Legal Commentary

WaPo Endorses Obama, Cites Palin as a Reason

By Jeralyn

Tomorrow the Washington Post will endorse Barack Obama. The editorial is already posted here.

....[I]t is without ambivalence that we endorse Sen. Barack Obama for president.

The choice is made easy in part by Mr. McCain's disappointing campaign, above all his irresponsible selection of a running mate who is not ready to be president. It is made easy in larger part, though, because of our admiration for Mr. Obama and the impressive qualities he has shown during this long race. Yes, we have reservations and concerns, almost inevitably, given Mr. Obama's relatively brief experience in national politics. But we also have enormous hopes.

....we find no way to square his professed passion for America's national security with his choice of a running mate who, no matter what her other strengths, is not prepared to be commander in chief.[Emphasis supplied.]

It's not that flattering an editorial. It disagrees that McCain equals four more years of Bush and criticizes Obama's Iraq position. It makes me wonder, had McCain not picked Palin, would the Post still have endorsed Obama?

Full post as published by TalkLeft on October 16, 2008 (boomark / email).