~ Where the Sun Will Never Set on Our liberty ~
Sixteen days to go.
Newspaper editorial boards across America are endorsing Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan!
After nearly four years of economic stagnation, massive unemployment, record-setting debt and government intrusions into the economy that have paralyzed the private sector, the United States needs a new direction. For this reason, The Dispatch urges voters to choose Republican Mitt Romney for president in the Nov. 6 election.
Obama has failed. That is why Mitt Romney is the preferred choice for president. Romney’s adult life has been spent turning around troubled private and public institutions. These turnarounds include scores of companies acquired and restructured by Bain Capital, the investment firm he founded in 1984. Not all were successes, but that is because to a significant degree, many of the companies Bain took on were high-risk. In 1999, he was asked to take over the scandal-plagued and fiscally mismanaged 2002 Olympics in Salt Lake City. He quickly streamlined its management, fixed its finances and guaranteed its security, turning it into a success. As governor of Massachusetts, he made tough decisions to lead the state out of a budget deficit, and he did so in a state dominated by Democrats.
As a career businessman and former governor, Romney brings a wealth of executive experience in the private sector and the public sector that dwarfs that of Obama. From working both sides of the government/private-sector equation, he understands how that relationship can aid or impede prosperity. His election would be an immediate signal to the private sector that someone who knows what he is doing is managing the nation’s economic policy. The effect on business confidence would be dramatic and immediate, and business confidence is the vital ingredient needed to spur investment and hiring, the two things that the United States so desperately needs.
In 2008, Americans made a leap of faith when they elevated the inexperienced Obama to the White House. That faith was not rewarded. This time, voters should place their hopes for change in experience, by electing Romney.
Two days after his lackluster first debate performance, President Barack Obama’s re-election hopes got a timely boost. The government’s monthly jobless report for September showed the nation’s unemployment rate fell below 8 percent for the first time since he took office.
If that were the only metric that mattered, the president might credibly argue that the U.S. economy was finally on the right track. Unfortunately for him, and for the American people, he can’t.
We have little confidence that Obama would be more successful managing the economy and the budget in the next four years. For that reason, though we endorsed him in 2008, we are recommending Romney in this race.
Now the president and his supporters are attacking Romney because his long-term budget blueprint calls for money-saving reforms to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, three of the biggest drivers of deficit spending. Obama would be more credible in critiquing the proposal if he had a serious alternative for bringing entitlement spending under control. He doesn’t.. He built a successful business. He rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics from scandal and mismanagement. As governor of Massachusetts, he worked with a Democrat-dominated legislature to close a $3billion budget deficit without borrowing or raising taxes....
But after reflecting on his [Obama's] four years in the White House, we also don’t think that he’s the best qualified candidate in this race.
We endorse Mitt Romney for president.
Mitt Romney is the man who can lead the nation out of its lingering economic doldrums and restore faith in the United States.
A successful executive in the public and private sector, Romney is a committed capitalist who understands that the nation’s prosperity is driven by free enterprise, not government.
Under President Barack Obama’s liberal and inconsistent leadership, the country has limped along, barely a step ahead of another recession.
The deficit soared, government expanded and the prospects of more regulations and taxes chilled corporate investment.
Romney understands a reformed tax code, one that closes loopholes but lowers overall rates, would help businesses and consumers. A growing economy can generate more revenue, even with lower rates.
It is only a slight exaggeration to say the president trusts taxes, federal regulators and unions while Romney trusts the marketplace.
Instead, he [Obama] engaged in histrionic spending showdowns with an obdurate Congress. Now the nation faces a “fiscal cliff” of automatic tax increases and spending cuts. If compromise is not reached before the end-of-the-year deadline, the nation’s military defense could be compromised and the economy could nosedive. So much for leadership.
Romney’s record as a determined, detail-oriented leader who demands results strongly suggests he would find a workable middle ground in such conflicts.
The Tampa Tribune, with confidence and enthusiasm, endorses Mitt Romney for president.
