Please accept my apologies for posting this here, I just couldn't have
a great day thinking Tommy would miss this.
hows it go john? hehehehe hahaha...I need penance for my
infantilism...if thats a word.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1d0b127c-a380-11dd-942c-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1

Obama is the better choice

Published: October 26 2008 19:31 | Last updated: October 26 2008 19:31

US presidential elections involve a fabulous expense of time, effort
and money. Doubtless it is all too much â€" but, by the end, nobody can
complain that the candidates have been too little scrutinised. We have
learnt a lot about Barack Obama and John McCain during this campaign.
In our view, it is enough to be confident that Mr Obama is the right
choice.

At the outset, we were not so confident. Mr Obama is inexperienced.
His policies are a blend of good, not so good and downright bad. Since
the election will strengthen Democratic control of Congress, a case
can be made for returning a Republican to the White House: divided
government has a better record in the United States than government
united under either party.

So this ought to have been a close call. With a week remaining before
the election, we cannot feel that it is.

Mr Obama fought a much better campaign. Campaigning is not the same as
governing, and the presidency should not be a prize for giving the
best speeches, devising the best television advertisements, shaking
the most hands and kissing the most babies.

Nonetheless, a campaign is a test of leadership. Mr Obama ran his
superbly; Mr McCain’s has often looked a shambles. After eight years
of George W. Bush, the steady competence of the Obama operation
commands respect.

Nor should one disdain Mr Obama’s way with a crowd. Good presidents
engage the country’s attention; great ones inspire. Mr McCain, on
form, is an adequate speaker but no more. Mr Obama, on form, is as
fine a political orator as the country has heard in decades. Put to
the right purposes, this is no mere decoration but a priceless asset.

Mr Obama’s purposes do seem mostly right, though in saying this we
give him the benefit of the doubt. Above all, he prizes consensus and
genuinely seeks to unite the country, something it wants. His call for
change struck a mighty chord in a tired and demoralised nation â€" and
who could promise real change more credibly than Mr Obama, a black
man, whose very nomination was a historic advance in US politics?

We applaud his main domestic proposal: comprehensive health-care
reform. This plan would achieve nearly universal insurance without the
mandates of rival schemes: characteristically, it combines a
far-sighted goal with moderation in the method. Mr McCain’s plan,
based on extending tax relief beyond employer-provided insurance, also
has merit â€" it would contain costs better â€" but is too timid and would
widen coverage much less.

Mr Obama is most disappointing on trade. He pandered to protectionists
during the primaries, and has not rowed back. He may be sincere, which
is troubling. Should he win the election, a Democratic Congress will
expect him to keep those trade-thumping promises. Mr McCain has been
bravely and consistently pro-trade, much to his credit.

In responding to the economic emergency, Mr Obama has again impressed
â€" not by advancing solutions of his own, but in displaying a calm and
methodical disposition, and in seeking the best advice. Mr McCain’s
hasty half-baked interventions were unnerving when they were not
beside the point.

On foreign policy, where the candidates have often conspired to
exaggerate their differences, this contrast in temperaments seems
crucial. For all his experience, Mr McCain has seemed too much guided
by an instinct for peremptory action, an exaggerated sense of
certainty, and a reluctance to see shades of grey.

He has offered risk-taking almost as his chief qualification, but
gambles do not always pay off. His choice of Sarah Palin as running
mate, widely acknowledged to have been a mistake, is an obtrusive case
in point. Rashness is not a virtue in a president. The cautious and
deliberate Mr Obama is altogether a less alarming prospect.

Rest assured that, should he win, Mr Obama is bound to disappoint. How
could he not? He is expected to heal the country’s racial divisions,
reverse the trend of rising inequality, improve middle-class living
standards, cut almost everybody’s taxes, transform the image of the
United States abroad, end the losses in Iraq, deal with the mess in
Afghanistan and much more besides.

Succeeding in those endeavours would require more than uplifting
oratory and presidential deportment even if the economy were growing
rapidly, which it will not be.

The challenges facing the next president will be extraordinary. We
hesitate to wish it on anyone, but we hope that Mr Obama gets the job.

www.ft.com/uselections

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008

"FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times.
Privacy policy | Terms
© Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2008.



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to