It’s also notable that later in the event, McCain said the following:
“I don’t want it getting out of this room, but my opponent is an impressive fellow in many ways. Political opponents can have a little trouble seeing the best in each other. But I’ve had a few glimpses of this man at his best and I admire his great skill, energy and determination. It’s not for nothing, but he’s inspired many folks in his own party and beyond. Senator Obama talks about making history and he’s made quite a bit of it already. There was a time when the mere invitation of an African-American citizen to dine at the White House was taken as an outrage and an insult. Today is a world away from the cruelty and prideful bigotry of that time - and good riddance. I can’t wish my opponent luck, but I do wish him well.”
* Obama…
“There are very few of us who have served this country with the same dedication and honor and distinction as Senator McCain, and I’m glad to be sharing the stage with him tonight.”
*** BREAKING NEWS *** The Chicago Tribune endorses Obama…
This endorsement makes some history for the Chicago Tribune. This is the first time the newspaper has endorsed the Democratic Party’s nominee for president.
The Tribune in its earliest days took up the abolition of slavery and linked itself to a powerful force for that cause–the Republican Party. The Tribune’s first great leader, Joseph Medill, was a founder of the GOP. The editorial page has been a proponent of conservative principles. It believes that government has to serve people honestly and efficiently.
With that in mind, in 1872 we endorsed Horace Greeley, who ran as an independent against the corrupt administration of Republican President Ulysses S. Grant. (Greeley was later endorsed by the Democrats.) In 1912 we endorsed Theodore Roosevelt, who ran as the Progressive Party candidate against Republican President William Howard Taft.
The Tribune’s decisions then were driven by outrage at inept and corrupt business and political leaders.
We see parallels today. […]
When Obama said at the 2004 Democratic Convention that we weren’t a nation of red states and blue states, he spoke of union the way Abraham Lincoln did.
It may have seemed audacious for Obama to start his campaign in Springfield, invoking Lincoln. We think, given the opportunity to hold this nation’s most powerful office, he will prove it wasn’t so audacious after all. We are proud to add Barack Obama’s name to Lincoln’s in the list of people the Tribune has endorsed for president of the United States.
There was a 90-minute discussion of the editorial board, which included Tribune publisher Tony Hunter and Tribune editor Gerould Kern. There were passionate, but respectful arguments on both sides. Everyone spoke. There was no shouting. What emerged was a clear consensus of the board in favor of Obama. Hunter, Kern and editorial page editor Bruce Dold agreed on that final decision. Dold wrote the endorsement.
McCain at his best. Where has THIS McCain been during the campaign? Obama was good but not as comfortable. If they had done all of the Townhall meetings/debates during the campaign, the % might be very different
If these two acted for the sake of the nation, like they acted for the sake of the Alfred Smith Foundation Dinner, it would have been a much more interesting campaign indeed.
North of I-80…This is the same McCain as always. Except this time, there wasn’t any media filter to tell us how terrible McCain is. You’re right about the debate formats - they were awful this year (except Saddleback, where McCain clearly cleaned Obama’s clock). He’s definitely better than Obama at delivering a joke, I would add.
Uh, oh….given the Trib’s recent record of endorsements, should the Obama camp be worried? The couple-thousand people who still read it would have cancelled if they went with McCain.
I saw it. McCain was hilarious, and Obama was not. People just don’t want to laugh at The One even when he tries to be funny.
You want a bipartisan guy elected in 2008? Go with the one that is so bipartisan that he can’t even skewer his opponent when there is reason to do so. The one who gets boos from his crowd when he corrects them over a slight against his opponent. The one who can say thinks like the quote above.
McCain is the uniter. Ask Joe the Plumber what happens if Obama exposes himself with his “spread the wealth around” statement, and Obamaniacs pile on Joe instead of questioning their candidate.
Last night I saw Joe Biden make fun of Joe the Plumber, a 30+ year US Senator slamming the guy who Obama randomly selected to ask a question. The Senator was doing this with multi-millionaire Jay Leno, who also enjoyed making Joe the Plumber sound like an idiot for asking Obama a question.
Who is the real uniter here? Who is the guy with the real bipartisan record? And why is it OK for the Obama campaign to smear an average guy standing at a rope line who asked their candidate a simple question?