It sounds cliched, but it is a truism: America is at a crossroads. It can continue down the path of Leviathan government and an increasing dependence on it, or America can return to the path of limited government and the kind of prosperity-producing independence on which the Founders based this great republic.
The choice is yours. Our choice is the latter. And that’s why we enthusiastically endorse Republican Mitt Romney for president of the United States.
He’s an exceptionally good and decent man who is a proven leader, administrator and deft politician.
2003 – Mitt Romney is elected Governor of Massachusetts. Click on image to enlarge. (Photo – Jim Bourg/Reuters)
Mitt Romney, on the other hand, has excelled in service private and public, showing great mastery in keeping the steed steady and in some quite unfriendly and even treacherous waters.
And he showed great political adroitness in working with a Democrat legislature as governor of Massachusetts for the betterment of all Bay State residents.
Mitt Romney offers a seasoned, strategic and mature public policy mind so sorely needed in the White House and so necessary to enable our great nation and its people to excel.
It’s time to begin restoring America. It’s time to elect Mitt Romney as president of the United States.
The Gazette-Journal recommends a vote for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for president of the United States.
It wasn’t an easy decision. A recommendation against an incumbent can’t be taken lightly.
Nevada was the state hit hardest by the great recession, and four years later, the state continues to lag well behind the others as the U.S. economy shows signs of slow improvement. Its unemployment rate remains worst in the nation; the foreclosure rate, while no longer No. 1, is still among the worst; and the tourism industry continues to struggle.
A vote to re-elect Obama promises four more years of the same. In the two debates between the two candidates so far (a third, on foreign affairs, is scheduled for Monday), the president has shown little understanding of how his failures are affecting the nation, and he hasn’t offered any tangible proposals to change course. Romney must be the leader to get things moving.
The undecided New Hampshire voter has just two weeks to answer this question: Why switch from Barack Obama to Mitt Romney? By now the question is easy to answer if one has been listening to the candidates.
Barack Obama was in Manchester on Thursday. When he came to Veterans Park in 2008, he sold “hope and change.” He was uplifting, inspiring. Last week, that was gone. In its place was the negativity, the deception, the nastiness that Obama once said he wanted to remove from politics.
Obama offered New Hampshire nothing but bitterness and envy. He attacked Romney with a litany of mischaracterizations and deliberate falsehoods.
It was far from the uplifting message Obama delivered four years ago. But four years ago Obama did not have an indefensible record.
What Obama offers America is a fantasy. Sputtering economies are not sparked back to life by government-directed spending on industries hand-chosen by politicians. They are revived by unleashing the energy and creativity of the American people.
The key difference between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama is that Romney understands that crucial economic truth; Barack Obama does not.
While Obama offers rhetoric and pipe dreams, Romney offers a real plan to bring the economy back to life. ...
Obama had four years — half of them with a Democratic majority in Congress — to try his way. Romney offers a better way, a realistic way, to restore American prosperity. We tried the fantasy. It did not work. Now it is time to stop dreaming and start growing again.
Lowell Sun (MA)
n the 1980 U.S. presidential race against a Democrat incumbent, Ronald Reagan said, “A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose your job. A recovery is when Jimmy Carter is out of his job.”
We see many parallels between the campaign of 32 years ago and today’s between President Barack Obama and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
Romney may not be Ronald Reagan now. Yet given the chance to lead this nation back to greatness, Romney might prove even better than Reagan.
Romney knows how to run a business and a government. If elected, he would enter the White House with a level of private- and public-sector expertise unseen in modern times.
Romney has faced economic challenges at key points in his professional and political careers and has always seemed to grow in the job to deliver greater expectations than when he went in. President Obama, on the other hand, lacked any prior experience before entering the White House in 2008 and appears overwhelmed by the one serious economic challenge he has confronted.
