Corpus Christi, Texas Caller-Times Endorses Clinton

The trend of newspapers in Texas' larger cities endorsing Hillary Clinton continues.  This time the newspaper is the Corpus Christi Caller-Times, which dismisses the myth that Clinton is the lesser of two evils.  Similar endorsements have come from the Dallas Morning News and Houston Chronicle. Indeed, compared to her opponent, Donald Trump, there simply is no comparison in terms of experience, temperament and other needed skills in a national leader.  In my opinion, Trump embodies some of the worse aspects of America today and I truly believe that he cares absolutely nothing about those he is suckering into supporting through .  Worse yet, he will further divide the nation. Here are editorial highlights:

That we endorse Hillary Clinton for president should come as no surprise. There really is no other choice. And that's unfortunate — not because, as many Americans have allowed themselves to be led to believe, the country desperately needs a viable alternative to her. It's unfortunate because of the shadow it casts upon the former secretary of state/senator/first lady's genuine worthiness to be our first female president.

She is not, as has been sold, a mere lesser of two evils. Her experience and intellect would make her a standout in any group of candidates. Like President Obama said and didn't need to be fact-checked, she's more qualified than him or her husband.

We have reservations about the next presidency that have nothing to do with Clinton's abilities, personality or transgressions. Our concern is about the enormity of the task of leading a nation so polarized that angry factions are likely to dispute the election's outcome no matter who wins.

Blaming all of that on Donald Trump — as reprehensible as has been his campaign against Mexican immigrants, women, people of color, prisoners of war and Muslims, to name just a few, and as deplorable as was his declaration that the election is rigged unless he wins — gives him too much credit. He is only the intersection for fears and hatreds that already existed and that bring out the worst in the people privileged to live in the world's greatest nation. Using hatred and fear isn't what makes Trump smart. It's what makes him an insult to voters' intelligence.

Voting for Trump is a form of nihilism that the next president, no matter whom, will need to explore, understand and seek to remedy. The new president and we as a nation would benefit from understanding why, for example, distressed taxpayers who live paycheck-to-paycheck and whose American Dream has been dashed would vote for someone who gained his American Dream through inheritance, exploitation, tax evasion, bankruptcy and the misfortunes of people like themselves — and why they would reject someone who gained her American Dream on merit, married once, hasn't divorced, and knows how to change a diaper.

We perceive in Clinton the capability to bridge the divide — to define rather than exploit our problems and pursue intelligent solutions. . . . The woman who memorably declared that women's rights are human rights and that it takes a village to raise a child is the candidate who has the right priorities and the perceptiveness to make this divided but great country greater.

126 Year First - The Arizona Republic Endorses Hillary Clinton

The trend of conservative, historically pro-Republican newspapers fleeing the GOP and endorsing Hillary Clinton continues.  This time it is the Arizona Republic which has never endorsed a Democrat in its 126 year history - or at least until now. Indeed, the paper's editorial board said that Clinton was the only choice to move the nation forward. How much the endorsement will help Clinton and harm Trump will remain to be seen, but it certainly is an indication of how low the GOP has fallen that conservative editorial board see Trump as anathema to the well-being of the nation.  In my view, the endorsement is dead on point.  Trump is unfit for the office of the presidency and sane, thinking Republicans need to break the knee jerk reaction of always voting for Republicans no matter how flawed.  Too much is at risk in this election and it requires voting for a sane candidate who despite many flaws offers the best prospects for moving America forward.  That candidate is NOT Donald Trump.  Here are editorial highlights:

Since The Arizona Republic began publication in 1890, we have never endorsed a Democrat over a Republican for president. Never. This reflects a deep philosophical appreciation for conservative ideals and Republican principles.

This year is different.

The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified.

That’s why, for the first time in our history, The Arizona Republic will support a Democrat for president.

The challenges the United States faces domestically and internationally demand a steady hand, a cool head and the ability to think carefully before acting.

