Obama can end decades of division (Nashua Telegraph)

[jefferson_dem]

Obama can end decades of division

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is the best choice for Democrats in the New Hampshire primary on Jan. 8. He is the candidate with the greatest chance of reaching across the aisle – of resonating with moderate and independent voters needed to capture the general election – while maintaining the core principles of his party.

And he best represents what Democrats are looking for this year: a change from the status quo, a genuine and authentic voice for hope and healing during difficult and divisive times.

During our editorial board meetings with each of the primary contenders, candidates worked hard to define themselves on issues and on character.

During these meetings, Obama stood out; he thought deeply about the answer to each question we asked him. He spoke neither in safe, pre-scripted talking points nor in divisive polemic. He was able to give nuanced answers to questions without sounding like he was avoiding taking a position.

And he, better than any of the other candidates, was able to define common goals that make for common ground, while debating the issues that divide the country most deeply.

We urge readers to view for themselves the one-hour video of Obama's Nashua Telegraph editorial board interview here: www.nashuatelegraph.com/obama.

<SNIP>

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071223/OPINION01/825028349/-1/COMMUNITY03

[ClarkUSA]

1. Obama referenced this endorsement in a recent interview with David Gregory.

I look forward to watching the one-hour video interview. Thanks for the good news. Between the Nashua Telegraph and the Boston Globe,
Obama seems to have gotten a big Yankee :thumbsup:

[mtnsnake]

2. Obama always talks about it, but when asked HOW he'll do it he usually comes up empty

I like his theory, but it would be nice to hear him give us the details on how he's going to enact all this unity he talks about.

[calteacherguy]

3. This is a big one!

I particulary appreciate this part:

"There's plenty of experience in Washington. What's lacking is inspired leadership that can speak directly to the people over the heads of the partisan politicians and craft a national consensus not seen in decades.

What's lacking is authenticity, transparency and courtesy. What's lacking are leaders who, rather than seeking high ground from which they can dispatch their opponents, will seek common ground and common-sense solutions.

Obama can provide that leadership, and deserves the support of New Hampshire Democrats."

[Bitwit1234]

4. Bullshit....you think the country is divided with bush

if the bottom falls out of this country and Obama wins this will be the most divided country since before 1776.

[calteacherguy]

5. I found your assertion puzzling and completely incomprehensible.

Care to elaborate?

[jgraz]

18. Um...you're surprised by this?

My theory is that Bitwit is some Caltech student's AI project. The Trollmeister 2000.

[Blue-Jay]

6. You *can't* be for real.

:rofl:

[Jane Austin]

7. You're reaction to this is so surprising!

Just "Bullshit"?

No facts, no evidence, just "bullshit"?

[Forkboy]

8. Trollin' trollin' trollin'...yes your head is swollen..

Keep them lies a flowin'...Rawhide!

[Jane Austin]

10. Oh, and I do think the country is divided with Bush,

largely because he can't keep himself from using divisive, partisan language.

One of Obama's greatest gifts is his inclusive language. He can see places of common ground to work from without abandoning his own principles.

Starting with Lee Atwater, we became so accustomed to language that sets us apart, that we may not even recognize the promise in Obama's non-divisive language at first.

I encourage you to listen to him with this difference in mind.

[Nedsdag]

16. Come on, Bitwit1234,

put the Hillary Kool-Aid down, slowly, gently.

That's good!

[K Gardner]

9. I think this is THE biggest thing Obama has going for him. To read posts here, you'd

think the guy just appeared out of thin air, or that no other President in U.S. history had been elected on charisma and hope and likeability. Ronald Reagan comes to mind. It is no secret that Presidents rely on an absolute HORDE of advisors to wind their way through the intricacies and daily routines of the office. I just don't get the "no experience" banter. I mean, you're not President until you're sitting behind the desk :-)

At any rate, America needs a face and voice for healing. Obama has both. I worry about his backers, about whose pockets he may be in, but I agree in sum with the editorial. Thanks for the post.

[Mythsaje]

11. Yeah, because we all know all it takes to tame the rabid RWers

is someone who talks softly and carries a boffo stick.

Let's remember that, to the RWers, "bi-partisanship" means "doing it the way WE want." "Compromise" means "get on board with what we want or we'll piss all over everything YOU want to get done."

Bi-partisanship is bullshit. This is precisely the meme the Republicans want touted in the corporate media. Play by THEIR rules and they're happy.

Or do we think that they'll abandon their nasty, new-deal destroying bullshit just because someone is being nice to them?

Nonsense.

[venable]

12. disregarding realities of how the divisions have become who we are...

believing that some generous accomodation (wretch) will accomplish anything is naive in the extreme. wish that this was not the case, but believe that it is.

[Tactical Progressive]

13. Obama has been the most divisive figure in this primary

with his lies and his smears right from the start. Forcing others to finally get into the gutter with him. How does him not even being able to deal with his own side with civility bode well for him dealing with our political enemies, unless it is to give deference to the Publicans while selling his own side out?

I just don't see it. Obama is about Obama, and I think that's going to be bad for every Democrat.

Plus, who says we want to "reach across the aisle" to begin with? Clinton tried that for eight years and the far left is angry about alot of it. The past eight years of "governing from the middle" have been Democrats caving in to complete Publican power. That's sixteen years of trying to make nice with people who aren't anything close to nice.

The last thing I, and many Dems want if we finally get the power back - when Publicans finally have no choice in the matter - is us reaching across the aisle and compromising.

The best we get with Obama is compromising with Publicans after nearly two decades of them not when we finally don't have to. The worst we get is Obama selling us out easy so Obama can promote Obama. I think that's the more likely, but I don't like either choice.

Hillary will fight, and she'll have the entire Democratic establishment behind her this time. That's what I want and Hillary is the one I want to do it. Divisive? Fine.

[NYCGirl]

15. Clinton reached across the aisle recently, with Lieberman, Brownback and

Bayh:

http://gamepolitics.com/2007/11/20/us-senators-call-for-review-of-esrb-in-wake-of-manhunt-2/

[XemaSab]

14. There's an extra period at the end of the url for the video

:(

[AtomicKitten]

17. I look forward to it.

[jgraz]

19. I agree. Which is why I'm not supporting him.

We don't need anyone reaching across the aisle unless it's to deliver a left hook. We don't need to work with the Rethugs, we need to destroy them. I'd much rather see a fighter in there kicking ass and handing out indictments.

Obama's insistence on including these genocidal monsters in the dialog just shows the hollowness of his campaign. It's not a plan, it's a slogan.