President Obama tells Americans the world is changing and we are but a cog on the big map of nations. Not a key cog, just a cog. He implies that America, against this evolving backdrop, must lower its expectations and even allow others to surpass us or the global good. It is a rationale for across-the-board entrepreneurial retreat and eventual economic defeat. Worse, Obama’s philosophy goes against the grain of everything Americans are taught and strive for from cradle to grave.
It is not the path to the future we want for America, and it is not the one Mitt Romney is championing.
In two nationally televised debates, Romney’s love for America, its values and its people come through as genuine.
The Sun believes in Mitt Romney and his vision for America’s future. Vote for Mitt Romney for U.S. President on Tuesday, Nov. 6.
Romney Can Lead Economy Forward
Our belief that Republican Mitt Romney should be elected the 45th president of the United States is anchored in that tough reality.
We believe the nation’s best opportunity to escape the compounding woes of spiraling debt and economic stagnation lies with a president who believes in the free market’s capacity to heal its own wounds.
That leader is Romney. The nation’s economy now is in desperate need of the kind of jobs-creating animal spirits that President Romney would encourage.
The economy indisputably will benefit, perhaps significantly, from a flatter, fairer system of taxation along the lines proposed by Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan.
Given the final two minutes to speak during Tuesday’s second presidential debate, President Barack Obama quickly spotlighted what he said was the key distinction between his re-election candidacy and the campaign of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
“There’s a fundamentally different vision about how we move our country forward,” Obama said.
He’s right, and “fundamentally different” is what the nation needs. For that reason, Romney should be elected president on Nov. 6.
The slow U.S. economy and its discouragingly high unemployment overshadow the other important issues in this election. Economic recovery must be spurred to a faster pace, and a change to Romney’s leadership would do that.
But the middle class has suffered disproportionately in the 2007-2009 recession and its aftermath. Opportunity is lacking and must be restored.
The more relevant question is how to move forward.
Galveston Daily News
The Daily News’ endorsements for the Nov. 6 election
President of the United States
Four years ago, then-candidate Barack Obama used an inspirational message of change and undeniable charisma to convince a majority of the American people he should be the next president of the United States.
Today, that hope President Obama was so successfully able to foster in the American people has all but disappeared as the policies and programs he has implemented have made the difficult economic and foreign policy issues he inherited worse instead of better.
Which is why we recommend Gov. Mitt Romney, the Republican challenger, for president.
The most critical issue facing the country is the economy, and when you look at the backgrounds of Romney and the president, it is clear Romney is better positioned to get the economy moving in the right direction again.
... We need more taxpayers in the system, and the only way that will happen is if we have more people working. When it comes to job creation, we’ll take Romney’s background over the president’s every time.
One of the sound bites from this year’s presidential campaign is that this election will not only decide the next four years, it will decide the next 40 years.
If that’s the case, all the more reason to vote for Romney.
The Chronicle’s backing of Barack Obama in 2008 broke a 44-year string of endorsing Republican candidates for president. Like so many others, we were captivated by the Illinois senator’s soaring rhetoric and energized by his promise to move American politics beyond partisan gridlock and into an era of hope and change.
It hasn’t happened. Four years later, President Obama’s deeds have failed to match his words, much less his specific vows to cut the national debt by half and bring the nation’s unemployment rate to 6 percent. ...
We do not believe four more years on the same plodding course toward economic recovery is the best path forward for Texas or the nation. And so we endorse the Republican team, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, in the belief that they can do better by Texas and the nation.
Concerns about the economy consistently register at the top for most voters, and for obvious reasons: Nearly 23 million Americans are unemployed, underemployed or have given up the job search. And national unemployment rates remain stubbornly high, especially among African-Americans and Hispanics.
There is a launching pad to reignite the national economy: It is the abundance of affordable domestic energy that has revealed itself so dramatically over the past several years. We refer primarily to the resources of natural gas and oil from shale rock that have become available through the technologies of horizontal drilling and fracturing.
These resources offer us a clear path to prosperity and energy security.
