Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

In Philly, Conservative Talk Radio Host Backs Obama

October 17, 2008 3:44 PM

On his talk show on WPHT today, conservative Philadelphian Michael Smerconish endorsed Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.

Listen HERE.

Smerconish did so by reading a couple paragraphs from his pending op-ed in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

"I’ve decided," he said. "My conclusion comes after reading the candidates’ memoirs and campaign platforms, attending both party conventions, interviewing both men multiple times, and watching all primary and general election debates.
 
"John McCain is an honorable man who has served his country well. But he will not get my vote. For the first time since registering as a Republican 28 years ago, I’m voting for a Democrat for president.

"I may have been an appointee in the George H.W. Bush administration, and master of ceremonies for George W. Bush in 2004, but last Saturday I stood amidst the crowd at an Obama event in North Philadelphia," says the Republican.

Smerconish has given us some more from his op-ed: 

"Terrorism. The candidates disagree as to where to prosecute the war against Islamic fundamentalists. Barack Obama is correct in saying the front line in that battle is not Iraq, it’s the Afghan-Pakistan border. Osama bin Laden crossed that border from Tora Bora in December 2001, and we stopped pursuit. The Bush administration outsourced the hunt for bin Laden and, instead, invaded Iraq.
 
"No one in Iraq caused the death of 3,000 Americans on 9/11. Our invasion was based on a false predicate, so we have no business being there, regardless of whether the surge is working. Our focus must be the tribal-ruled FATA region in Pakistan. Only recently has our military engaged al-Qaeda there in operations that mirror those Obama was ridiculed for recommending in August 2007.
 
"Last spring, Obama told me, 'It’s not that I was opposed to war [in Iraq]. It’s that I felt we had a war that we had not finished.'  Even Sen. Joe Lieberman conceded to me just last Friday that 'the headquarters of our opposition, our enemies today,' is the FATA."

Smerconish is taking a lot of heat from his fellow GOPers, as one might imagine.

- jpt

October 17, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (283)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Folks,

It is an MSNBC play. Frankly, who cares what he thinks... People get a life.

If you live in Philly, listen to WIP in the AM.


best

Posted by: John Baumiester | Oct 20, 2008 4:25:52 PM

Smerconish is as phony as they come. He makes his living off the backs of conservative listeners then double crosses them by giving fuel to the liberals . It's no wonder people like him back Obama...Phony attracts Phony

Posted by: Stephen J Montemuro | Oct 20, 2008 3:57:50 PM

The fact that so many people on here make far far less then 250,000 have the nerve to complain about a 3% tax increase that has nothing to do with there broke butts is hilarious. Stop it already with the nonsense I mean now its about Joe the Plumber oh please. John Mac and the rest of you nut jobs need to find a message and stick to it period Mac never denies wanting to give a 300 billion credit to the big boys and we've seen where that has gotten us over the last 8 years. So Mac wants to take your tax dollars and give it to the wealthy and Obama wants to tax the wealthy and give it to you but beause he's black you just cant vote for him and you go against your own interest. My new name for Mac supporters is simply IDIOT

Posted by: kai | Oct 19, 2008 11:30:33 PM

As a resident of the Philadelphia Suburbs, I can vouch for the fact that Smerconish will take more heat for this choice than anything that he's done in his career..For the most part, voters for Obama fall into 2 camps: 1. The Obama supporters who see the candidate as the "transformational" figure that was referenced by Colin Powell.. 2. The reluctant Obama supporters who have been pushed towards him by McCain's own actions and temperment.....I believe that Smerconish (like Powell) believes in the upside of Obama...He would have loved to see McCain select Tom Ridge who is representative of the type of Republican suburbanites here respect..He likes Obama's temperment (certainly not his policies) so he needed McCain to be the McCain of 2000..Make no mistake, McCain's selection of Sarah Palin has given Moderates reason to pause and say "why not go for hope?"...This is the reason why McCain is down double-digits in Pennsylvania. The population growth AND the votes, reside in the Eastern part of PA....The GOP will not win PA this year. There are simply too many "Michael Smerconish Republicans" here.

Posted by: TruthHurts | Oct 19, 2008 9:30:23 PM

If Mr is hurt in anyway shape or form, Mr McCain and Ms Pallin will be blamed.
Mr McCain has sold his soul to the devil in an effort to become president. If this man is this desperate then it says an aweful lot about how he would govern this Country.

Posted by: Sherly | Oct 19, 2008 5:26:18 PM

LOL @ the person citing terrorist attacks that happened during Democratic administrations as if ***9/11*** didn't happen while Bush was in office. The selective reading of history by right wingers would be comical if it wasn't so destructive.

And wasn't Reagan in office when he cut and ran out of Lebanon after 200+ Marines were blown to bits? Yup, sure was.

Chew on that...