Hillary Clinton understands this. Donald Trump does not.

Clinton has the temperament and experience to be president. Donald Trump does not.

Clinton knows how to compromise and to lead with intelligence, decorum and perspective. She has a record of public service as First Lady, senator and secretary of state.

She has withstood decades of scrutiny so intense it would wither most politicians. The vehemence of some of the anti-Clinton attacks strains credulity.

Trump hasn’t even let the American people scrutinize his tax returns, which could help the nation judge his claims of business acumen.

Make no mistake: Hillary Clinton has flaws. She has made serious missteps. . . . . Yet despite her flaws, Clinton is the superior choice.

She does not casually say things that embolden our adversaries and frighten our allies. Her approach to governance is mature, confident and rational.

That cannot be said of her opponent. . . . Trump responds to criticism with the petulance of verbal spit wads.

She is intimately familiar with the challenges we face in our relations with Russia, China, the Middle East, North Korea and elsewhere. She’ll stand by our friends and she’s not afraid to confront our enemies.

Contrast Clinton’s tenacity and professionalism with Trump, who began his campaign with gross generalities about Mexico and Mexicans as criminals and rapists. These were careless slaps at a valued trading partner and Arizona’s neighbor. They were thoughtless insults about people whose labor and energy enrich our country.

As secretary of state, Clinton made gender equality a priority for U.S. foreign policy. This is an extension of Clinton’s bold “women’s rights are human rights” speech in 1995.

It reflects an understanding that America’s commitment to human rights is a critically needed beacon in today’s troubled world.

Trump’s long history of objectifying women and his demeaning comments about women during the campaign are not just good-old-boy gaffes. They are evidence of deep character flaws. They are part of a pattern.

Many Republicans understand this. But they shudder at the thought of Hillary Clinton naming Supreme Court justices. So they stick with Trump. We get that. But we ask them to see Trump for what he is — and what he is not.

Trump’s conversion to conservatism is recent and unconvincing. There is no guarantee he will name solid conservatives to the Supreme Court.

Hillary Clinton has long been a centrist. Despite her tack left to woo Bernie Sanders supporters, Clinton retains her centrist roots. Her justices might not be in the mold of Antonin Scalia, but they will be accomplished individuals with the experience, education and intelligence to handle the job. . They will be competent. Just as she is competent.

Trump’s inability to control himself or be controlled by others represents a real threat to our national security. His recent efforts to stay on script are not reassuring. They are phony.

The president commands our nuclear arsenal. Trump can’t command his own rhetoric.

Were he to become president, his casual remarks — such as saying he wouldn’t defend NATO partners from invasion — could have devastating consequences.

Trump has praised Russian President Vladimir Putin, a thug who has made it clear he wants to expand Russia’s international footprint.

Being the leader of the free world requires a sense of propriety that Trump lacks.

We understand that Trump’s candidacy tapped a deep discontent among those who feel left behind by a changed economy and shifting demographics. Their concerns deserve to be discussed with respect.

Ironically, Trump hasn’t done that. He has merely pandered. Instead of offering solutions, he hangs scapegoats like piñatas and invites people to take a swing.

America needs to look ahead and build a new era of prosperity for the working class.

This is Hillary Clinton’s opportunity. She can reach out to those who feel left behind. She can make it clear that America sees them and will address their concerns.  She can move us beyond rancor and incivility.

Dallas Morning News Endorses Clinton, the First Democrat in 75 Years

The last time the Dallas Morning News endorsed a Democrat candidate for president of the United States was over 75 years ago.  That changed yesterday when the newspaper endorsed Hillary Clinton.  Earlier in the week it issued an editorial taking Donald Trump to task and arguing that he was not even a real Republican, noting as follows:

Individual liberty? Trump has displayed an authoritarian streak that should horrify limited-government advocates. This impulsive, unbridled New York real estate billionaire and reality-TV star wants to deport people who were born in the U.S. and don't meet his standard for loyalty. He has proposed banning all Muslims from entering the country, even those escaping Islamist rule, and won't rule out creating a database of Muslims already living here. His open admiration of Russia's Vladimir Putin is alarming.

