to foreign policy, opposing the Iraq War while Clinton voted for it, and has been a reliable progressive ally over the course of his career. While his rhetoric about “unity” can be troubling, it also embodies a savvy strategy to redefine the center of American politics and build a coalition by reaching out to independent and Republican voters disgruntled and disgusted with what the Bush era has wrought. Most important, we feel his candidacy, in its demonstrated investment in organizing and grassroots activism as well as his personal appeal, represents the best chance to forge a new progressive majority. For these reasons we support Obama for President.
So why are the endorsing him?
1 – Opposed the war. Fairy tale. He had no say on Iraq, said he didn’t know how he would have voted, did not act on his words and continues to changes his stance.
2 – Potential for bipartisanship when he has no history of doing so.
3 – Personality and race.
Concern: rhetoric of change = no substance
Conclusion endorsement based on a myth. Period. Points for not trashing Sen Clinton.