SLATE Staff Endorsements: 45 Kerry, 4 other - Please Read!

[liberalpragmatist]

The "other" includes a couple Bush votes, a Cobb vote, and a Badnarik vote.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2108714/

Some great endorsements, some crappy ones.

1. Good summation of the case against Bush:
Scott Moore, General Manager of the MSN News and Information Division: Kerry

I voted for Bush/Cheney in 2000 because I believed they would implement better economic policies than Gore would have. And frankly, I couldn't stand the thought of being lectured by Professor Gore for four years. As a business person, I judge job performance on the basis of results and I hold people accountable for their commitments. After four years Dick & W, I have just two words for you: "You're fired!"

The administration's record is an utter failure. Its litany of sins include a net loss of U.S. jobs, an anemic business recovery and record oil prices, explosion of the budget deficit, alienated allies in Europe, a disastrous adventure in Iraq entered into on false pretenses without a credible plan for winning the peace, and failure to kill or capture OBL. On top of that we've had to endure the disgraceful spectacles of Bush boasting "mission accomplished" (uh, no); Cheney equating a vote for Kerry with a vote for terror (gee, that's subtle); and a president seemingly unable to acknowledge reality, let alone change policy in the face of setbacks (inflexibility is anathema to leadership).

The extent to which Bush/Cheney has made fear of terror the centerpiece of their re-election campaign is truly pathetic. Great American leaders don't emphasize the negative in the world; they emphasize America's values, its history and its capacity for doing good works at home and abroad. These times demand strong positive leadership. I don't know if John Kerry can provide it, but I'm certain George W. Bush hasn't and won't. In a time of war, I'm ready to give a man who voluntarily and bravely served his country in combat and in the Senate a chance.

2. Nice, simple statements:

Jim Holt, Contributor: Kerry

Let me cite one relatively marginal reason: Kerry opposes the death penalty. In doing so, he passes a test of rationality and moral decency that every other Republican and Democratic presidential candidate has failed for at least the last three elections.

David Greenberg, Contributor: Kerry

I'm voting for Kerry. He's intelligent, honorable, able, hard-working and (shh!) liberal, which means I agree with him on most of the issues that matter. But politics aside, I'd vote for practically anyone instead of Bush, because I don't think he really believes in democracy. Why do I say this? Let me refer you, if I might, to what I wrote about Bush over the summer in The New Yorker and the Washington Monthly.

3. Most Idiotic Statement:

Steven Landsburg, Economic Writer: Bush

If George Bush had chosen the racist David Duke as a running mate, I'd have voted against him, almost without regard to any other issue. Instead, John Kerry chose the xenophobe John Edwards as a running mate. I will therefore vote against John Kerry.

Duke thinks it's imperative to protect white jobs from black competition. Edwards thinks it's imperative to protect American jobs from foreign competition. There's not a dime's worth of moral difference there. While Duke would discriminate on the arbitrary basis of skin color, Edwards would discriminate on the arbitrary basis of birthplace. Either way, bigotry is bigotry, and appeals to base instincts should always be repudiated.

Bush's reckless spending and disregard for the truth had me almost ready to vote for Kerry—until Kerry picked his running mate. When the real David Duke ran against a corrupt felon for governor of Lousiana, the bumper stickers read, "Vote for the crook. It's important." Well, I'm voting for the reckless spendthrift. It's important again.

4. Biggest Dicks:

Timothy Noah, Senior Writer: Kerry

Sen. John Kerry is the least appealing candidate the Democrats have nominated for president in my lifetime. I'm 46, so that covers Kennedy, Johnson, Humphrey, McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, and Gore. McGovern, Mondale, and Dukakis get the worst press in this bunch, but I liked all three of them and still do. I can't pretend to like John Kerry. He's pompous, he's an opportunist, and he's indecisive. Although I'm impressed by Kerry's combat record in Vietnam, I can't suppress the uncharitable suspicion that what drew him there wasn't patriotism so much as a preppy passion for physical challenge and the urge to buff his future political resume.

Jacob Weisberg, Editor: Kerry

I remain totally unimpressed by John Kerry. Outside of his opposition to the death penalty, I've never seen him demonstrate any real political courage. His baby steps in the direction of reform liberalism during the 1990s were all followed by hasty retreats. His Senate vote against the 1991 Gulf War demonstrates an instinctive aversion to the use of American force, even when it's clearly justified. Kerry's major policy proposals in this campaign range from implausible to ill-conceived. He has no real idea what to do differently in Iraq. His health-care plan costs too much to be practical and conflicts with his commitment to reducing the deficit. At a personal level, he strikes me as the kind of windbag that can only emerge when a naturally pompous and self-regarding person marinates for two decades inside the U.S. Senate. If elected, Kerry would probably be a mediocre, unloved president on the order of Jimmy Carter. And I won't have a second's regret about voting for him. Kerry's failings are minuscule when weighed against the massive damage to America's standing in the world, our economic future, and our civic institutions that would likely result from a second Bush term.

***

You've all heard about Christopher Hitchen's flip-flop, already. So I didn't feel the need to reprint it here.

[elsiesummers]

1. I liked the endorsements of Jon Katz, Scott Moore and Robert Neubecker.

These endorsements are all pragmatic.
They also point out areas in which someone who might have once supported Bush, if they are thinking rather than listening to Fox or talk radio hype, would have to be dissillusioned by the distance between what Bush said and what he has done.

Also liked William Salletan for having gotten it right all along.

Have to agree that some of the snide (like your category four - Noah and Weisberg) "we can't stand this mannerism" remarks, including a couple of shivs in there at Gore, are annoying. This pettiness is a microcosim of greater problems with the media, in general. So tired of the "which one would you want to drink a beer with approach." I feel quite sure that if many of them judge their spouses or significant others by these arbitrary standards they remain perpetually dissatisfied.

On that note, I'm dissappointed at the overall lack of enthusiasm of many of the Kerry voters. I just don't get that. It's not like Kerry just won the primary (he was my fourth choice, but I'm genuinely pleased with him as a candidate). He really has been a remarkably strong candidate from the first debate onward. They need to get over their quirky judgementality - especially the pundit types like Noah, Weisberg and Kaus.

The permanent dissatisfaction becomes a bore.

edited - category four