Attacking guys like Joe the Plumber isn’t uniting anything.
Remind me to wake up early tommorrow to watch the sun rise in the west!
Also, I just heard from Satan, who asked if I knew where he could get supplies quickly to build a ski lift for Hell!
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:11 pm:
Even though its the first time the Chicago Tribune has ever endorsed a Democrat for President, I’m not as surprised as many others.
Since the George Ryan meltdown, the Chicago Tribune has seen its blind faith in GOP leadership was unsustainable. Its move to non-partisanship has been in fits-and-starts, endorsing Lisa Madigan in 2002 but performing some mental gymnastics to endorse George Bush over John Kerry despite the growing recognition that Iraq was one of the greatest foreign policy blunders in U.S. history. But it has been moving.
No self-respecting newspaper can show blind allegiance to one party, and the Tribune’s endorsement today goes along way toward restoring their credibility on political endorsements. In the end, both Democrats and Republicans endorsed by the paper will benefit from that restoration. But more importantly, its a recognition that neither party has a monopoly on good ideas, good leaders or good patriots. A less partisan, less ideological, more pragmatic, more bipartisan statement comes at a good time for America.
Re outrage at inept and corrupt business and political leaders…
.. I can understand endorsing Obama out of ethnic pride. I can understand endoring Obama because of his Liberalism. I have a hard time understanding an endorsement based on Obama’s committment to cleaning up any corruption. That record is just not there….
…I don’t believe Obama’s Liberalism. I think that will change.
I don’t think the baggage he’s going to bring with him from Chicago will change though.
In the 2006 GOP gubernatorial primary, what percent of the vote did the Trib endorsed candidate get? 11%?
Let me know when the Trib editorial board is writing a mea culpa for the nonsense national security editorials from the Bush years.
I remember one editorial where the Trib blamed the U.S. political Left and the Democrats for two bombings in Turkey. Somehow, the Trib’s wise writers twisted the situation to be the fault of the minority party in Congress.
The Trib has enabled the Bush agenda, including the worst abuses. Until they deal with this issue, I don’t really care much what they have to say on the editorial page.
It’s perfectly easy to see an Obama endorsement as a cynical move intended to offend the fewest readers and advertisers. The Trib endorsing Obama isn’t quite as much of a homer move as hyping the Cubs, but Obama is from Chicago.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:25 pm:
Let’s not forget that Obama’s endorsements also include the Washington Post:
“Mr. Obama is a man of supple intelligence, with a nuanced grasp of complex issues and evident skill at conciliation and consensus-building. At home, we believe, he would respond to the economic crisis with a healthy respect for markets tempered by justified dismay over rising inequality and an understanding of the need for focused regulation. Abroad, the best evidence suggests that he would seek to maintain U.S. leadership and engagement, continue the fight against terrorists, and wage vigorous diplomacy on behalf of U.S. values and interests. Mr. Obama has the potential to become a great president. Given the enormous problems he would confront from his first day in office, and the damage wrought over the past eight years, we would settle for very good.”
As well as critical Battleground and Red State endorsements (circulation numbers):
ARKANSAS
Arkansas Times (K): 34,000
COLORADO
Cortez Journal (K): 6,700
The Durango Herald (K): 8,870
Gunnison Country Times (N/A): 4,000
Ouray County Plaindealer (K): 3,000
IOWA
The Storm Lake Times (K): 3,200
MICHIGAN
The Muskegon Chronicle (K): 41,114
MISSOURI
St. Louis Post-Dispatch (K): 255,057
NEW MEXICO
Santa Fe New Mexican (K): 25,249
NORTH CAROLINA
Asheville Citizen-Times (K): 50,160
OHIO
The (Toledo) Blade (K): 119,901
Dayton Daily News (K): 116,690
The (Canton) Repository (B): 65,789
Springfield News-Sun (K): 24,684
PENNSYLVANIA
The Express-Times (Easton) (B): 44,561
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (K): 214,374
TENNESSEE
Chattanooga Times (K): 71,716
The Commercial Appeal (Memphis) (K): 146,961
The (Nashville) Tennessean (K): 161,131
TEXAS
The Lufkin Daily News (K): 12,225
VIRGINIA
Falls Church News-Press (K): 30,500
WEST VIRGINIA
The Charleston Gazette (K): 48,061
WISCONSIN
The Capital Times (Madison) (K): 16,335
Wisconsin State Journal (Madison) (B): 87,930
Two things of importance to note. First, newspapers seem to be making their endorsements early this year, which increases their weight — its not the newspaper endorsement that counts, its the number of times candidates can cite it in their campaign ads.
