he's the man... told ya so.

the endorsements are rolling in... newspapers are picking their candidates for the us election in 14 days time. john kerry has picked up 48 newspapers in total (with a combined 8,935,195 daily circulation). the biggest so far has been the new york times, the only national paper to have endorsed a candidate till now. george w. bush has the endorsements of 34 newspapers (with a total of 4,776,231 daily circulation).
interestingly, national review online reports that the lone star iconoclast, george w. bush's hometown paper, is backing john kerry this year. that's a change from 2000 when the weekly endorsed the hometown boy. it's impossible to know how much influence the crawford, texas, weekly's endorsement will have on its 425 subscribers, but no one expects the state of texas to end up in the democratic column next month. john kerry's hometown paper the lowell sun, a larger daily, recently endorsed george w. bush. it's safe to say that massachusetts won't go republican.

and, in a break with tradition, the tampa tribune, a republican standard-bearer for decades, has refused to endorse a candidate for us president for the first time since 1964. the newspaper has solidly supported every republican presidential nominee since 1952, except for barry goldwater, but withheld its endorsement this year, calling the decision "achingly difficult" and blaming shortcomings of both candidates. editors instead published an unusual full-page editorial with harsh criticism of the war in iraq and president george bush's economic policies.

now, i said i’d think this weekend about why i’m so heavily invested in kerry winning.
i didn’t. instead, i read most of the endorsements for him so far and realized that these editors and journalists could put into words what i couldn’t.

this one, from the san jose mercury news, sums it all up nicely:
the argument for electing john kerry president is straightforward. he would be a more responsible president than george w. bush. kerry would be more responsible in maintaining america's standing among other nations, without sacrificing its independence or risking its security. he would be more responsible in reversing the plunge to record budget deficits. he would be a more responsible in protecting the environment. bush does not merit another four years as president. a part of our recommendation of kerry is simple: he is not bush. but kerry is a good choice on his own merits as well.kerry is better prepared to step into the presidency than bush was four years ago. at every stage of his life, kerry has been a man of serious purpose. in vietnam, he signed up to fight despite his doubts. after vietnam, he protested the war, which was neither easy nor popular. in the senate, he investigated iran-contra and paved the way to better relations with vietnam (along with sen. john mccain). kerry and mccain dispelled the myth of prisoners of war being held in vietnam, still a political flash point at the time. their work opened the door to diplomatic and economic ties. yes, kerry is sometimes verbose and vague. sometimes it is a fault. bush has been deriding kerry as a flip-flopper over his senate votes that appear to be both for and against the war in iraq. in part, the charge is a canard from a president who has changed his own mind numerous times. in part, kerry's changing votes are explained by evolving circumstances. the case for war was different when the president sought authorization for it than when he sought $87 billion to sustain it. nonetheless, kerry has given voters some reason to wonder if he would be decisive enough as president. we believe he would. presidents grow to fill the office.while indecision is not a virtue in a president, an ability to understand issues in all their complexity is. the world is not the black-and-white tv show bush seems to think it is.kerry understands that the war on terror involves choices just as every other struggle does. the war in iraq was a choice that diverted resources from the effort to wipe out al-qaida and osama bin laden in afghanistan. he understands that the war in iraq isn't simply spreading freedom, it's spreading anti-americanism in the muslim world. on foreign policy, kerry is firmly within the decades-long american tradition of working within alliances, because a group is stronger than any of the members individually. with 19 years on the senate foreign relations committee, kerry has the grounding a new president will need to immediately begin re-establishing america's standing in the world. on the home front, kerry at least offers some hope of restoring fiscal sobriety and tax fairness. he would revoke bush's income-tax cuts for families with incomes above $200,000. first, it would stop the pretense that the country can spend more and tax less. second, rather than accelerate the growing gap between rich and poor, kerry's tax policy would ask more of those who are doing best economically. but it would be a mistake to simply plow that money into a health care plan as he says he would do, instead of reducing the bush budget deficits. health care requires a different, more significant - and likely far more expensive - national solution.to judge by the lawmakers silicon valley sends to sacramento and washington, the domestic agenda of the bush administration is at odds with the kind of society people here desire.kerry would be genuinely compassionate toward the poor. he would protect civil rights, including abortion rights. he would halt bush's erosion of environmental regulations. one area where we disagree with kerry - at least with what he has said in the campaign - is trade. his "benedict arnold ceos'' and other tirades against jobs moving overseas betray either economic ignorance or campaign pandering. at least his senate record is better than his recent rhetoric.george bush likes to remind voters that "you know where i stand.'' it's not always true. too often when it is, it's not where we think the country ought to be. john kerry is in the right place. americans should put him in the white house.

‘kerry’s papers’ so far (from his endorsement page):
the new york times, boston globe, minneapolis star-tribune, san francisco chronicle, miami herald, st. petersburg times (fla.), kansas city star (mo.), the sacramento bee (calif.), san jose mercury news, dayton daily news (ohio), palm beach post, the beacon journal (ohio), lexington herald leader (ky.), daytona beach news journal (fla.), roanoke times (va.), the modesto bee (ca.), south florida sun-sentinel, the register-guard (ore.), duluth news tribune (minn.), the st. louis american, bradenton herald (fla.), the muskegon chronicle (mich.), the daily camera (colo.), grand forks herald (n.d.), mail tribune (ore.), columbia daily tribune (mo.), the daily reflector (n.c.), nevada appeal, livingston county press & argus (mich.), florida today, las vegas mercury, citizen's advocate newspaper (coppell, texas), the albuquerque tribune, the philadelphia inquirer, st. louis post-dispatch, seattle post-intelligencer, the oregonian (portland, ore.), portland press herald (portland, me.), the atlanta journal-constitution, detroit free press, arizona daily star (tucson, ariz.), the lone star iconoclast (crawford, texas), the day (new london, conn.), the press democrat (santa rosa, calif.), the seattle times, the philadelphia daily news.

what made my day today: stiff after jogging. a good stiff :)

*now listening to: nothing, really.