Univ. of Texas Newspaper Endorses Hillary Clinton

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 01:49:55 PM EST
Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, 2008 (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Austin, TX is considered one of the most liberal cities in Texas. It is also home to the University of Texas. I always thought it was purely Obama country.

Today, The Daily Texan, the university's newspaper, made it clear that it is endorsing Hillary Clinton for President.

George W. Bush has made a mess of America, and we believe Hillary Clinton is the best person to clean it up. She is prepared and willing to be a leader who is "a lot less hat and a lot more cattle," as she stated during Thursday night's debate.

Clinton is a seasoned politician, and some argue that works against her. But Bush has been wildly successful in destroying every positive function of the machine that is Washington, D.C., and Clinton has the political tools and knowledge to fix it.

More...

Last night's debate hurt Obama in the paper's view:

But during Thursday's debate, Obama made a major gaffe in incorrectly stating that he had received endorsements from every major newspaper in Texas. We may not be considered a "major" paper to many, but we represent a crucial constituency of close to 50,000 young and enthusiastic voters, and we've been scrutinizing every move of the candidates leading up to today's endorsement. Sure, Obama took many under his spell when he graced our city with his presence early in his campaign, but we think he prematurely considered his work in Austin done.

On to substantive issues:

Clinton, while not as dazzling as her opponent, has asserted her presence to us. She has pledged to restore government support to college students by increasing the availability of Stafford Loans and Pell Grants. Her outline for a universal health care system is thorough and sound, while Obama unfairly exploits the resounding term "universal" in terms of his plan, which is voluntary and wouldn't actually serve America in its entirety (like Social Security, policy can only be universal if it is mandatory). Furthermore, Clinton's plans for Iraq ensure a gradual transition to stability for the Middle East.

On the difference between Hillary and Obama,

She's proved to us over and over again that she's ready, even excited, to get her hands dirty. Meanwhile, Obama's curent focus is geared toward winning the nomination, and we need more than hope and rhetoric to be reassured that the critical transition to come with the next presidency will be handled safely.

As to Obama, the paper says he's just not ready yet.

Obama has our confident vote in four (or eight) years' time. But for now, we can't risk trusting the judgment of our hearts. Logically, Hillary Clinton should be the next president of the United States. Under her leadership, we can return to being the great country we once were.

< Accusation: Rove Targeted Siegelman | Playing the Blame Game to Excuse Wrongful Conviction >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Univ. of Texas Newspaper Endorses Hillary Clinton | 54 comments (54 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Not too shabby (5.00 / 4) (#1)
by goldberry on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 01:54:34 PM EST

At least the University of Texas has not lost its head.

: Quite (none / 0) (#39)
by tek on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 03:03:04 PM EST

interesting since Austin is supposed to be tied up for Obama and it's supposed to be the university that is going to hand it to him. Interesting. Too bad there haven't been more rational even-handed op-eds like this one. Clinton would still be the far frontrunner. But the media has to play these stupid games and people ARE very influenced by them. Now they're going to start exposing the dirt on Obama, but it's probably too late.

: Right On UT... (none / 0) (#49)
by john5750 on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 04:42:47 PM EST

I'm happy to see they made their decision based on facts, not rhetoric.
They're straight-thinkers, just what we need in America today.

if what liminal says is true (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by NJDem on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:28:05 PM EST

than I really think HRC should run as the ONLY Democrat in this race fighting for democratic principles, which she believes should include Universal Health Care.

That would really frames it for people, no.

Typical Obama supporter (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by Edgar08 on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:29:27 PM EST

It's just not possible that someone could endorse Clinton cause they actually think she'd make a better president, is it?

My husband pointed out (5.00 / 3) (#20)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:31:37 PM EST

that the editorial board of the UT-Austin must be all caucasian females over the age of 60? Because that's they only Democraphic that comes out for Clinton, right?

Teresa, haven't you heard? (5.00 / 0) (#24)
by kmblue on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:40:58 PM EST

All our votes are in the bag
for Obama. He has said so. ;)


I love the Democraphic (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by g8grl on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:47:48 PM EST

Was that Freudian clever or a typo?


