Leahy Endorses Obama, Saying Clinton’s Not the Best Dem To “Reintroduce” America

Facts matter: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. Support our nonprofit reporting. Subscribe to our print magazine.


PatrickLeahy.jpg The email came in: Barack Obama Campaign about to Announce a Major Endorsement. Who could that be? Al Gore? The campaign was holding a conference call in minutes to break the news. I quickly called in. And the big catch turned out to be….Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont.

This certainly won’t turn the race. But one standard line for Senator Hillary Clinton has been that she has outdrawn Obama in senatorial endorsements. She had bagged ten; he had six. Now Obama has cut her lead by 25 percent. She better watch out!

In the conference call, Leahy gave one reason for picking Obama over Clinton and former Senator John Edwards:

I believe many around the world have lost respect for America….I think we can restore that respect. But we need a president who can reintroduce America to the world.

I asked the obvious question: why did Leahy think that Obama could better reintroduce America than Clinton?

No surprise, he punted. “My endorsement is not in opposition to Senator Clinton or Senator Edwards,” Leahy replied. “I’m looking at who can do this best….We need someone who…can express American values the best.”

Leahy insisted that his decision was not a sign of “disrespect” for Clinton. But stripped of his polite Senate-speak, it was a profound swing at her. Imagine him saying to her face: “You cannot represent America to the rest of the world as well as Obama.” Should she ever become president, Leahy might have to worry about those dairy subsidies for Vermont.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate