Obama is very charismatic and brilliant which is important after Bush. But Hillary ( although part of the so called "old guard") has had training as first lady and senator that no previous candidate has ever had obviously. She has more tension than Obama which may be what people object to....or maybe it is Bill's flaws. However...the country did well then. It was the economy stupid after the 1980 GOP administrations if anyone remembers and Bill and Hillary were in charge when the economy was booming and the treasury got rid of a huge defict and wound up in the black. How does Obama plan to do that? I hope he can learn from the trio of Bloomberg, Schwarzenegger and Rendell who suggest the government repeat a new WPA and create jobs for people while rebuilding our roads, bridges, electric grid, environment etc. So far neither Hillary or Obama has mentioned any plans.......just ideas with no particular implementation.

In addition.....Mc Caine has no ideas at all about the economy. I guess it will be tax breaks for the rich again.

In addition.....although I once liked Mc Cain mostly because he had the human experience of being a POW unlike Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld who never were in harms way. Unfortunately he soon begain to support Bush untill his nose turned brown. He may have some ideas militarily.......but what about the economy? education? healthcare? Being anti terrorist is not enough. His 8 years old possible affairs have nothing to do with the well being of the country. I don't really agree with those who put their head in the ground when it comes to BIGGER issues and concentrate on their own superior value values which often turns out to be a sham.!!!!!

McCain all but has the Republican nomination sewed up and this won't change that. They could have released it just prior to a Presidential election, instead of party elections. This will have little effect on McCain. People care so little about the morality our of our public officials anymore anyway, unfortunately. http://www.phoenix-life-insurance.com

Because the post is full of liberals like the writer of this article, who are experts on repeating things they hear without verifying. I hate liberals, and this is why.

BARACK OBAMA IS COPYING THE CAMPAIGN THEME OF DEVIL PATRICK, FIRST BLACK GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS. PATRICK'S THEME WAS: "YES, WE CAN." HE WON BECAUSE MASSACHUSETTS IS CONTROLLED BY HARDLINE ULTRA-LIBERALS AND HOMOSEXUALS. CONGRESSMAN BARNEY FRANK HAS A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT BECAUSE HE IS AN ULTRA-LIBERAL AND GAY. THEN THERE'S TED KENNEDY AND JOHN KERRY, TWO MORE ULTRA-LIBERAL LIFETIME APPOINTMENTS.

PATRICK IS NOW RAISING TAXES, TOLLS, BRINGING IN CASINOS, AND HAS A BUDGET DEFICIT OF $1.5 BILLION. HE SAYS THE STATE CAN'T AFFORD THE NEW MANDATORY HEALTH INSURANCE. WHAT A MESS! AND THAT'S NOT EVEN COUNTING THE MASSACHUSETTS LIBERALS "MORAL" MANTRA: ABORTION, EMBRYONIC STEM CELL DESTRUCTION, EUTHANASIA, GAY MARRIAGE. REMEMBER, MASSACHUSETTS IS THE ONLY STATE IN THE COUNTRY TO ALLOW GAY "MARRIAGE."

BEWARE OF ANY POLITICIAN WHO RUNS HIS CAMPAIGN ON GENERALIZATIONS AS BARACK OBAMA IS DOING: "YES, WE CAN! LET'S UNITE! DIVERSITY IS UNITY!" ETC., ETC. ALL 300 MILLION AMERICANS COULD RUN ON THOSE CLICHES. IT MEANS BARACK OBAMA DOESN'T KNOW WHAT HE IS DOING, HAS NO PLAN, AND WILL TRY TO LEARN ON THE JOB WHILE HIS ULTRA-LIBERAL "ADVISERS" RUN THE COUNTRY; LIKE WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW IN MASSACHUSETTS.

In response to:
"One has to wonder why the Times editorial staff would endorse a candidate whose judgment was being questioned by its top political reporters. "

The NYT endorsed McCain, not because he was a good candidate. The editorial made it clear that on the Republican side, McCain was the best among the bad.