Esquire's Endorsement more anti-McCain than pro-Obama

For the first time in its history, Esquire magazine is endorsing a presidential candidate... sorta. Like former President Bill Clinton, the editors at Esquire found it much more difficult to praise Obama than to trash McCain. now that i think about it, i think they really only had a problem with "Presidential Nominee" McCain, not so much with "Senator" McCain.

here's a few of Esquire's anti-McCain comments:
*"That McCain is now attempting to seize the mantle of 'change' for himself is profoundly absurd. And that he expects the American people to swallow it is profoundly insulting."
*"there is no serious debate to be had over Sarah Palin's preparedness to be president of the United States. Because in fact, she is stunningly unqualified...her selection is the clearest indication yet of the contempt that Senator McCain now feels for the process of governance."
*"nothing John McCain has done or said in this campaign would lead you to believe that anything the incumbent administration has done is wrong -- just badly executed -- and he's saying that now only because public opinion has turned so radically against Bushism and all its works. And the ultimate price of his capitulation is to continue Bushism, in all of its manifestations..."

like the Clintons, Esquire hedges their bets by being sheepish in their support of Obama, insisting that he must be the next President simply because he is the only remaining option that leads away from the disastrous policies of the Bush administration, which "must be ripped out, root and branch, everywhere it has been established, or else the presidential election of 2008 is a worthless exercise in futility. Barack Obama may not be the man to do it, but John McCain, for all his laudable qualities, clearly is neither willing nor able to do so..." and that restoring America to its roots "is the task for the next president. That is the main reason to vote for Barack Obama of Illinois. We strongly encourage you to do so."
uno.
-gM