Secondly, newspaper endorsements are breaking 3-1 in Obama’s favor. In 2004, Kerry and Bush split newspaper endorsements about 50-50.
One of the best was in 88, with the laughs coming from all people Mike Dukakis. It was obvious by then that Dukakis was going to go down hard to Bush I, but his act was hilarious. I thought Vernon Walters, the Ambassador to the UN and a very large man, was going to have the big gripper right there on the dais at the Waldorf he was laughing so hard.
McCain was exceptional in his graciousness to Obama. That’s the guy he should be showing the country.
Obama was pretty good, but looked very tired. One man’s opinion, I think it’s dawning on him that he might very well win this thing.
That would scare anyone. God help him.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:31 pm:
Vanillaman -
Nice war of distraction. Isn’t the point here not that Joe the Plumber is “under attack,” but that Joe the Plumber will pay lower taxes under Barack Obama than John McCain?
Lets be honest about one other thing as well: Joe the “Plumber” is not an undecided voter, he’s a devote Conservative who even shares John McCain’s view that we should privatize social security.
‘Ask Joe the Plumber what happens if Obama exposes himself with his “spread the wealth around” statement, and Obamaniacs pile on Joe instead of questioning their candidate.’ -VanillaMan
Yeah, you can ask him at his next press conference. He’s had more of those than Palin has.
McCain is the one who leveraged Joe the Plumber at the debates, without thoroughly vetting him (sounds familiar). Perhaps you should direct your ire at him.
But you won’t because even though you continuously call Obama the religious laced slur ‘The One,’ McCain is the candidate who is unquestionably wrong in your eyes.
But I’ll give you one thing. McCain was funny. Of course, I’ve been laughing at him for months now.
I can understand the entrainment value of the a right wing papers endorsing a left wing candidate for most of us here, but does any newspaper’s endorsement carry the weight it did even 15 years ago? With so many people getting their information from blogs, cable news, websites, even youtube(gulp), will this even resonate with many people?
==Nice war of distraction. Isn’t the point here not that Joe the Plumber is “under attack,” but that Joe the Plumber will pay lower taxes under Barack Obama than John McCain?==
You just don’t get it. Americans don’t want to spread the wealth around whether they earn more or less than $250,000. Ask Thomas Frank. Americans believe that hard work should be rewarded with success. A government that labels you in the manner Obama and you guys are so comfortable in doing, isn’t helping people earning less than $250,000. Instead they are putting a cap on success and a majority of folks don’t thing that is a very American thing to do.
The other problem you guys don’t seem to be troubled with is watching folks like Joe the Plumber run over by a multi-million dollar political campaign. Obama selected Joe, he went to Joe’s house. Obama said “spread the wealth around” and exposed himself. It wasn’t Joe’s fault at all!
Is this what we are coming to? You ask a question and get roughed up by partisan loons, have them going through your private records and smearing you 24/7? When do you people start wearing brown shirts?
The treatment we’ve been witnessing to Joe the Plumber should send a chill up anyone’s spine who believes that American citizens should be able to ask a political candidate a questions without having their lives ruined in retaliation when the candidate screws up.
Anyone attacking Joe the Plumber should be ashamed of themselves.
It’s true, in the age of instant communications, if you venture into the light, you’re going to get the full treatment, right or left, right or wrong, from the 24/7 media. The elephant has an insatiable appetite.
Now, people seek celebrity for reasons good, bad and unfathomable. I think it started happening around the time of the OJ trial. Look at Monica, for crying out loud. She wrote a book, posed for Vanity Fair photo spreads and did TV interviews!
Some people dig the limelight. I think Joe does, too. And if he plays his cards right, he’ll make more than $250,000 in the next year based on his new celebrity.