President Obama’s failure to identify the economic opportunities these resources offer is mystifying. In our 2008 endorsement we cautioned the president against demonizing the energy sector – good advice that he has never heeded (see Keystone XL Pipeline). By contrast, Gov. Romney has listed energy atop his five-point plan to rejuvenate the economy.
It can. ...
Romney’s ability to negotiate successfully across party lines in the Bay State stands in contrast to the president’s baffling disengagement from the national health care debate. Obama’s decision to leave essential details to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi, together with his failure to step in and insist that the Republicans’ version of health care reform have a fair hearing in the House of Representatives, needlessly polarized the process. Reports from his own staff that Obama is uninterested in process are troubling.
Gov. Romney impresses us as a focused, task-oriented problem solver, both by inclination and by experience – a “fix-it” guy.
A lot needs fixing in America, from a broken economy to a broken-down political system.
Mitt Romney offers the leadership we require from the White House.
Excellent stuff. Thanks for posting it.
One of the sound bites from this year’s presidential campaign is that this election will not only decide the next four years, it will decide the next 40 years.
Wow! That is for sure!
This is great news, and I'm truly leaning optimistic now!
I LOVE THIS ONE!
After yesterday’s tussle with the White House about whether the Des Moines Register could actually tell people what Barack Obama said in an interview with them to get the editorial board’s endorsement, Obama finally relented and allowed Iowa’s leading newspaper to print a transcript of the interview. The editors assured readers that they would not hold Obama’s pettiness against him when it came to deciding on the endorsement, as too much is at stake in this election. However, today’s front page certainly looks like a little payback for Obama’s unprecedented demand for “privacy” — and a pretty good hint at which way the DMR is leaning on that endorsement (via Byron York):
This is hardly a subtle message. The headlines contrast the negative campaigning from Obama with the positive, agenda-focused campaigning from Romney. They have Obama scowling and looking over his shoulder, while Romney smiles and looks forward. Obama is also positioned lower in the photos than Romney. Plus, even the crowd reactions are a contrast; hardly anyone around Obama is smiling, while the crowd is reaching toward Romney, showing enthusiasm and support. The only thing missing here is a MSM-style halo around Romney’s head instead of Obama’s, and a classic Obama finger point to go with the scowl.
To be fair, if a major newspaper did this to Romney rather than Obama, we’d be screaming bloody bias — and that would be true, but only if one ignores the context of the back story this week. This isn’t bias so much as payback.
OK, snatched off Breitbart! This one is HUGE!!
Sources say the paper is not eager to experience the same kind of heat it received after endorsing Republican Governor Scott Walker in the recall election earlier this year:
I asked editorial page editor David Haynes about this and he replied in an email: “I’m writing a column on our decision for the Sunday paper. We may post that early (Friday). As a point of history: The JS did not endorse in the 2000 presidential election, and I remember [editor] Marty Kaiser writing at the time that it was not the first time that a newspaper in Milwaukee had not endorsed. It wasn’t common, but it had happened before.”
I’m told that both U.S. Senate candidates Tammy Baldwin and Tommy Thompson were furious when they heard the no-endorsement news...
Inside the paper, I’m told, there’s the feeling that “we have two tough picks to make and we’re taking a pass,” and the paper is less relevant because of it.
Average polling data currently shows Barack Obama leading challenger Mitt Romney by approximately two points in the race to win Wisconsin's ten electoral votes. The Midwestern state is the home of Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan.
Ruthann, your post was picked up by the Tartan Marine blogspot! http://tartanmarine.blogspot.com/
It is the eighth or ninth post down on his main page for Oct. 27th! Good job!
Romney is the first Republican the paper has endorsed for president in 40 years when it supported Richard Nixon.
"We need Iowa to help get America back on track. I am honored to have the @DMRegister’s endorsement," Romney tweeted from his @MittRomney account shortly after the paper published the endorsement.
