Contrast that with some of the wild charges, both ideologically and personally, leveled against him in the recent campaign.
To anyone who watched the telecast, he (and his wife) certainly came across as intelligent, moderate, humorous and likeable.
Time will tell, of course, what path he follows as president, but we predict even his staunchest opponents will be surprised by the degree of moderation and goodwill.
What is the basis of that prediction?
It's really quite simple -- taking a moderate approach to governance is the intelligent thing to do and Barack Obama is an intelligent man.
One of the key parts of the telecast Sunday night was Obama's statement that he won't let ideology dictate his course -- he is looking for "what works". And that is exactly what the American people want to hear at this time.
He may steal some ideas from Franklin Roosevelt and he may borrow some from Ronald Reagan -- if they are practical and successful.
Naturally, regardless of how one voted Nov. 4, all realize the magnitude of the problems facing the nation (and the world) and this time. With that in mind, both friend and foe of the new president understand he faces a daunting task.
We hope, and trust, the American people will support him in his efforts to deal with the serious domestic and international issues we face as a nation.
Of course, we mean that in the general sense of having an open mind and wishing him well. We understand the tradition, and need, for a "loyal opposition" in our system of government -- one that operates on the tried and true concept of checks and balances.
The two-party system is indeed an historical part of that checks and balances tradition and it works well, as long as it doesn't go too far. Most Americans probably believe it has "gone extreme" in recent times with excessive partisanship emerging as a national problem.
With that in mind, George W. Bush ran as a "uniter, not a divider" in 2000 and the American people (and the world) were solidly behind him at one point following the 9-11 attack. One can look through the files of this newspaper and find our own clearly-stated support for him following his excellent address to Congress at that time. For whatever reason, and we suspect some of his closest advisers were to blame (can you say Rove-Cheney?), he decided to go down a different path that led to discord and bitterness.
Obama has been measured and magnanimous in his comments following the election, as was his opponent, John McCain, in his excellent concession speech. So far, Obama has done or said nothing to elicit the fears that he plans to be some wild-eyed radical intent on overturning the American system.
Obama said Sunday night he will indeed have Republicans in his Cabinet. He also has advocated not taking any punitive political action against Sen. Joe Liebermann, who campaigned for his friend John McCain, but also went the unnecessary "extra mile" in leveling some very harsh comments against the candidate of the party with which he is aligned in the Senate.
As for one of the specifics, changing the top-income level tax rate from 36 to 39 percent (back to the pre-Bush levels) hardly qualifies as Marxism or Socialism by any rational accounting. And, to the extent any measures taken by the President or Congress will bolster a sagging and disappearing middle class can be considered "sharing the wealth," one might suspect the supposedly shocking phrase garnered Obama more votes than it cost.
We understand those who have political and philosophical opposition to Barack Obama and the Democratic Party, but we would assume even the harshest critics who saw Sunday's telecast would agree this is a man who is calm and reasonable and has accomplished a lot both personally and professionally. It also was vividly clear he is extremely proud of his wife and two young daughters and is in concert with all Americans who want our families to be able to enjoy the continuing promise of our great nation.
--REK
![[Masthead]](http://www.cctimesdemocrat.com/images/nameplate.png)