===Is this what we are coming to? You ask a question and get roughed up by partisan loons, have them going through your private records and smearing you 24/7? When do you people start wearing brown shirts?===
Have you never watched cable TV news in the past 8 years? Remember what happened to the Dixie Chicks? For crying out loud, man, this is absolutely nothing compared to that. Crocodile tears are unimpressive.
Also, McCain was the one who kept bringing up the plumber(’s assistant) and making Joe/Sam literally the centerpiece of his debate performance. That leads to coverage. Period. Plus, JTP consented to numerous interviews afterwards. That made it even worse.
It’s the unfortunate nature of the beast. Every time McCain said “Joe the plumber” I got a little sick to my stomach for the poor guy. But, stuff happens.
90-minutes to decide the edorsement?
I assumed the debate went somethign like this:
Yeah, Bruce, we need to start selling papers. I’m going to need you to come in this weekend and write up a nice little endorsement on the guy that sells us papers.
Yeah, I know, McCain’s a moderate maverick with a penchant for reform and taking on the establishment — exactly everything we’ve always said the country needs.
But those McCain restrospective frontpage T-shirts, free with a one-year subscription, haven’t really sold as well as we thought.
So, Obama it is. Anyone disagree?
And if, my friends, you think that word (pardon the expression, word) was not passed down from Wacker Drive to Tribune Tower on this “endorsement”, you are either more naive than Mary Schmich or more in the tank for Obama than Eric Zorn.
Anyone attacking Joe the Plumber should be ashamed of themselves. -VanillaMan
I assume you shared equal indignation when Graeme Frost, a 12 year old who gave a radio address for the Democrats, was excoriated by Michele Malkin, even to the point of trespassing on his family’s property and looking in the windows.
This guy is giving interviews, he’s holding press conferences. McCain and Joe have made Joe fair game. Fact checking him is not ‘attacking.’ McCain simply isn’t allowed to inject people into political discourse without the media doing a modicum of due diligence.
I don’t think you need to worry about poor Joe, though. I’m sure he’ll be just fine. I smell a future on FOX News.
- North of I-80 - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:13 pm:
McCain at his best. Where has THIS McCain been during the campaign? Obama was good but not as comfortable. If they had done all of the Townhall meetings/debates during the campaign, the % might be very different
- 618er - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:19 pm:
If these two acted for the sake of the nation, like they acted for the sake of the Alfred Smith Foundation Dinner, it would have been a much more interesting campaign indeed.
- phocion - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:23 pm:
North of I-80…This is the same McCain as always. Except this time, there wasn’t any media filter to tell us how terrible McCain is. You’re right about the debate formats - they were awful this year (except Saddleback, where McCain clearly cleaned Obama’s clock). He’s definitely better than Obama at delivering a joke, I would add.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:26 pm:
===Except this time, there wasn’t any media filter to tell us how terrible McCain is.===
Oh, please. Are you gonna start invoking the “stabbed in the back” theory next?
- Levois - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:27 pm:
I heard Obama was lame. He forced himself to laugh and the audience followed.
- Frank Booth - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:34 pm:
McCain at his best.
His problem is Red State voters don’t value sarcasm.
- phocion - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:37 pm:
Dunno, Rich. What exactly is the “stabbed in the back” theory?
- Oneman - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:42 pm:
I still think my ‘freight train on manifest destiny’ works….
- Vote Quimby! - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:44 pm:
Uh, oh….given the Trib’s recent record of endorsements, should the Obama camp be worried? The couple-thousand people who still read it would have cancelled if they went with McCain.
- VanillaMan - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:46 pm:
I saw it. McCain was hilarious, and Obama was not. People just don’t want to laugh at The One even when he tries to be funny.
You want a bipartisan guy elected in 2008? Go with the one that is so bipartisan that he can’t even skewer his opponent when there is reason to do so. The one who gets boos from his crowd when he corrects them over a slight against his opponent. The one who can say thinks like the quote above.
McCain is the uniter. Ask Joe the Plumber what happens if Obama exposes himself with his “spread the wealth around” statement, and Obamaniacs pile on Joe instead of questioning their candidate.