The paper noted their "discussion repeatedly circled back to the nation’s single most important challenge":
[P]ulling the economy out of the doldrums, getting more Americans back in the workforce in meaningful jobs with promising futures, and getting the federal government on a track to balance the budget in a bipartisan manner that the country demands.
The paper came to the conclusion that Romney's business and executive background made him the best candidate to tackle these challenges and "unlock this nation’s economic potential."
"Throughout the campaign, [Romney] has expressed faith in the private sector to fuel a more robust economic recovery if it has more confidence that the federal government will not be an obstacle," the paper wrote. "Romney has a strategy for job growth through tax and regulatory relief for small businesses, encouraging all forms of domestic energy production, education that prepares graduates with job skills, expanding foreign trade and reducing the burden of federal deficits."
As for Obama, the paper pointed out his lack of ideas and plans for a second term and noted that while he "rocketed to the presidency from relative obscurity with a theme of hope and change in his administration," a "different reality has marked his presidency" and "his record on the economy the past four years does not suggest he would lead in the direction the nation must go in the next four years."
"The president’s best efforts to resuscitate the stumbling economy have fallen short," the paper wrote of Obama. "Nothing indicates it would change with a second term in the White House."
The Register urged voters to "give Mitt Romney a chance to correct the nation’s fiscal course and to implode the partisan gridlock that has shackled Washington and the rest of America — with the understanding that he would face the same assessment in four years if he does not succeed."
In explaining how they came to their endorsement, Publisher Laura Hollingsworth, Editor Rick Green, Opinions Editor Randy Evans, and editorial writers Rox Laird and Andie Dominick, the five people who make the endorsement, wrote that their support for "Republican Mitt Romney may surprise, it may anger, it may please," but "the goal of endorsement editorials is to advance the conversation."
"After watching the two candidates over the past six years, interviewing them both at least twice, researching their positions and the issues and having conversations with Iowans, the five of us spent more than two hours before reaching a consensus," they wrote. "It was a vigorous and useful debate."
On Tuesday, Obama refused to give the Register editorial board an on-the-record interview. After the public put pressure on the White House after the paper's editor blogged about having felt "handcuffed" by Obama's ground rules, the Obama administration released the transcript of the interview last Wednesday.
Iowa launched Obama to the presidency in 2008. His win in the Iowa Caucus propelled his campaign. Obama later won the state in the general election against John McCain by 9.5 points.
Four years later, Obama is essentially tied with Romney for the state's important six electoral votes and the Register endorsement may tip the scales for many Iowans.
The endorsement caught most in the political world -- including the Obama campaign -- by surprise.
The Obama campaign's Iowa communications director Erin Seidler on Saturday had confidently and prematurely tweeted it would be "hard to imagine" the Register endorsing Romney.
Four minutes after Seidler's tweet, the Register published its endorsement of Romney.
Another Crossover !
The South Florida Sun-Sentinel, supporters of then-Sen. Barack Obama's candidacy in 2008, announced its endorsement of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Friday.
In dropping Obama for Romney, the Sun-Sentinel becomes the second large Florida daily to give up on the president in 2012. Last week, the Orlando Sentinel also announced its endorsement of Romney after supporting Obama in 2008. The Tampa Tribune also threw its support behind Romney, while the Tampa Bay Times, the largest Florida daily, stuck with Obama in 2012 after endorsing him in 2008.
In an editorial that takes an almost reluctant tone at times, the Sun-Sentinel's board sums up their decision as one driven by a belief that the nation's foremost priority should be righting its fiscal ship. It should do this, they write, by focusing on job creation, addressing the national debt and reforming entitlements.
"We believe Romney will help this nation find the political will to address the challenges with Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid," writes the board. "We’d like to see him exercise equal fiscal discipline at the Pentagon, whose budget has grown 50 percent in 10 years and exceeds that of the next 10 largest nations combined."
The second part is perhaps wishful thinking, considering Romney's clearly stated position that he would like to increase military spending, while Obama has proposed maintaining it at its current levels.