: I'll say Freudian clever (5.00 / 1) (#54)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 05:33:07 PM EST

Only I know for sure ;-).

if I recall correctly (5.00 / 1) (#30)
by NJDem on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:48:25 PM EST

BO quoted a student/college paper in one of his ads (and Iowa paper maybe?). So he must think they hold some weight.

Generally speaking, I don't think endorsements really change votes, but this certainly won't hurt HRC.

: Why, yes, you recall quite correctly (none / 0) (#35)
by Cream City on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:58:35 PM EST

that appalling Obama flyer that quoted the Iowa student newspaper -- the only endorsement in it -- for his health coverage plan and against the Clinton plan. From what I have read since from many Obama supporters, I have decided to not put my trust in them to care for me in my waning years -- as I already am so old in their eyes that I must be waning. I even read here quite recently that I ought not count on Social Security from them, either, although I have paid into it for more than 40 years. And since I currently am helping an Obama voter through college and helping two of that age group with health care coverage, I cannot put much by for those waning years so fast upon me.
I think that when it comes to analyses by the press on economic issues, I will go with Paul Krugman over the Iowa student newspaper. That I find myself in agreement with the UT student newspaper gives me "hope," though, for our future.

HRC didn't plagairize anyone (5.00 / 1) (#31)
by NJDem on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:50:18 PM EST

Can't you see the difference between similar themes expressed in different words and repeating lines verbatim???

Great to wake up this morning (5.00 / 2) (#52)
by masslib on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 05:20:01 PM EST

to this endorsement. Hillary supporters have been marginalized and censored all through out the MSM/blogosphere(not here thank goodness). It's extremely hard to get the word out, especially to young people. Show of hands, how many Hillary supporters have made pro-hillary comments at huffpo only to have them scrubbed? How about CNN/MSNBC blogs? How many daily kos users who support Hill have gone months without the ability to rec/troll comments? It's such a sham. Thanks for reporting on this endorsement and for being a, forgive the phrase, fair and balanced community.

Austin is the most "liberal" city in (5.00 / 1) (#56)
by longhornalumni on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 02:52:41 AM EST

Texas, and most of that belongs to the University of Texas voters. It was the only area that Bush did not win in 2004. I was surprised with the choice by the Daily Texan since Obama fever is fiercest amongst this demographic.

But for those that think this is just another college paper - do your research. More people in Austin read the Daily Texan than the supposed major paper - the Austin Statesman. It is the largest college paper in the nation in terms of pages printed & circulation. And also, as an ex-longhorn, UT is also one of the most diverse in racial demographics as well.

U. of Texas newspaper - endorse Hillary (5.00 / 2) (#58)
by pearharbour on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 11:34:36 AM EST

University of Texas makes me feel so hopeful and proud because it shows that our college students are independent thinkers, not being easily influenced by biased and hateful (towards Hillary) mass media and not being easily convinced by only beautiful speeches without proven record for positive changes that Obama has promised. For any recent college graduates and people looking for a job, they know the Number one criteria for employers to look at are the candidate's relevant experience and proven record. Without solid performance in college and relevant experience and knowledge, it is hard to find a good job in real life. President of the United States is the most important job in the world and is a REAL job, but somehow, Obama's supporters don't think the proven record, experience, and knowledge are so crucial to lead the country and to solve difficult problems and make real positive changes possible. If Obama becomes the President of the United States, it is going to send very negative message to all the young kids and college students - the only thing they have to learn and to do is to win a Speech contest; forget about working hard on all the subjects except taking speech classes. Also, from now on, we really don't have to spend so much money and energy on election. The winner of a national high school student speech contest will be qualified to be the President of the United States since proven experience and actual knowledge doesn't count according to Obama's supporters.

We are not electing a King who does not have a real job and power. We are electing a President who has to work really hard and solve real difficult problems that require extensive experience on issues both domestically and internationally. The only candidate that has the right and extensive experience is Hillary Clinton. I am wondering if some people in this great country somehow are still not ready for a woman President, which is against everything the United States has tried to promote - equal opportunity for everyone.

Vote for Hilary Clinton, please, who has the proven record and experience to make positive changes in our country. We need a doer and fighter - Hillary, who can actually realize the positive changes both Hillary and Obama have promised.

Again, I am really proud of the University of Texas newspaper. Hillary '08

--Pear

Question (none / 0) (#2)
by Saul on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 01:57:47 PM EST

Is this the main news paper of the University?

: yes (none / 0) (#4)
by Jeralyn on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:03:29 PM EST

it is

Clinton's plans for Iraq??? (none / 0) (#3)
by Dadler on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 01:59:32 PM EST

What planet is this editorial board living on? Hillary Clinton hasn't shown a whit of leadership on this issue. Please. If she's that concerend, order a pull out now. But that would mean Iraqis had to fight for their own future, and we don't think they're capable of fighting their own battles for their own nation or nations. Because we don't want them to have what THEY want, we want them to have what WE want, which, right now, is perpetual war.

Obama may be no better since the war has started, but at least he had the intelligence and humanity to AGAINST this fiasco in the first place, which can only lend one to believe he would vote against other fiascos in the future. How anyone can look at Hillary's record on Iraq and be encouraged is beyond me. She will be thugged from the moment she gets in office, if she indeed gets elected, and she had better be able to thug back in an effective manner, whatever that manner is. You think the sexism is bad now, wait until she becomes President. She'll be fighting against the malevolent cocksmanship that has gotten us where we are, and that she in her own way has aided. I'd say she's gonna need balls, but those seem to be a huge part of the problem.

I just want this crap over with. Get a democratic nominee and hold their feet to the progressive fire, whomever they are.

Um, no... (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by cmugirl on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:16:30 PM EST

Obama did NOT vote against the Iraq resolution, as he was not in the Senate. He made ONE speech at an anti-war rally in 2002 where he was against the war, but since he actually got to the Senate, he has consistently voted EVERY TIME to fund the war (as Clinton has - the only vote they differed on was where she voted against making Gen George Casey the Army Chief of Staff). In 2004, he tried to defend John Kerry's vote for the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF): "I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don't know."

He also said that there was no difference between himself and Bush on the war.

SO, IMHO:

Obama is the better candidate, but Clinton would make the better President.


: So (none / 0) (#40)
by tek on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 03:04:43 PM EST

sad that Obama's supporters don't read anything except their favority All Obama All the Time blog.

You (conveniently?) are missing a word (5.00 / 3) (#11)
by Cream City on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:16:45 PM EST

which would, if filled in, tell us more clearly what you think of your candidate's stand. You say he had the intelligence, humanity, etc. to [blank] against the war, which leads you to believe he would vote against war again. Could you fill in that blank, please? Then we can discuss his votes on the war since, his speeches about other areas such as Pakistan since, etc.

But do please keep male genitalia out of the discussion, especially about a woman candidate. If you need help in finding an apt term, we can help. They actually do exist.


There's a difference between (none / 0) (#16)
by JJE on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:27:06 PM EST

not wanting to make a bad situation worse and not wanting to get into the bad situation in the first place. That difference is ignored by those promulgating the fairy tale meme.


Well, ya know... (5.00 / 0) (#25)
by Kathy on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:42:13 PM EST

back in 1998, I said that Google was a good company and that--now, this is the important part--if I'd had the money I certainly would have given it to them to help with the start-up...and yet, I am not now a millionaire. Why is that?


Please clarify (none / 0) (#37)
by JJE on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 03:00:35 PM EST

This analogy seems strained and non-responsive to my point.


It's a good analogy (none / 0) (#44)
by eric on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 03:15:23 PM EST

The analogy is good. You see, back when Obama opposed the war, he gave a speech at an anti-war rally which indicated that he opposed the war. Just like when Kathy said back in 1998 that Google was a good company. But Obama didn't step up and do anything more, just like Kathy didn't step up and invest.


: thank you, eric (none / 0) (#46)
by Kathy on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 03:22:01 PM EST

if only I'd had to put my money where my mouth is.
Oy, I could'a been a contender!

"What planet... (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by kmblue on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:37:08 PM EST

is this editorial board living on?"

Exactly the kind of comment that turns off
potential Obama supporters.

This comment calls someone who doesn't at this point in time support Obama
stupid.

I point this out just to be helpful.