Last night I saw Joe Biden make fun of Joe the Plumber, a 30+ year US Senator slamming the guy who Obama randomly selected to ask a question. The Senator was doing this with multi-millionaire Jay Leno, who also enjoyed making Joe the Plumber sound like an idiot for asking Obama a question.
Who is the real uniter here? Who is the guy with the real bipartisan record? And why is it OK for the Obama campaign to smear an average guy standing at a rope line who asked their candidate a simple question?
Attacking guys like Joe the Plumber isn’t uniting anything.
- Wumpus - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:55 pm:
McCain focused on attacking Obama as the msm were in love with the guy. That is where “This” McCain went.
- Bluefish - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:59 pm:
Since the Trib endorsed Obama does it mean the Sun-Times will endorse McCain?
- fedup dem - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 2:59 pm:
Remind me to wake up early tommorrow to watch the sun rise in the west!
Also, I just heard from Satan, who asked if I knew where he could get supplies quickly to build a ski lift for Hell!
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:11 pm:
Even though its the first time the Chicago Tribune has ever endorsed a Democrat for President, I’m not as surprised as many others.
Since the George Ryan meltdown, the Chicago Tribune has seen its blind faith in GOP leadership was unsustainable. Its move to non-partisanship has been in fits-and-starts, endorsing Lisa Madigan in 2002 but performing some mental gymnastics to endorse George Bush over John Kerry despite the growing recognition that Iraq was one of the greatest foreign policy blunders in U.S. history. But it has been moving.
No self-respecting newspaper can show blind allegiance to one party, and the Tribune’s endorsement today goes along way toward restoring their credibility on political endorsements. In the end, both Democrats and Republicans endorsed by the paper will benefit from that restoration. But more importantly, its a recognition that neither party has a monopoly on good ideas, good leaders or good patriots. A less partisan, less ideological, more pragmatic, more bipartisan statement comes at a good time for America.
- Bill Baar - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:13 pm:
Re outrage at inept and corrupt business and political leaders…
.. I can understand endorsing Obama out of ethnic pride. I can understand endoring Obama because of his Liberalism. I have a hard time understanding an endorsement based on Obama’s committment to cleaning up any corruption. That record is just not there….
…I don’t believe Obama’s Liberalism. I think that will change.
I don’t think the baggage he’s going to bring with him from Chicago will change though.
- Carl Nyberg - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:19 pm:
In the 2006 GOP gubernatorial primary, what percent of the vote did the Trib endorsed candidate get? 11%?
Let me know when the Trib editorial board is writing a mea culpa for the nonsense national security editorials from the Bush years.
I remember one editorial where the Trib blamed the U.S. political Left and the Democrats for two bombings in Turkey. Somehow, the Trib’s wise writers twisted the situation to be the fault of the minority party in Congress.
The Trib has enabled the Bush agenda, including the worst abuses. Until they deal with this issue, I don’t really care much what they have to say on the editorial page.
It’s perfectly easy to see an Obama endorsement as a cynical move intended to offend the fewest readers and advertisers. The Trib endorsing Obama isn’t quite as much of a homer move as hyping the Cubs, but Obama is from Chicago.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:25 pm:
Let’s not forget that Obama’s endorsements also include the Washington Post:
“Mr. Obama is a man of supple intelligence, with a nuanced grasp of complex issues and evident skill at conciliation and consensus-building. At home, we believe, he would respond to the economic crisis with a healthy respect for markets tempered by justified dismay over rising inequality and an understanding of the need for focused regulation. Abroad, the best evidence suggests that he would seek to maintain U.S. leadership and engagement, continue the fight against terrorists, and wage vigorous diplomacy on behalf of U.S. values and interests. Mr. Obama has the potential to become a great president. Given the enormous problems he would confront from his first day in office, and the damage wrought over the past eight years, we would settle for very good.”