It's also not the only curious argument made in support of Romney, criticized in the endorsement for pandering to the Republican Party's immigration hardliners and appearing aloof during a foreign tour this summer. The board then goes on to claim that "diplomacy must remain the first, second and third tools in our toolbox," saying Romney proved himself worthy of this goal in the final presidential debate.
The editors also make a point of noting that the next president will likely decide the makeup of the Supreme Court, going as far as to question whether that will put "women's rights and other policies in danger," though in the next sentence the board says social issues are not "Job One" for the next president.
Great post Ruthie! I love it and thank you for posting this. Romney is sweeping the country. He will sweep this election as well. I'm feeling better every day.
We need to keep this one up top!!
U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three other Americans died in a well-planned military assault on their diplomatic mission in Benghazi seven weeks ago, the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. So why are details surfacing, piecemeal, only now?
The Obama administration sat by doing nothing for seven hours that night, ignoring calls to dispatch help from our bases in Italy, less than two hours away. It has spent the past seven weeks stretching the story out, engaging in misdirection and deception involving supposed indigenous outrage over an obscure anti-Muslim video, confident that with the aid of a docile press corps this infamous climax to four years of misguided foreign policy can be swept under the rug, at least until after Tuesday's election.
Charles Woods, father of former Navy SEAL and Henderson resident Tyrone Woods, 41, says his son died slumped over his machine gun after he and fellow ex-SEAL Glen Doherty - not the two locals who were the only bodyguards Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration would authorize - held off the enemy for seven hours.
The Obama administration was warned. They received an embassy cable June 25 expressing concern over rising Islamic extremism in Benghazi, noting the black flag of al-Qaida "has been spotted several times flying over government buildings and training facilities." The Obama administration removed a well-armed, 16-member security detail from Libya in August, The Wall Street Journal reported last month, replacing it with a couple of locals. Mr. Stevens sent a cable Aug. 2 requesting 11 additional body guards, noting "Host nation security support is lacking and cannot be depended on," reports Peter Ferrara at Forbes.com. But these requests were denied, officials testified before the House Oversight Committee earlier this month.
Based on documents released by the committee, on the day of the attack the Pentagon dispatched a drone with a video camera so everyone in Washington could see what was happening in real time. The drone documented no crowds protesting any video. But around 4 p.m. Washington received an email from the Benghazi mission saying it was under a military-style attack. The White House, the Pentagon, the State Department and the CIA were able to watch the live video feed. An email sent later that day reported "Ansar al-Sharia claims responsibility for Benghazi attack."
Not only did the White House do nothing, there are now reports that a counterterrorism team ready to launch a rescue mission was ordered to stand down.
The official explanation for the inadequate security? This administration didn't want to "offend the sensibilities" of the new radical Islamic regime which American and British arms had so recently helped install in Libya.
The official explanation for why Obama administration officials watched the attack unfold for seven hours, refusing repeated requests to send the air support and relief forces that sat less than two hours away in Italy? Silence.
An open discussion of these issues, of course, would lead to difficult questions about the wisdom of underwriting and celebrating the so-called Arab Spring revolts in the first place. While the removal of tyrants can be laudable, the results show a disturbing pattern of merely installing new tyrannies - theocracies of medieval mullahs who immediately start savaging the rights of women (including the basic right to education) and who are openly hostile to American interests.
When Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney promptly criticized the security failures in Benghazi, the White House and its lapdog media jumped all over him for another "gaffe," for speaking out too promptly and too strongly. Prompt and strong action from the White House on Sept. 11 might have saved American lives, as well as America's reputation as a nation not to be messed with. Weakness and dithering and flying to Las Vegas the next day for celebrity fund-raising parties are somehow better?
This administration is an embarrassment on foreign policy and incompetent at best on the economy - though a more careful analysis shows what can only be a perverse and willful attempt to destroy our prosperity. Back in January 2008, Barack Obama told the editorial board of the San Francisco Chronicle that under his cap-and-trade plan, "If somebody wants to build a coal-fired power plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them." He added, "Under my plan ... electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." It was also in 2008 that Mr. Obama's future Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, famously said it would be necessary to "figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe" - $9 a gallon.