: Good luck with that (none / 0) (#62)
by mediawatcher on Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 10:51:21 PM EST

I have been trying to point out that the "politics of hope" really can't afford to be negative. No success to date. Obama supporters just don't get it. They run an incredibly negative campaign online, then whine when someone points out Obama is, after all, a politician.
I really can't see how he would "change" anything if he can't even get his supporters to portray his message.

sexism (5.00 / 3) (#23)
by eric on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:38:08 PM EST

You think the sexism is bad now, wait until she becomes President.

Did you really just type that? Sexism is bad so we have to avoing putting a woman in a position where she will be affected by that sexism? Yikes.

And boo on all the anatomy references.


: Be (none / 0) (#42)
by tek on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 03:06:01 PM EST

still my heart. I can't wait until she is President, and BTW: what will the sexism matter at that point?

It's a popular delusion Dadler..... (none / 0) (#6)
by kdog on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:06:15 PM EST

Thinking that Clinton or Obama will get us out of that place can only be described as delusional.


this is off topic (none / 0) (#53)
by Jeralyn on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 05:29:17 PM EST

further responses to it will be deleted. Discuss it on an open thread if you want.


Nice (none / 0) (#5)
by Kathy on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:04:29 PM EST

Good to see someone has been paying attention.

Sorry but as a former UT student (none / 0) (#8)
by Jgarza on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:10:00 PM EST

I wouldn't make to much of it. The paper regularly endorsed libertarians, and republicans, even though the UT precinct boxes are all 80-90 percent Dem. On top of that one of the big stories is that she made the remark about Senator Watson in the debate. He is the former Austin mayor and current state senator, and is really popular. It was not a smart move.

They are really (none / 0) (#14)
by Jgarza on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:18:40 PM EST

bad. We used to fight with them. I was in Udems, they would always trash democratic candidates.


: Doesn't really jive with this... (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by americanincanada on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:38:02 PM EST

Actually they are the only newspaper, including the ne endorsng Obama, who didn't also endorse GWB.

Obama's Texas Newspaper Endorsements (none / 0) (#9)
by the biped on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:14:24 PM EST

HOUSTON CHRONICLE
DALLAS MORNING NEWS
SAN ANTONIO EXPRESS
FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM
AUSTIN AMERICAN STATESMAN
EL PASO TIMES
CORPUS CHRISTI CALLER TIMES

Did those papers all endorse GWB? (5.00 / 4) (#13)
by liminal on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:18:14 PM EST

Why yes, yes - I believe they did.

Did the UT-Austen paper endorse GWB?

Why no, no - I believe that they did not.


: Good point, thanks for making it. (none / 0) (#34)
by RalphB on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:55:15 PM EST

The same media that is fawning over Obama (none / 0) (#61)
by mediawatcher on Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 10:39:08 PM EST

was the main cheerleader for the Iraqi war.

Wouldn't put too much faith in the media groupthink nowdays


I also found amusing (none / 0) (#15)
by JJE on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:23:43 PM EST

Their statement that they "represent" a constituency of 50,000 voters. They represent nobody but their editorial board. Newspaper endorsements (including Obama's) are silly, and student newspaper endorsements are even sillier.

Austin liberal? (none / 0) (#27)
by Davebo on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:44:48 PM EST

Well, parts of Austin are liberal, but overall? Not so much really.

Just ask Michael Dell, Lance Armstrong, etc.

Just talked to an Austinite (none / 0) (#36)
by Cream City on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 02:59:55 PM EST

trying to get a new job to get out. A Hispanic who finds it not the rosy place painted for me by others -- those others not being Hispanic. Interesting.


: Austin... (none / 0) (#50)
by sumac on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 04:49:18 PM EST

...has it's fair share of problems (the highway system comes to mind). As far as being liberal or progressive, it is still. But we have seen a massive influx of people move to this city, from Dallas, Houston, all parts of California, etc. It's not the little hippie town it used to be. Indeed, the suburbs are growing and as you move outward you see more and more conservative ideology.
I don't really blame your friend for wanting to leave. It's a very expensive town re Texas standards for living and the job market is tough - we've got a lot of over-educated bartenders.
But here's what I take about the Daily Texan endorsement. It's not that big of a deal (except that the endorsement did come from the college-age demographic) until it gets people talking. And it has done that. I went to their website and saw a lot of anger over the endorsement. But I also saw a fair share of people showing admiration and relief from the endorsement which is, perhaps, brave given the setting? There are UT students who support Hillary, but I think their voice is getting lost, much of it due to peer pressure. What a horrible thought.