Trump doesn't reflect Republican ideals of the past; we are certain he shouldn't reflect the GOP of the future.  Donald Trump is not qualified to serve as president and does not deserve your vote.

While that editorial trashed Trump and made the case as to why Republicans and conservatives should not vote for him, yesterday's editorial made the case for voting for Clinton.  Here are editorial highlights:

There is only one serious candidate on the presidential ballot in November. We recommend Hillary Clinton.

We don't come to this decision easily. This newspaper has not recommended a Democrat for the nation's highest office since before World War II — if you're counting, that's more than 75 years and nearly 20 elections. The party's over-reliance on government and regulation to remedy the country's ills is at odds with our belief in private-sector ingenuity and innovation. Our values are more about individual liberty, free markets and a strong national defense.

We've been critical of Clinton's handling of certain issues in the past. But unlike Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton has experience in actual governance, a record of service and a willingness to delve into real policy.

Resume vs. resume, judgment vs. judgment, this election is no contest.  

In Clinton's eight years in the U.S. Senate, she displayed reach and influence in foreign affairs. Though conservatives like to paint her as nakedly partisan, on Capitol Hill she gained respect from Republicans for working across the aisle: Two-thirds of her bills had GOP co-sponsors and included common ground with some of Congress' most conservative lawmakers.

As President Barack Obama's first secretary of state, she helped make tough calls on the Middle East and the complex struggle against radical Islamic terrorism. It's no accident that hundreds of Republican foreign policy hands back Clinton. She also has the support of dozens of top advisers from previous Republican administrations, including Henry Paulson, John Negroponte, Richard Armitage and Brent Scowcroft.

Those are real shortcomings. But they pale in comparison to the litany of evils some opponents accuse her of. Treason? Murder? Her being cleared of crimes by investigation after investigation has no effect on these political hyenas; they refuse to see anything but conspiracies and cover-ups.

We reject the politics of personal destruction. Clinton has made mistakes and displayed bad judgment, but her errors are plainly in a different universe than her opponent's.

Trump's values are hostile to conservatism. He plays on fear — exploiting base instincts of xenophobia, racism and misogyny — to bring out the worst in all of us, rather than the best. His serial shifts on fundamental issues reveal an astounding absence of preparedness. And his improvisational insults and midnight tweets exhibit a dangerous lack of judgment and impulse control.

For all her warts, she is the candidate more likely to keep our nation safe, to protect American ideals and to work across the aisle to uphold the vital domestic institutions that rely on a competent, experienced president.

Hillary Clinton has spent years in the trenches doing the hard work needed to prepare herself to lead our nation. In this race, at this time, she deserves your vote.

Richmond Times-Dispatch: Clerks Opposed to Gay Marriage Should Resign

Photo: Timothy D. Easley/AP

The Richmond Times-Dispatch is among Virginia's most conservative newspapers.  Such being the case, it often hawks reactionary Republican talking points, especially in its editorials.  Thus, it was a surprise to see the Times-Dispatch  commuting political heresy in an editorial that said court clerks who oppose same sex marriage and refuse to do their jobs need to resign.  The piece argues that once one takes a position as a public official, personal rights on religious belief and other issues often go out the window.  The same, of course, should be true of organizations accepting taxpayer funds: once you take public dollars, your right to discriminate against members of the public must cease (it's a concept lost on Catholic agencies here in Virginia).  Here are editorial highlights:

Kim Davis, the county clerk in Rowan County, Ky., is carrying out her own form of massive resistance. Despite a federal court order, she refuses to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. A few other clerks across the country are doing the same.