Yet the president now claims he's in favor of oil development and pipelines, taking credit for increased oil production on private lands where he's powerless to block it, after he halted the Keystone XL Pipeline and oversaw a 50 percent reduction in oil leases on public lands.
These behaviors go far beyond "spin." They amount to a pack of lies. To return to office a narcissistic amateur who seeks to ride this nation's economy and international esteem to oblivion, like Slim Pickens riding the nuclear bomb to its target at the end of the movie "Dr. Strangelove," would be disastrous.
Candidate Obama said if he couldn't fix the economy in four years, his would be a one-term presidency.
Mitt Romney is moral, capable and responsible man. Just this once, it's time to hold Barack Obama to his word. Maybe we can all do something about that, come Tuesday.
To use a phrase that the enemy Obama coined: "Yes we can!"
I love turning their "words" against them. ;-)
Hat tip to Jodi's daily Tids...
I think there are some new ones here now!
Do newspaper endorsements mean what they used to? Maybe not. But Mitt Romney has over one hundred of them, which is an impressive feat for a Republican. However, Romney’s ability to convert editorial board’s away from their decisions to endorse President Obama four years ago is truly impressive.
To date, twenty-eight large newspapers have decided to drop their endorsement record with President Obama and put their chips all in on Romney. The blunt explanations for their decisions often gives way to some blistering critiques of the president, leaving the reader no doubt why these papers lost their faith over the last four years.
According to Editor & Publisher, Republican Mitt Romney is stunning the newspaper world, earning 112 endorsements from editorial boards around the country compared to the President’s 84. Most large market newspapers like the The New York Times and The Washington Post have stuck with Obama, but have ran less than glowing assessments of his accomplishments. So while a newspaper endorsement may not mean what it once did, these conversions could be telling of anational trend.
“ The economy is growing at an unacceptably anemic rate”
“It verges on magical thinking to expect Obama to get different results in the next four years.”
“More pointedly, we are disappointed in the tone of Obama’s relentless insinuations that wealthy Americans refuse to pay their fair share. That tone is divisive and damaging for the nation and for our economy. It creates villains and victims, and unfairly so.”
– The Daily Herald, Chicago
“ The president has shown little understanding of how his failures are affecting the nation, and he hasn’t offered any tangible proposals to change course.”
“Obama’s signature achievement was confusing and ill-timed. The byzantine Affordable Care Act worsened uncertainty for business during a recession and will compound the costs of workplace benefits for four out of five working-age Americans.”
“Nationally, the one thing that is needed above anything else is job creation. Yet, the president’s economic proposal is to raise taxes on the job-creating class. Why ever would you raise taxes on anyone when real unemployment is around 15 percent? That defies all economic theories. Let’s face it: Romney is more of a businessman than a politician. You can resent his wealth all you want, but he has a proven record as a turnaround artist.”
–The Daily Tribune, Royal Oak, MI
“As Texans, it is a particular vexation that this president’s attitude toward the interests of our state has occasionally bordered on contempt, particularly in decisions relating to the NASA budget and the energy sector.”
“President Obama’s steps to get spending under control and reduce the debt are too tentative, and again hark back to his inability to possess the leadership to break the partisan gridlock in Congress.”
“Instead of taking charge in Washington, Obama has shown unwillingness to take even the most basic step in presidential leadership: picking up the Oval Office phone to bring his influence to bear on reluctant representatives and senators.”
“Romney is an agent of change whose primary campaign thrust has been the economy and his plans and qualifications to improve it.”
“But today, rather than articulate a compelling vision for growth, the president falls back on the tired talking point of increasing taxes for the wealthy.”