why is HRC seen as having an edge on experience? (none / 0) (#38)
by Fisherman Bob on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 03:00:39 PM EST

I would have loved a question put to Hillary last night regarding the status of her campaign and how it may be a reflection of her abilities as an effective, experienced leader. As best I can tell Mrs. Clinton has blown what many thought was an insurrmountable lead in fundraising and endorsements in record fashion. Hillary has been spending her campaign funds like a drunk sailor, and now finds herself in real financial trouble. The most important personnel decisions of her campaign have been a magnificent bust. Who is actually impressed with how she has managed her money, her people or her message? In contrast, for being untested Obama has been thrashing Clinton quite convincingly. If he is such an inexperienced, empty suit, how is it that he can so roundly whip Mrs. Clinton and her "ready on day one' team? The only experience I have seen from HRC is far from impressive.

If campaigning was the same (none / 0) (#47)
by RalphB on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 03:50:54 PM EST

as governing, then George W Bush would have been an excellent president. Need I say more?


: exactly my point (none / 0) (#48)
by Fisherman Bob on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 04:08:12 PM EST

Bush was re-elected with 4 years of "experience" under his belt. What a disaster that has been. My point is if your own campaign is grossly mismanaged, perhaps touting your leadership experience isn't the best tag-line. The apparent swiftness with which HRC's percieved inevitability has evaporated, and the campaign mismanagement that has subsequently emerged, suggests her level of support among many was only an inch deep.

However... (none / 0) (#45)
by Baal on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 03:18:09 PM EST

The University of Houston newspaper, which is far more liberal and which samples a much higher percentage of the urban population that will actually be weighted in this race supported Obama.

"Eloquent, but Empty" "Naive". (none / 0) (#51)
by john5750 on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 04:55:18 PM EST

I think McCain correctly wrapped Obama up in a few words.

We need Hillary and her experience to fight McCain and win.

the problem with describing (none / 0) (#55)
by cpinva on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 06:42:20 PM EST

austin as "liberal" is that, in texas, all that means is that they drink white wine during the lynchings. so i'm not so sure i'd make too much of that endorsement.

Great Job on Your Endorsement (none / 0) (#57)
by Registered Nurses Care on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 10:41:29 PM EST

As a wife, mother, registered nurse, and woman, I believe that Hillary has always dedicated her life to those that are less fortunate. I have been working for 15 years to make sure that quality healthcare is provided to everyone regardless of their ability to pay; therefore, I consider myself an expert in knowing the difference between someone who 'cares' about the underprivileged because of selfish reasons and someone who cares about the underprivileged because they believe with their whole heart, body, and soul that everyone deserves quality healthcare. As a result of my daily interaction with both of these types of people in my personal and professional life, I can say without a shadow of doubt that Hillary cares for and is an advocate for those that can not care for themselves. I would like to thank you for making honest comparisons of both of these candidates and acknowledging that hands down she is the most qualified and experienced to take on this great opportunity to improve the lives of all Americans.

Great article (none / 0) (#59)
by forthepeople on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 04:16:05 PM EST

Thank you University of Texas! Hillary is the right choice and I'm so glad your staff could recognize this. I hear some people say that when they are trying to decide between Hllary and Obama that they are weighing experience against judgement. Well, I' don't kow about you, but it has been my experience that the more experience you have, whether good or bad, the better your judgement is. Most people learn something from every experience they have, which is knowledge, and knowledge is power. So Hillary having had more experience,and knowledge is the only real choice wehave to put in POWER. She is an excellent candidate and you have endorsed the right one. Thanks again.
From GA.
Sonya

Daily Texan Endorses Hillary (none / 0) (#60)
by MOMO on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 10:36:15 PM EST

Yea !!! Just read this & am thrilled. Was this reported in the Austin-American Statesman ? If not, why not ? Shows how intelligent we are at UT. Hook 'em Hillary !

You might want (none / 0) (#63)
by mediawatcher on Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 10:54:32 PM EST

to read the whole endorsement.