I live in the San Fernando Valley. Home of about 3 million Angelenos. The Daily Newsis our local newspaper. The Los Angeles Times is the newspaper most people associate with Los Angeles but the Dail News is the one that most represents the Valley.
I don't like it. Until now. As a matter of fact, I have been trying to cancel my subscription. It is not easy. They keep putting it on my front door every morning. I canceled my LA Times subscription since they replaced Robert Scheerwith Jonah Goldberg.
The Daily News features Bill O f%^&*$g Rilley every week and it is the newspaper that launched Michelle fre$@*&^ing Malkins carreer.
I just got back home and there it was.
His is a message that we're a people who might be down, might be facing hard times, but we still have a bright future. It's a message that makes us feel hopeful - not helpless - in the face of the climate crisis, that we can treat the elderly, the sick and the poor as a rich nation not only can, but should. And that in the end we can and will leave the country a better place for our children and grandchildren.
I will now renew my subscription for another year. This is easy. Only about $14.50. I'll send them a check.
This is a breakthrough. I did not live here in 2004, but I do not remember them endorsing anyone in 2004. Wikipedia does not have a record either.
I think this is very unusual. A consistently pro-Republican newspaper like the Daily News must have gone through a lot of soul searching before they did this.
And they do not do it hesitantly either.
That's a message America is dying to hear. Obama speaks of the future in a way that Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton did before him. He doesn't despair over what is wrong in America today but points to what is right and still good, and how we can become better.
Remember, the San Fernando Valley is home to the Ronald Reagan library. It is the secessionist part of Los Angeles, always blaming the liberal political machine of Downtown.
And they don't just endorse Obama, they come down hard on McCain;
At one time, McCain seemed to embody this same sense of hope and can-doism that Obama now owns. He truly was a maverick, whose sense of decency and fairness allowed President Bush to pummel him back to Arizona in the 2000 primaries. Things have changed. McCain has drunk the Kool-Aid of Karl Rove-style campaigning. He's been embraced by the GOP machinery and, in so doing, has become the antithesis of the independent, principled populist politician he once was.
And this is how they conclude;
And finally, it makes pragmatic political sense to vote for Obama simply because he isn't the candidate of the incumbent party in the White House. There's good reason not to allow any one party to become so emboldened it forgets its role in Washington, D.C., is to serve Americans, not the other way around. Changing parties once every eight years ensures neither the reds nor the blues get too comfortable in power.
When it comes down to the choice between the two top contenders and between hope and despair, there is one clear choice. Barack Obama is the one.
So my fellow Kossacks, there is hope. If the Daily News endorses Obama hell must be freezing over, however warm it was today in Southern California.