As well as critical Battleground and Red State endorsements (circulation numbers):
ARKANSAS
Arkansas Times (K): 34,000
COLORADO
Cortez Journal (K): 6,700
The Durango Herald (K): 8,870
Gunnison Country Times (N/A): 4,000
Ouray County Plaindealer (K): 3,000
IOWA
The Storm Lake Times (K): 3,200
MICHIGAN
The Muskegon Chronicle (K): 41,114
MISSOURI
St. Louis Post-Dispatch (K): 255,057
NEW MEXICO
Santa Fe New Mexican (K): 25,249
NORTH CAROLINA
Asheville Citizen-Times (K): 50,160
OHIO
The (Toledo) Blade (K): 119,901
Dayton Daily News (K): 116,690
The (Canton) Repository (B): 65,789
Springfield News-Sun (K): 24,684
PENNSYLVANIA
The Express-Times (Easton) (B): 44,561
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (K): 214,374
TENNESSEE
Chattanooga Times (K): 71,716
The Commercial Appeal (Memphis) (K): 146,961
The (Nashville) Tennessean (K): 161,131
TEXAS
The Lufkin Daily News (K): 12,225
VIRGINIA
Falls Church News-Press (K): 30,500
WEST VIRGINIA
The Charleston Gazette (K): 48,061
WISCONSIN
The Capital Times (Madison) (K): 16,335
Wisconsin State Journal (Madison) (B): 87,930
Two things of importance to note. First, newspapers seem to be making their endorsements early this year, which increases their weight — its not the newspaper endorsement that counts, its the number of times candidates can cite it in their campaign ads.
Secondly, newspaper endorsements are breaking 3-1 in Obama’s favor. In 2004, Kerry and Bush split newspaper endorsements about 50-50.
2004 Endorsements, for those interested:
http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/2004_Media_Endorsements
- South of I80 - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:27 pm:
I vividly recall my mother and father railing about the Tribune’s editorial page. They were lifelong Democrats.
Today, my dad is smacking his head in the afterlife, wondering what happened! I wish he’d been around to see this endorsement.
- wordslinger - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:28 pm:
As always, the Al Smith Dinner was tops.
One of the best was in 88, with the laughs coming from all people Mike Dukakis. It was obvious by then that Dukakis was going to go down hard to Bush I, but his act was hilarious. I thought Vernon Walters, the Ambassador to the UN and a very large man, was going to have the big gripper right there on the dais at the Waldorf he was laughing so hard.
McCain was exceptional in his graciousness to Obama. That’s the guy he should be showing the country.
Obama was pretty good, but looked very tired. One man’s opinion, I think it’s dawning on him that he might very well win this thing.
That would scare anyone. God help him.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:31 pm:
Vanillaman -
Nice war of distraction. Isn’t the point here not that Joe the Plumber is “under attack,” but that Joe the Plumber will pay lower taxes under Barack Obama than John McCain?
Lets be honest about one other thing as well: Joe the “Plumber” is not an undecided voter, he’s a devote Conservative who even shares John McCain’s view that we should privatize social security.
- doubtful - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:43 pm:
‘Ask Joe the Plumber what happens if Obama exposes himself with his “spread the wealth around” statement, and Obamaniacs pile on Joe instead of questioning their candidate.’ -VanillaMan
Yeah, you can ask him at his next press conference. He’s had more of those than Palin has.
McCain is the one who leveraged Joe the Plumber at the debates, without thoroughly vetting him (sounds familiar). Perhaps you should direct your ire at him.
But you won’t because even though you continuously call Obama the religious laced slur ‘The One,’ McCain is the candidate who is unquestionably wrong in your eyes.
But I’ll give you one thing. McCain was funny. Of course, I’ve been laughing at him for months now.
- 618er - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:43 pm:
I can understand the entrainment value of the a right wing papers endorsing a left wing candidate for most of us here, but does any newspaper’s endorsement carry the weight it did even 15 years ago? With so many people getting their information from blogs, cable news, websites, even youtube(gulp), will this even resonate with many people?
- wordslinger - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 3:46 pm:
Totally passed over the Trib endorsement of Obama. The Colonel is spinning in his grave, for more reasons that one.
Maybe McCain should have put Paul Lis on the payroll.
- VanillaMan - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 4:16 pm:
==Nice war of distraction. Isn’t the point here not that Joe the Plumber is “under attack,” but that Joe the Plumber will pay lower taxes under Barack Obama than John McCain?==
You just don’t get it. Americans don’t want to spread the wealth around whether they earn more or less than $250,000. Ask Thomas Frank. Americans believe that hard work should be rewarded with success. A government that labels you in the manner Obama and you guys are so comfortable in doing, isn’t helping people earning less than $250,000. Instead they are putting a cap on success and a majority of folks don’t thing that is a very American thing to do.
