Our newspaper is endorsing Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee for president. He was not our choice over Hillary Clinton but he is better for this country than John McCain. Obama should be victorious given the devastation of America by George Bush. Historically, the party in power that has wrecked the American economy usually loses the presidential election. The Democrats are in a strong position to get the presidency and a veto proof majority in the Congress of the United States.

We do caution our readers that the Southern White Democrats have defected in 2000 and 2004 and joined the Republicans to elect and then re elect Bush respectively. The London Times ran a front page story the day after Bush was elected in 2004, it states, "How can 59 million people be so dumb." That is a concern that many of those who re elected Bush will opt for McCain. We really don’t know if they have had enough of Republicans rule. Our country is destroyed if one looks at the costly war in Iraq, the worthless dollar, the housing crisis, the failed education programs, the price of oil and gasoline, the 42 million citizens without health insurance, and so much more. You would think this should be an easy victory for the Democrats.

Let me introduce you to the Bradley Effect. Tom Bradley, an African American was the mayor of Los Angeles who ran for governor of California. He had a White opponent and the polls leading up to Election Day had Bradley winning with Whites and Blacks by a comfortable margin. The final results had Bradley defeated by his White opponent and everyone was puzzled as to how the polls could be so wrong. The Bradley Effect was termed such because it was felt that Whites lied to the pollsters and when they were given the choice of voting for a Black man versus one who looks like them, they chose the White candidate.

Tom Bradley was a seasoned politician and he was the mayor of L.A. He was very well known and he was a class act and an absolute gentleman. Unlike Barack Obama, who is a virtual unknown, one whose main track record is that he was a community organizer on the South side of Chicago; he served 14 months in the U S Senate, and he was born offshore.

If Whites can re elect Bush, after seeing him destroy the country in his first term as president, they can do almost anything. Barack Obama is a very risky gamble by the Democrats who know full well that our country is still extremely racist and generally anti Black. So the question is why the Democrats would put forth an unknown Black candidate to run against the Republican candidate. It is a dangerous roll of the dice in a time when the Presidency is theirs to lose.

We have to get beyond the Democratic blunder and deal with the nominee that is before us. We have no other choice but to support Barack Obama. When any reasonable observer looks at Mc Cain they see and old man, who makes embarrassing remarks, and he is tied to Bush. We don’t have anything against Barack Obama as a person and as a politician; God knows he has to be good to defeat Bill and Hillary Clinton in the primaries. We just don’t see why those of us who are liberal Democrats are violating "Politics 101," where you never run a Black against a White when the majority of the voters are White. That is so unfortunate but given the level of racism and the number of Whites who don’t like black people, it is mindless to test whether these racist Whites have a change of heart about Black candidates and Black people in general.

Barack Obama has based his campaign on CHANGE. He is the darling of the young Americans, the Hip Hop culture and the "Beautiful People", actors, other musicians, and athletes. He will receive at least 99% of the Black vote in November. He has been embraced by the Democratic leadership and the liberal wing of the Party. What disturbs us is the number of White voters who supported Hillary Clinton in the Democratic Primaries. Take Texas for example, Obama only carried Houston and Dallas [heavy enclaves of Black voters] while Clinton took the rest of Texas.

Many White Democrats voted in large numbers in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and other primary states defeating Obama. Furthermore, Hillary carried the huge industrial states, [CA, NY, NJ, Mass, Texas, Penn, Ohio, RI,]. These were the working class ordinary White Democrats.

If Barack Obama has a problem carrying those voters then there should be some concern by the Democrats whether he can gain White voters who are not Democrats. In other words, the Democrats have to deal with race. When Whites have to choose between a Black candidate and a White candidate, it becomes a serious problem knowing how racist this country is.

In closing, Barack Obama, the man, is not the problem but the real concern is whether or not enough White voters will support this Black candidate. It literally is in their hands and that is not where this newspaper would like to have our people’s future. We of the Observer do not have the faith that so many Blacks have in the White majority doing the right thing by electing a Democrat who happens to be Black.