Obama editorial short on substance

Your editorial endorsing Obama is in the spirit of his speeches - long on hot air but short on substance.

I suppose it is wise when defending such a flawed individual to ignore his policies and highlight the superficial. Otherwise, the people would be shaken out of their trance and forced to think.

Is there no one on your editorial staff capable of laying out comparisons between the two candidates and critiquing their positions?

If Obama's positions are so good for the country, why fear presenting them?

Only a fool would vote on the basis of "hope and change" and that is what you are suggesting.

I myself am curious to know how he intends to give a tax cut to 95 percent of the population and increase spending by hundreds of billions of dollars on all his new and wonderful programs by raising taxes on only 5 percent of the population.

Are the 95 percent all current tax payers or will the unproductive also benefit from someone else's labors?

Why is his judgment not questioned for choosing "foot in mouth" Biden, who wanted to partition Iraq, as his running mate?

Are his associations with truly human garbage not to be questioned?

If John McCain had been at the home of a bomber of a black church or an abortion clinic, I am fairly certain that would have been a non starter for you at the Daily Herald.

And finally, given that you in the press have made a concerted effort to elect this man, how will you be able to objectively do your jobs in the next four years? Sorry, that was a stupid question.

John Vercillo

Elk Grove Village