NY Observer is conservative and owned by the Trump family. Biggest welfare bums in NYC.
... and so is the Orlando Sentinel
Do try to get your facts straight.
- Gopher ... Do try and be on point and accurate just once in your life.
- Regardless of their owneraship, all of the papers in question endorsed Obama in 2008 and are now fed up with him because of his hopelessly inept record. The topic is not who happens to own particular newspapers but rather which candidate the editors had chosen to support for president and why.
- Here is another prominent newspaper (one that is usually right of center) that supported Obama in 2008 and is now fed up with him. The editorial in this regard is quite compelling, not that you would be able to understand it but others will want to read and reflect on this well earned and explained abandonment of Obama.
Romney for president
Copyright 2012: Houston Chronicle | Sunday, October 21, 2012 | Updated: Sunday, October 21, 2012 11:53am
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. 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. The hurtful symbol of this attitude of insensitivity to Texans' feelings was the administration's choice to deny Space City's bid to become home to one of the retired space shuttles.
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.
Starting with energy and continuing with NASA.
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. This is a Texas story, to be sure. The state has huge shale resources, and they've been unlocked in large part due to the pioneering work of
Houstonian George P. Mitchell.
But it is a national energy story, as well. Shale resources extend from Texas through Oklahoma and Kansas, east to Mississippi and north through West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio and New York state. The picture of abundance is further enhanced by the riches in North Dakota's Bakken oil formation that has transformed that state into a major energy center and given it the nation's lowest unemployment rate. Add to this the upward revisions of reserves in the Gulf of Mexico and the potential for East and West coast offshore development, as well as in the Arctic.
Such a gift.
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. Let us count the ways:
Jobs: The abundance of clean-burning domestic natural gas has raised the prospect of a manufacturing renaissance across the Rust Belt in the Midwest.
National security: Increased reliance on domestic fuels will lessen our dependence on oil and gas from unstable, unfriendly countries. With each passing day, the volatility across oil-producing areas in the Middle East becomes more apparent.
Balance of payments: Producing our own energy at home will stanch the flow of dollars to nations such as Venezuela and Saudi Arabia, while expanding the revenue base for governments at every level in this country through job generation.
Transportation: Conversion of fleet vehicles to natural gas is already well under way, but much broader use can be made as infrastructure is expanded for refueling automobiles and long-haul 18-wheeler trucks.
Cleaner air: Natural gas burns 50 percent cleaner than coal, the fuel traditionally used by electric utilities and heavy industry.
In the development and expanded use of these resources, utmost care must be exercised to protect air and water resources. We join many other Texans in insisting on that. We also view this windfall as the logical bridge to a sustainable energy future for the country.
The other launch pad ignored by President Obama is the literal one - NASA, and specifically the
Johnson Space Center.
It has been an insult to the memory of American heroes like
Neil Armstrong and Sally Ride to allow manned spaceflight to languish in the country that put men on the moon. The notion of paying $50 million a seat to Russia for commercial taxi service to the
International Space Station is galling.
Obama has failed to articulate a bold vision of his own for the agency. That failure forsakes a legacy of scientific achievement that has showered benefits on the nation. This approach to NASA has abandoned the American imperative of lighting out for the territory and exploring new worlds. NASA's legacy must be reclaimed.
In recent days we have seen a welcome return of popular enthusiasm for space exploration, thanks to the success of the Mars rover Curiosity. When NASA stuck the landing in a tour de force of technical precision, the international excitement was palpable. Let's seize upon it.
That will require more effective presidential leadership.
Our endorsement of Mitt Romney is not unqualified. He must address the perception that he tailors his message to suit any given audience. And his economic plans lack specificity. There's a lot of concern that his tax and budget proposals won't add up without gutting our social safety net. "Trust me" is not good enough. Between now and Nov. 6, Romney needs to go to the blackboard and show us the math.
Let us stipulate: The Mitt Romney we are endorsing is the Massachusetts moderate who worked successfully alongside an 88 percent Democratic majority in the state Legislature to produce what the Obama administration says became its model for national health care reform.
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.
Should Romney be elected, we expect him to make good on his promise to negotiate in good faith with congressional
Democrats on two major issues:
Health care: Chief Justice John Roberts'
Supreme Court opinion on the Affordable Care Act clearly left room for a political solution beyond the act. That solution is self-evident: It should combine the best elements of the Democratic plan signed into the law - coverage of pre-existing conditions, mandatory participation by all, coverage of children up to age 26 - with strengths in the Republican plan that were not included, such as freedom to purchase health insurance across state lines. There is room for debate over whether the tailoring of health care reform should be left to individual states. Texas is not Massachusetts.
The deficit, debt and spending: Forging a solution will require both cuts in government spending and additional sources of revenue. The opportunity for meaningful tax reform is within reach if the two sides will take it. As president, Romney would have specific responsibility for bringing true believers in the tea party wing of the GOP toward workable compromise. The challenges of the next four years leave no room for partisan triumphalism.
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.
