Largest newspapers in Texas endorse Obama in primary.

I find it interesting that the seven largest newspapers in Texas have all endorsed Obama in the Democratic primary.

Excerpts from some of these endorsements set out some of the differences between Obama and Hillary that I have been trying to explain.

Austin American-Statesman

Look closely at the two Democratic front-runners for president and you will see similarities in how they address challenging problems confronting the country.

Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois both talk about strengthening the middle class, expanding economic growth and lifting sagging wages. Both offer solutions for the crisis in our health care system and global warming and support ending the war in Iraq. So the key differences between the candidates are in their leadership styles and visions for the country.

Obama presents a view of governing that is inclusive and relies on Americans to work with their government to solve sobering problems at home and abroad. Obama’s familiar refrain on the campaign trail is, “Yes, we can.”

By contrast, Clinton promotes a self-centered governing style that drives home what she would do as president. She asks little of Americans and discourages opposing views. Clinton has moved from her position as first lady that it “takes a village” to solve problems to it takes only Hillary (and maybe Bill).

Those contrasts offer a clear choice: Barack Obama. His optimism, unifying vision and ability to inspire are the kind of healing balm the country needs at this moment in history.

(emphasis added).

Corpus Christi Caller-Times

The differences on policy issues between Obama and Clinton are all but neglible. Both offer similar positions on universal health insurance, the Iraq war, the economy, immigration reform and the other major issues. The difference is how they would approach the presidency. Clinton is a two-term senator and former first lady. The 60-year-old Clinton touts her experience as the edge. Obama, the choice of the Editorial Board, brings something to American politics that has been missing for a long time: the ability to inspire. The campaign of the 46-year-old Illinois senator has demonstrated his ability to bring new voters to the polls in every primary held so far. This is evidence of Obama's ability to reawaken faith in representative democracy among Americans sick of leadership that depends on division and demonizing of opponents.

*******

These are difficult issues to grapple with and they demand a broad and inclusive effort from the entire American political spectrum to arrive at solutions. This is the appeal of Obama. His candidacy is rooted in the notion that politics can be about solutions, not divisions, that elected leaders are elected to lead, not to drive wedges between groups of Americans. This is a chance to break from the past.

*******

But what her candidacy can't offer is a bridge from the past to the future. She offers a list of answers to a list of any possible policy questions, but what is missing is an over-arching sense of mission for Americans, other than restoring a bygone era. For Clinton, every issue must have an enemy -- oil companies, the rich, insurance companies, a corporate oligarchy, and on and every enemy must be vanquished. Beating up on a political enemy doesn't educate children, comfort the aged or ease the anxieties of economically stressed families.

Clinton, in a criticism that is likely to surface again in the fall if Obama is the Democratic nominee, belittles his candidacy as riding on mere beautiful speeches. This misses one of the most important jobs an American president has, the ability to move Americans toward a unifying theme, to instill courage and boldness. There is a whole Congress to legislate. A president, with his cabinet and administration, must plunge into the sausage-making of negotiating bills. But only the president can inspire, can call Americans to sacrifice and to unity. Of this, there has been precious little for a long time.

(emphasis added).

Houston Chronicle

The presidency of the United States is a powerful bully pulpit. The occupant of the White House must not only issue orders, but also inspire and advocate for all Americans.

Of the two finalists for the Democratic presidential nomination, the Chronicle believes Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois is best-qualified by life experience, skill and temperament to be the standard bearer for his party.

*******

Those who have viewed the numerous campaign debates know there's not much to separate Obama from his opponent, Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York. Either could ably represent the Democratic Party.

*******

However, there is a decisive difference. Obama vows to reach out to independents and Republicans with a message of inclusion and cooperation. He offers a historic opportunity to elevate national political dialogue to a higher ground. Those who insist on vitriol and obstructionism would be marginalized.

(emphasis added).

San Antonio Express-News

America needs a president that tries to create unity out of diversity, marshalling all the forces — red, blue or purple — that make this country great.

Sen. Barack Obama is the Democratic candidate that offers the best chance to reach that lofty objective.

*******

The rivals differ little when it comes to their positions, except on health care; Clinton favors mandated insurance, while Obama proposes a system that is affordable for everyone, leaving it up to the individuals to decide whether they want to sign up.

But the main difference comes down to approach. Obama expresses a message of hope that emphasizes what is good for the country, not the party.

*******

In addition, Clinton and her husband are running a campaign that has been, at turns, nasty and undignified. The Clinton team's win-at-all-costs approach is a turnoff to many voters, who are ready to leave today's dysfunctional political culture behind.

(emphasis added).

I will expound upon the views expressed herein in a subsequent post.