Boston Globe Breaks for Barack, Des Moines Register for Hillary
Published December 16, 2007
I was also reading today about Ted Sorenson’s endorsement of Barack Obama back in March of this year. He said he "compares their candidacy." He too believes that preparedness is key and said that Barack is ready. Why, in a word he said it was "judgment." Is Ted right and the Register wrong? Time will tell us that they are more than a bit skeptical. In fact, they pooh-pooh Oprah’s influence as just more bling on the barby. In other words, what she brought to the table he already has! Good point.
To win the Democratic nomination for President, Barack Obama still needs the same thing he has needed all along — for voters to see him as ready to be commander in chief by January 2009. So now the question is: Will appearing at weekend campaign rallies with Oprah Winfrey help him achieve that goal?
Hillary claimed to be standing firm when it comes to ice. That’s a good thing for her to claim at a time when she was truly slipping in the Iowa and New Hampshire polls. A man must win his peers as well as his own state and Obama seems well on his way to doing just that.
Time has tipped its hand in terms of a future endorsement. We won't cry over its choice. It will probably be Hillary Clinton. And it may not come until after New Hampshire. They are mainstream and conservative enough to bide their time on this one until the front runner has cleared more snow from its path.
I know that there will be lots of Sunday lip smacking over this political manna. Just when you thought it was getting dull.
- Boston Globe Breaks for Barack, Des Moines Register for Hillary
- Published: December 16, 2007
- Type: News
- Section: Politics
- Filed Under: Politics: U.S., Politics: Local and Regional, Politics: Elections and Candidates, Culture: Media
- Writer: Heloise
- Heloise's BC Writer page
- Heloise's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
Obama is leading now, but once the world knows that Oprah makes very bad judgment calls, Obama may start losing his lead.
truth14,
You have really just made the case for Barack:
What you may not know, but would if you had read my book "Dinner With DaVinci" since I trace the past lives of many presidents and others close to them that one of the prerequisites for being president is having so called ties to the scary "occult."
Speaking of ties to the occult the very JFK was HPB. It don't get more occult than that. I also trace FDR. There is/was a good Web site by someone who made the JFK/HPB connection also, besides myself. I have lots of links at my yahoo group and other places.
But I am not saying much online anymore. I am getting it together in a book. Why, because the very writers who are complaining about not being paid are stealing my shit and ideas like crazy and I ain't getting a penny for it!
I wrote "Barack Who?" for example and now there is a show "Samantha Who?" I will have to write a researched article about online writer influence one day. So, don't get me started.
Heloise
Oh, lest I forget: Hillary was Calamity Jane, and Bill was Wild Bill Hickock. They were gunslingers rather than occulist. Bill was killed by a coward, shot in the head like other presidents. This is the reason he did not die nor killed in office. He had paid the karma forward, unlike JFK. I document it in "Dinner" but I ran out of space to give it full treatment.
Heloise
Heloise,
Blavatsky? Helen Blavatsky returned as Kennedy? And you are the returning spirit of John Kennedy? So you are the returning spirit of Helen Blavatsky down the road a ways? Do I comprehend this right, or have I missed something somewhere?
they are both going to lose, so it doesnt really matter
A poll for who you'd vote for as President is being run on BCs Forum page. To add your voice click here
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/72035)
I work for a newspaper and it just bugs the crap out of me that candidates fawn all over the editorial boards to get endorsements, but spend such a small part of ad dollars in the same newspapers.
Conclusion: the campaign managers only want the endorsement so they can run TV spots. The candidates think newspaper readers are important. The media buyers don't want to buy newspapers because it involves work.
Who's stupider? The newspapers for thinking readers care? The candidate for thinking the endorsement matters? The media buyers who think newspaper readers aren't worth pursuing.
All of the above.