– Sun Sentinel Fort Lauderdale, FL
“The president laments congressional gridlock that fomented under the inflammatory leadership of Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Harry Reid. The president’s deference to their reckless rhetoric further deepened congressional divide.”
“Four years ago, the editorial board’s willingness to change horses in the middle of a churning river led us to call for voters to break the Republican hold on the White House and try a Democrat with a fresh spark. Today, it leads the editorial board to urge voters to say “enough” to a Democratic administration whose sincere best has turned out disappointing, and install a seasoned leader with a record of fixing problems.”
“Four years ago, we recommended Barack Obama be elected. He offered himself as someone who could bridge the wide chasm between Democrats and Republicans. However, after four years, the situation has worsened.”
“Mr. Obama may have great ideas, but if he can’t get them through Congress — and there’s no reason to think anything on that account will change after Nov. 6 — they are worthless.”
“Some of the warnings about Obama’s lack of legislative and leadership skills have come true over the past four years. It is not worth risking the state of our economy for the next four years to see whether his learning curve really is behind him.”
“Class warfare might be a successful strategy for cobbling together 270 electoral votes. But it’s not the way to unite a divided nation. The president comes to town on a Monday, takes our money, shakes our hands and tells us how much he values the CEOs and innovators of New York. And then on Tuesday, he turns around and refers to business leaders as fat cat bankers whose success was created by the sweat of others. That’s not a friend. That’s not a leader. That’s a politician.”
“Voters may well wonder if Obama even knows what it means to get spending under control.”
“Instead of following through on his hope-and-change message, Obama keeps telling us the limits of hope and change.”
“In 2008, an unproven Obama promised things would turn out differently with him in charge. “Change we can believe in” is how he put it. Four years later we realize it was all made up.”
“It was the vision of hope and change that convinced us four years ago to support then-Sen. Barack Obama over Sen. John McCain. Today, there is little hope in how another four years of an Obama administration would swiftly and effectively lift our country out of its economic doldrums, and there is little change in how Washington operates.”
“Good intentions, repeated promises and lofty rhetoric are no substitute for sound economics and a foreign policy grounded in realism and strength.”
“Obama spent a year to win razor-thin passage of a divisive law that has spawned fights over expensive mandates, new taxes and infringement of religious liberties.”
“It is true that in 2008 we endorsed the change promised by Obama, but the reality today is – four years later – we have little confidence Obama will be more successful managing the economy and the budget going forward. Indeed, we feel change is needed again. And we believe Romney fills that ticket.”
“Sure, funding for public broadcasting is an insignificant part of the budget, but if Obama isn’t even willing to cut one one-hundreth of 1 percent of federal spending for something that is non-vital to America, then the president is not serious about reducing spending at all.
If Obama is not serious about that, he is the wrong person for the job.”
“But here’s the rub: Obama has had four years. What improvements he’s overseen are largely incremental. Instead, lectures become excuses. And the excuses wear thin. Eventually, Obama’s words, meant for Romney, blow back: Where’s the plan? Where does this White House administration see America in four years? In all of that campaigning, that plan didn’t emerge.”
– Journal And Courier, Lafayette,IN
“This administration from day one has waged a deplorable crusade to kill coal mining jobs, and to close coal-fired power plants, through a politically motivated Environmental Protection Agency.”
“Obama’s Term In The White House Has Been Quite Possibly The Most Disappointing Presidency In The History Of The United States.”
“President Obama has strong support among women and ethnic minorities, but his avowed goal of bringing together all Americans remains only a faint dream. After four years, he has run out of time.”
Shawn McCoy, the Romney spokesperson for the state of Iowa, echoed many of the newspaper sentiments when asked for comment by TheBlaze. McCoy addressed the endorsement switches saying, “newspapers across this country are switching their endorsements from Barack Obama to Mitt Romney because they know we need pro-growth policies.” He went on to say Romney represented “real change.” McCoy has overseen perhaps the greatest newspaper endorsement success story, as Romney swept every major newspaper endorsement in the state of Iowa over the last weekend.