The clerks claim to be exercising their First Amendment right to religious liberty, just as a few bakers, photographers and others have exercised theirs by declining to provide services for gay weddings. But the two situations are not the same.

Individuals can exercise many rights as private citizens that they cannot exercise as government officials. Teachers, for instance, are free to stand on the street corner on the weekend and urge everyone within hearing distance to accept Jesus Christ as their lord and savior. They can’t do the same thing in the public-school classroom.

Religious scruples are a legitimate reason for a church not to perform marriage rites for gay couples. They are not a legitimate grounds for government to deny marriage licenses; the Supreme Court has ruled that gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry. Davis cannot turn her own interpretation of Christianity into public policy for Rowan County. If she sincerely believes that abetting gay marriage is an affront to her conscience, then she has only one option left: Quit.

Note the interesting correlation made to Davis' conduct and "massive resistance," one of the most shameful parts of Virginia's history when public schools in some counties were closed rather than  allow black students attend.   There is a direct correlation between racists and segregationist and folks like Davis who are raising the false cry of "religious liberty" whether or not the godly folk are willing to take a good look at themselves int he mirror.

Richmond Times Dispatch Rips Cuccinelli - Opts to Not Endorse in Gubernatorial Race

I have been waiting to see how the ultra-conservative Richmond Times Dispatch would handle this year's 2013 gubernatorial contest.  Historically, the Times Dispatch almost always endorses Republican candidates no matter how extreme the contortions required to find a means to endorse the GOP candidate.  This year, given the obvious extremism/insanity of Ken Cuccinelli, the Times Dispatch chose to endorse no candidate for governor.  However, it did manage to trash Ken Cuccinelli in the process of its decision to endorse no gubernatorial candidate.  Sadly, the Times Dispatch could not bring itself to endorse a Democrat even though Terry McAuliffe is the far better choice between the two viable candidates. Here are excerpts from the non-endorsement:

During recent months, numerous editorials in The Times-Dispatch have lamented the gubernatorial campaign.

The major-party candidates have earned the citizenry’s derision. The third-party alternative has run a more exemplary race yet does not qualify as a suitable option. We cannot in good conscience endorse a candidate for governor.


This does not gladden us. Circumstance has brought us to this pass. This marks, we believe, the first time in modern Virginia that The Times-Dispatch has not endorsed a gubernatorial nominee.

Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli rigged the process for the Republican nomination when his minions changed the system from a primary to a convention, which they considered more likely to produce their desired outcome. The switch mocked Cuccinelli’s advertised fealty to first principles. The expression of raw power would have delighted sachems of Tammany Hall. Virginia does not welcome an in-your-face governor.

On social issues such as abortion and homosexual rights, Cuccinelli not only takes stands we find objectionable but pursues his divisive agenda with a stridency that was unbecoming in an attorney general and would be unbecoming in a governor. We do not support abortion for any reason at any time and have embraced bans on late-term abortions, for instance; we remain troubled by Cuccinelli’s approach to personhood and to regulations on clinics. Questions involving abortion will be resolved not by government policy but by transformation of the human heart.

Cuccinelli’s hostility to marriage equality offends. The rights applying to human beings by definition apply to homosexuals.
We disagree with Cuccinelli’s opposition to Gov. Bob McDonnell’s transportation package. McAuliffe scores points here.

Cuccinelli may have performed the legal tasks of his office with professional competence, but his focus raises questions about his gubernatorial ambitions.As AG, he stressed things he did not have to, and, if he stayed in character, he would do the same as governor.

Ouch!!  My money normally would have been on the Times Dispatch holding its nose and endorsing Cuccinelli.  However, Cuccinelli has shown himself to be so insanely extreme that even the far right Times Dispatch could not endorse him.  That speaks volumes and ought to send a laud and clear messages to Virginians as to just how toxic Cuccinelli and his warmed over agenda dictated to him by The Family Foundation/Tea Party would be for Virginia.