→ i0:Billary關鍵時刻判斷力首要當然在延續個人政治生涯 02/04 11:50
推 yeh67:希拉蕊和麥肯都是強硬派 不論誰當選 美國不會與中俄妥協 02/04 12:41
雖然在台灣知名度似乎比不上紐約時報,落杉機時報畢竟是全美第三大報,而
且位於初選大票倉加州,其背書也因此有不小的份量.落杉機時報在1972年支持
共和黨的Nixon,不過在水門案後他們對這項背書相當後悔.之後有一段時間
他們為了切斷和共和黨的聯結,選擇不在選舉為候選人背書,不過今年他們打破
沉默.在民主黨方面,他們強力支持Obama,共和黨方面,則支持McCain(自由派媒
體對支持Clinton或Obama各有看法,不過偏好McCain而非其他共和黨參選人這
個立場倒是頗為一致),雖然McCain在不少議題上跟落杉機時報的編輯群不合.
個人在看過前幾天民主黨在加州的辯論後對Clinton的印象倒是越來越好,想
來世界最強的國家由這樣聰明又了不起的女性來領導是一件挺偉大的事.
我個人感覺上是Clinton贏了Healthcare跟Immagration上的辯論,
不過Clinton曾經投票授權Bush侵伊還是為她帶來了傷害,也成了洛杉磯時
報批評她在關鍵時刻判斷力不足的理由.同時該報也認為Clinton背負著
Bill Clinton政權的舊包袱,相較之下有多元文化背景的Obama較有潛
力開創新格局.
Los Angels Times
Editorial
Barack Obama for Democratic nominee
February 3, 2008
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-dem3feb02,0,3530861.story
Democrats preparing to vote in Tuesday's California primary can mark their
ballots with confidence, kowing that either candidate would make a strong
nominee and, and if elected, a groundbreaking leader and capable president.
But just because the ballot features two strong candidates does not mean that
it is difficult to choose between them. We urge voters to make the most of
this historic moment by choosing the Democrat most focused on stirring the
nation toward constructive change: We strongly endorse Barack Obama.
The U.S senator from Illinois distinguishes himself as an inspiring leader
who cuts through typical internecine campaign bickering and appeals to Americans
long weary of divisive and destructive politics. He electrifies young voters,
not because he is young but because he embodies the desire to move to the next
chapter of the American story. He brings with him deep knowledge of foreign
relations and of this nation's particular struggles with identity and
opportunity. His flair for expression, both in print and on the stump, too
easily leads observers to forget that Obama is a man not just of style but
of substance. He's a thoughtful student of the Constitution and an experienced
lawmaker in his home state and, for the last three years, in the Senate.
On policy, Obama and his rival Democratic candidate, Sen. Hillary Rodham
Clinton of New York, are a hairsbreadth apart. Both vow to pull troops from
Iraq. Both are committed to healthcare reform. Both offer candid critiques
of the failed George W. Bush presidency, its blustering adventurism, its
alienating stance toward other countries and it cavalier disregard for
sacred American values such as individual liberty and due process of law.
With two candidates so closely aligned on the issue, we look to their abilities
and potential as leaders, and their record of action in service of their stated
ideals. Clinton is an accomplished public servant whose election would provide
familiarity and, most important, competence in the White House, when for seven
years it has been lacking. But experience has value only if it is accompanied
by courage and leads to judgment.
Nowhere was that judgment more needed than in 2003, when Congress was called
upon to accept or reject the disastrous Iraq invasion. Clinton faced a
test and failed, joining the stampede as Congress voted to authorize war.
At last week's debate and in previous such sessions, Clinton blamed Bush for
abusing the authority she helped to give him, and she has made much of the
fact that Obama was not yet in the Senate and didn't face the same test.
But Obama was in public life, saw the danger of the invasion and the
consequeces of occupation, and he said so. He was right.
Obama demonstrates as well that he is open-eyed about the terrorist threat
that posed to the nation, and would not shrink from military action where
it is warranted. He does not oppose all wars, he has famously stated, but
rather "dumb wars." He also has the edge in economic policy, less because
of particular planks in his platform than because of his understanding that
some liberal orthdoxies developed during the last 40 years have been
overtaken by history. He offers leadership on education, technology policy and
environmental protection unfettered by the positions of prevous administrations.
By contrast, Clinton's return to the White House that she occupied for eight
years as first lady would resurrect some of the triumph and argument of that
era. Yes, Bill Clinton's presidency was a period of growth and opportunity,
and Democrats are justly nostalgic for it. But it also was a time of
withering political fire, as the former president's recent comments on the
campaign trail reminded the nation. Hillary Clinton's election also would
drag into a third decade the post-Reagan political duel between two families,
the Bushes and the Clintons. Obama is correct: It is time to turn the page.
An Obama presidency would present, as a distinctly American face, a man of
African descent, born in the nation's youngest state, with a childhood spent
partly in Asia, among Muslims. No public relations campaign could do more
than Obama's mere presence in the White House to defuse anti-American passion
around the world, nor could any political experience surpass Obama's life
story in preparing a president to understand the American character. His
candidacy offers Democrats the best hope of leading America into the future,
and gives Californians the opportunity to cast their most exciting and
consequential ballot in a generation.
In the language of metaphor, Clinton is an essay, solid and reasoned; Obama
is a poem, lyric and filled with possibility. Clinton would be a valuable and
competent executive, but Obama matches her in substance and adds something
that the nation has been missing far too long -- a sense of aspiration.
本文願意開放自由轉載
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 122.127.67.52
※ 編輯: swallow73 來自: 122.127.67.52 (02/04 01:19)
※ 編輯: swallow73 來自: 122.127.67.52 (02/04 01:22)