Financial Times endorses Obama  

Well, that says a lot doesn't it? Granted, I don't take endorsements overly seriously because only I can decide who is the right person for me to support. But, once in a while, there will be an endorsement that catches my attention.

Recently, there was the video put out by Ron Howard wherein he re-enacts roles he played on television while talking about the election. Also in the video were Andy Griffith and Henry Winkler. That got my attention because none of those three is known to be political activists in any way. They keep their politics private and allow others the same privilege. So, for them to get out and do this meant that they felt VERY strongly about the upcoming election. I'm more likely to listen to people who don't impose their opinions on me than others who are constantly shoving one perspective or another down my throat (regardless of side).

Now comes the Financial Times, not exactly known, that I'm aware, for its left-leaning ways, openly supporting Obama for President. This even after "all the President's men" managed to secure a $700 billion bailout of Wall Street (who have proven themselves to be the leeches most of us have imagined since they now want to use that money for executive bonuses and raises, not refinancing their companies). So, to me, that is an attention getter, one that I have made strong note of.

Here is the link: http://rawstory.com/news/...

I'm just curious, though. Do you see these things the same as I do? Do you take note of things like this?