Posted by: alan | Oct 19, 2008 3:37:26 AM

Hi Reno: I don't know McCain or Palin either, so my not knowing Obama isn't going to bother me any. However, I have been exposed to the policies of all the candidates, and that's what I'm going to vote on. If the allegation that he's not even eligible to be POTUS is true, then so what? The Constitution is pretty specific about who can be POTUS, so he'll be removed from office, and Biden will step in. Sounds like the Constitution has this dilemma covered.

I'm more concerned that the Republican party has become a shadow of its former glory. It caters to its extremist members without trying to connect to the moderates, who make up the vast majority of the country. We're left to vote for Obama because we feel 'included' in his plans, whereas the Republicans appear to include only xenophobic Christian Extremists. It used to be, in Reagon's time at least, that you could be Republican and not fanatically religious. You could still be a likable Republican. Look at Michael J. Fox's character in Family Ties, as an example.

Posted by: Quin | Oct 19, 2008 3:24:22 AM

I am a supporter of thoughtful and forward-looking Republicans such as Richard Lugar and, at one time, John McCain. I am also a supporter of thoughtful and forward-looking Democrats.

I seriously considered voting for McCain this year - before he chose Palin, and before he demonstrated that he is incapable of managing a crisis and incapable of leading even his own campaign, much less our country.

Instead of LEADING, setting an example of ethics and good governance and forcing his campaign and party to go along, instead of uniting us as a country in order to address the dangerous challenges ahead, McCain threw away leadership and surrendered to the incredibly wasteful and destructive policies of his Rovian campaign advisors, to his zero-experience VP candidate and, more recently, to the ragged, rabid fringes of the GOP.

When John McCain did these things, he showed what kind of a leader he would be as president. And in doing so, he threw away my vote.

The contrast between Obama's leadership, hope, thoughtfulness and effectiveness on the one hand, and the "followership," divisiveness, anger, mindlessness and ineffectuality of the McCain campaign could not be more clear.

We will always remember Bush for his ability to bring the absolute worst out of everyone around him. McCain is heading down this track; Palin is already there. Obama, thus far, is exactly the opposite. As we observe his campaign,it is clear that through his forethought, his ability to learn from others and from his own experience, and his ability to disagree without judging others, Obama brings out the best in those around him.

These are the qualities we need to rescue the ship of our beloved United States from the vicious reefs on which it has run aground under Bush and Cheney.

Thank you, Mr. Smerconish, for endorsing Barack Obama. I am sure you will be attacked by a pack of rabid and angry GOP partisans. But you did the right thing.

Posted by: WS | Oct 19, 2008 3:02:51 AM

If everyone 'knows' so much about Obama, other than the propaganda trickled out by his campaign, why has he sealed ALL of his records from:

Occidental College in CA.
Columbia University
Harvard Law School
as editor, Harvard Law Review
term as Illinois Senator
time as law professor in Illinois
clients at law firm in Illinois

He cites many of these as his resume of experience but he isn't proud of any of his accomplishments that he would put them out there for public scrutiny? No articles he wrote for the Law Review? No thesis from Columbia or Harvard?
He even refuses to produce a valid, legal copy of his birth certificate or proof of citizenship regained after he was adopted (or claimed) by his stepfather in Indonesia. Such a simple and innocuous thing to present, a certified legal birth certificate, and yet he hasn't in all this time since he has been running for POTUS. I find it very curious and troubling that he would possibly risk a Constitutional crisis if he is elected and then the truth comes out that he wasn't eligible to run because he wasn't a 'naturalized' citizen as it is spelled out in the Constitution. Do you REALLY know everything you should know about the man known as Barack Hussein Obama AKA: Barry Soetoro or just what he wants you to know before he is elected?

Posted by: Reno | Oct 19, 2008 2:05:31 AM

I hope that developments like this are portents of a coming restructuring of our political system, beginning with the dissolution of the existing "Republican" and "Democratic" coalitions.

"Hardcore patriots" and evangelical Christians should be considering other political avenues besides continuing to serve the narrow financial interests (the "Mammonists") that are at the heart of the Republican Party, and that have been taking advantage of them for years. Small-government Libertarian Republicans should also leave the GOP, and return to their natural home, the Libertarian Party.

Conservative "Blue Dogs" and DLC Democrats should divorce themselves from the more liberal "Wellstone wing" and ally themselves with moderate Republicans (like Chaffee, Specter, etc.) in forming a truly centrist, technocratic party. This would enable both groups to better speak their own minds without worrying about the other.

When the dust settles, we would end up with seven or eight distinct and well-defined parties, able to form coalitions on specific issues as appropriate. And while multiparty democracy has its own problems (just ask Italy), I believe that it will provide a great improvement over the current, obsoloete two-party duopoly.