The other problem you guys don’t seem to be troubled with is watching folks like Joe the Plumber run over by a multi-million dollar political campaign. Obama selected Joe, he went to Joe’s house. Obama said “spread the wealth around” and exposed himself. It wasn’t Joe’s fault at all!
Is this what we are coming to? You ask a question and get roughed up by partisan loons, have them going through your private records and smearing you 24/7? When do you people start wearing brown shirts?
The treatment we’ve been witnessing to Joe the Plumber should send a chill up anyone’s spine who believes that American citizens should be able to ask a political candidate a questions without having their lives ruined in retaliation when the candidate screws up.
Anyone attacking Joe the Plumber should be ashamed of themselves.
- wordslinger - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 4:26 pm:
VMan, Joe looks pretty comfortable.
It’s true, in the age of instant communications, if you venture into the light, you’re going to get the full treatment, right or left, right or wrong, from the 24/7 media. The elephant has an insatiable appetite.
Now, people seek celebrity for reasons good, bad and unfathomable. I think it started happening around the time of the OJ trial. Look at Monica, for crying out loud. She wrote a book, posed for Vanity Fair photo spreads and did TV interviews!
Some people dig the limelight. I think Joe does, too. And if he plays his cards right, he’ll make more than $250,000 in the next year based on his new celebrity.
- 47th Ward - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 4:31 pm:
VanillaMan,
“When do you people start wearing brown shirts?”
You lose the argument and whatever credibility you had here. Thanks for playing.
- Amy - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 4:40 pm:
so this means the Trib endorsed W and Richard Nixon. they
must be so proud.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 4:45 pm:
===Is this what we are coming to? You ask a question and get roughed up by partisan loons, have them going through your private records and smearing you 24/7? When do you people start wearing brown shirts?===
Have you never watched cable TV news in the past 8 years? Remember what happened to the Dixie Chicks? For crying out loud, man, this is absolutely nothing compared to that. Crocodile tears are unimpressive.
Also, McCain was the one who kept bringing up the plumber(’s assistant) and making Joe/Sam literally the centerpiece of his debate performance. That leads to coverage. Period. Plus, JTP consented to numerous interviews afterwards. That made it even worse.
It’s the unfortunate nature of the beast. Every time McCain said “Joe the plumber” I got a little sick to my stomach for the poor guy. But, stuff happens.
Get real, VM.
- Michelle Flaherty - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 4:49 pm:
90-minutes to decide the edorsement?
I assumed the debate went somethign like this:
Yeah, Bruce, we need to start selling papers. I’m going to need you to come in this weekend and write up a nice little endorsement on the guy that sells us papers.
Yeah, I know, McCain’s a moderate maverick with a penchant for reform and taking on the establishment — exactly everything we’ve always said the country needs.
But those McCain restrospective frontpage T-shirts, free with a one-year subscription, haven’t really sold as well as we thought.
So, Obama it is. Anyone disagree?
- Arthur Andersen - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 5:02 pm:
And if, my friends, you think that word (pardon the expression, word) was not passed down from Wacker Drive to Tribune Tower on this “endorsement”, you are either more naive than Mary Schmich or more in the tank for Obama than Eric Zorn.
- doubtful - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 5:09 pm:
Anyone attacking Joe the Plumber should be ashamed of themselves. -VanillaMan
I assume you shared equal indignation when Graeme Frost, a 12 year old who gave a radio address for the Democrats, was excoriated by Michele Malkin, even to the point of trespassing on his family’s property and looking in the windows.
This guy is giving interviews, he’s holding press conferences. McCain and Joe have made Joe fair game. Fact checking him is not ‘attacking.’ McCain simply isn’t allowed to inject people into political discourse without the media doing a modicum of due diligence.
I don’t think you need to worry about poor Joe, though. I’m sure he’ll be just fine. I smell a future on FOX News.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Oct 17, 08 @ 5:36 pm:
Agreed. Joe/Sam has a great look and an outstanding voice. He’ll be a star soon enough and then can complain about that tax hike for real. lol