Posted by: Skip Mendler | Oct 18, 2008 11:01:37 PM

Strange how the people who were so full of support for Bush now support the man running away from him..full speed.

Will all those who support McCain and insist Obama is such an evil person, tell me why McCain speaks of him as honorable and decent? . McCain thinks its honorable to "pal around with terrorists" Or does he just say this because he wants to score political points with such talk? Or is he just a liar or a coward?

Posted by: Vietnameravet | Oct 18, 2008 6:29:37 PM

Wow, all these Republicans shouting too loud in these replies. As strident as McCain-Palin. I've had enough of Bush-Cheney stridency. I, and most of America I suspect, will vote for calm and rationality, and that'd be Obama-Biden. A safe America with Obama, not a crackpot America under McCain-Palin-Bush!

Posted by: buzziea | Oct 18, 2008 3:54:42 PM

Hey warguy, it's a different day and age now. Slick Willy Clinton is the new face of liberals. When faced with multiple acts of terrerism he opted to sit back and get a BJ. When Syria offered to give him Bin Laden he said NO Thanks and instead signed NAFTA into law. Oh BTW Clinton was the one who signed into law the legislation that let banks make the very loans that are killing the financial institutions today. We're not saying that the Dems haven't had some great leaders, Just not lately. Oh and one more thing, LIncoln was a Republican.

Posted by: Bob M | Oct 18, 2008 3:03:32 PM

WWII was won by a soldiers following the orders of a liberal President. Learn history.

Posted by: warguy | Oct 18, 2008 2:50:11 PM

Here's the main issue...dems talk a great game, but history is littered with the after effect of democratic policy. Just to name a few... democrats intro. Jim Crow, war profiteering in Vietnam (lady bird/Bell Helicopter), and not one but 3 terrorist attacks (USS Cole '00, Khobar Towers '95, World Trade Center '93).

If conservatism equals hate, then liberal equals disaster.

Posted by: chicagogal | Oct 18, 2008 2:22:49 PM

You Christians, Jews, and Patriots are complete idiots. Your god is done, Obama is our God now. Get used to it. He knows what is best for all of us. The sooner you learn that the better off we will all collectively be. Power to the People (the poor people of course), forget all you morons who pay your taxes, feed your kids without gov't help, and pray to your false God. There is a new revolution in this country and you and your stupid freedoms are finished. Silly republicans, you think your color is RED, you have not seen the shade of red that is coming. Workers of the Would Unite and stop this crazy freedom thing.

Posted by: C. Marx | Oct 18, 2008 2:15:27 PM

Rather to vote for the fraud at the top of the ticket?

You 'Republicans for Obama' contingent might consider this. Before the hoopla of the past year, McCain = moderate republican, Obama = most liberal democrat, Bush = hate him. McCain is not Bush. I will gamble McCain doesn't die in office vs giving the pres and congress over to dirty Harry, Pelosi, and Obama.

Posted by: Nut Job | Oct 18, 2008 2:11:10 PM

Welcome to the club. The current Republican party serves two constituencies: (1) Christian fundamentalists who want church and state to be integrated, rather than separated, and (2) misguided neoconservative foreign policy types who are more interested in reshaping the Middle East than in vanquishing Al Qaeda and its affiliates. That McCain had to pick the laughably unqualified Palin as his VP to satisfy both constituencies says it all. The rest of us are not sheep, and we can't in good conscience vote for the fraud that is Sarah Palin.

Posted by: frontstreet | Oct 18, 2008 2:05:10 PM

As a former Republican(now Independent 40 something white male) I can understand where he's coming from. It is the Republicans who have created this new brand of Communist Capitalism we now live under(trillions spent to socialize banks). They have doubled the national debt in 7 1/2 short years by 5 trillion. They have grown our government to unprecedented levels. They have made horrendously bad national security decisions(Iraq). And of course done just about nothing to change the social issues they hypocritically spout off about all of the time to get votes. They need to be taught a lesson by all good libertarian and conservative types out there so they can get their bearings back. I'm voting Obama too.

Posted by: HawkinCA | Oct 18, 2008 1:58:05 PM

I have watched Micheal Smerconish on MSNBC for the past year or so, and he has always been fair to both sides. He is a smart guy who looks beyond party to find the value in someone's ideas. It's sad that the Republican party has sold itself to the extremist nuts and have gotten away from good political values that are good for the country. It is now appears to embrace a sort of fascisistic ideology that repudiates and denounces anyone who speaks out against it. Perhaps the party that is always frothing at the mouth about who is patriotic and what is patriotism, will understand that it is about the nation not about the party. Republicans should be proud that Smerconish had the guts to speak his truth even if it costs him the supports of some zealots who value blind allegiance instead of discernment.

Posted by: Hope | Oct 18, 2008 1:57:17 PM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS