Barack Hussein Obama was elected the 44th president of the United States on Tuesday, sweeping away the last racial barrier in American politics with ease as the country chose him as its first black chief executive.

The election of Mr. Obama amounted to a national catharsis — a repudiation of a historically unpopular Republican president and his economic and foreign policies, and an embrace of Mr. Obama’s call for a change in the direction and the tone of the country.

But it was just as much a strikingly symbolic moment in the evolution of the nation’s fraught racial history, a breakthrough that would have seemed unthinkable just two years ago.

Mr. Obama, 47, a first-term senator from Illinois, defeated Senator John McCain of Arizona, 72, a former prisoner of war who was making his second bid for the presidency.

To the very end, Mr. McCain’s campaign was eclipsed by an opponent who was nothing short of a phenomenon, drawing huge crowds epitomized by the tens of thousands of people who turned out to hear Mr. Obama’s victory speech in Grant Park in Chicago.

Mr. McCain also fought the headwinds of a relentlessly hostile political environment, weighted down with the baggage left to him by President Bush and an economic collapse that took place in the middle of the general election campaign.

“If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer,” said Mr. Obama, standing before a huge wooden lectern with a row of American flags at his back, casting his eyes to a crowd that stretched far into the Chicago night.

“It’s been a long time coming,” the president-elect added, “but tonight, because of what we did on this date in this election at this defining moment, change has come to America.”

Mr. McCain delivered his concession speech under clear skies on the lush lawn of the Arizona Biltmore, in Phoenix, where he and his wife had held their wedding reception. The crowd reacted with scattered boos as he offered his congratulations to Mr. Obama and saluted the historical significance of the moment.

“This is a historic election, and I recognize the significance it has for African-Americans and for the special pride that must be theirs tonight,” Mr. McCain said, adding, “We both realize that we have come a long way from the injustices that once stained our nation’s reputation.”

Not only did Mr. Obama capture the presidency, but he led his party to sharp gains in Congress. This puts Democrats in control of the House, the Senate and the White House for the first time since 1995, when Bill Clinton was in office.

The day shimmered with history as voters began lining up before dawn, hours before polls opened, to take part in the culmination of a campaign that over the course of two years commanded an extraordinary amount of attention from the American public.

As the returns became known, and Mr. Obama passed milestone after milestone —Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Iowa and New Mexico — people rolled spontaneously into the streets to celebrate what many described, with perhaps overstated if understandable exhilaration, a new era in a country where just 143 years ago, Mr. Obama, as a black man, could have been owned as a slave.

For Republicans, especially the conservatives who have dominated the party for nearly three decades, the night represented a bitter setback and left them contemplating where they now stand in American politics.

Mr. Obama and his expanded Democratic majority on Capitol Hill now face the task of governing the country through a difficult period: the likelihood of a deep and prolonged recession, and two wars. He took note of those circumstances in a speech that was notable for its sobriety and its absence of the triumphalism that he might understandably have displayed on a night when he won an Electoral College landslide.

“The road ahead will be long, our climb will be steep,” said Mr. Obama, his audience hushed and attentive, with some, including the Rev. Jesse Jackson, wiping tears from their eyes. “We may not get there in one year or even one term, but America, I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you, we as a people will get there.” The roster of defeated Republicans included some notable party moderates, like Senator John E. Sununu of New Hampshire and Representative Christopher Shays of Connecticut, and signaled that the Republican conference convening early next year in Washington will be not only smaller but more conservative.

Mr. Obama will come into office after an election in which he laid out a number of clear promises: to cut taxes for most Americans, to get the United States out of Iraq in a fast and orderly fashion, and to expand health care.

In a recognition of the difficult transition he faces, given the economic crisis, Mr. Obama is expected to begin filling White House jobs as early as this week.

Mr. Obama defeated Mr. McCain in Ohio, a central battleground in American politics, despite a huge effort that brought Mr. McCain and his running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, back there repeatedly. Mr. Obama had lost the state decisively to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York in the Democratic primary.

Mr. McCain failed to take from Mr. Obama the two Democratic states that were at the top of his target list: New Hampshire and Pennsylvania. Mr. Obama also held on to Minnesota, the state that played host to the convention that nominated Mr. McCain; Wisconsin; and Michigan, a state Mr. McCain once had in his sights.

The apparent breadth of Mr. Obama’s sweep left Republicans sobered, and his showing in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania stood out because officials in both parties had said that his struggles there in the primary campaign reflected the resistance of blue-collar voters to supporting a black candidate.

“I always thought there was a potential prejudice factor in the state,” Senator Bob Casey, a Democrat of Pennsylvania who was an early Obama supporter, told reporters in Chicago. “I hope this means we washed that away.”

Mr. McCain called Mr. Obama at 10 p.m., Central time, to offer his congratulations. In the call, Mr. Obama said he was eager to sit down and talk; in his concession speech, Mr. McCain said he was ready to help Mr. Obama work through difficult times.

“I need your help,” Mr. Obama told his rival, according to an Obama adviser, Robert Gibbs. “You’re a leader on so many important issues.”

Mr. Bush called Mr. Obama shortly after 10 p.m. to congratulate him on his victory.

“I promise to make this a smooth transition,” the president said to Mr. Obama, according to a transcript provided by the White House .“You are about to go on one of the great journeys of life. Congratulations, and go enjoy yourself.”

For most Americans, the news of Mr. Obama’s election came at 11 p.m., Eastern time, when the networks, waiting for the close of polls in California, declared him the victor. A roar sounded from the 125,000 people gathered in Hutchison Field in Grant Park at the moment that they learned Mr. Obama had been projected the winner.

The scene in Phoenix was decidedly more sour. At several points, Mr. McCain, unsmiling, had to motion his crowd to quiet down — he held out both hands, palms down — when they responded to his words of tribute to Mr. Obama with boos.

Mr. Obama, who watched Mr. McCain’s speech from his hotel room in Chicago, offered a hand to voters who had not supported him in this election, when he took the stage 15 minutes later. “To those Americans whose support I have yet to earn,” he said, “I may not have won your vote, but I hear your voices, I need your help, and I will be your president, too.”

Initial signs were that Mr. Obama benefited from a huge turnout of voters, but particularly among blacks. That group made up 13 percent of the electorate, according to surveys of people leaving the polls, compared with 11 percent in 2006.

In North Carolina, Republicans said that the huge surge of African-Americans was one of the big factors that led to Senator Elizabeth Dole, a Republican, losing her re-election bid.

Mr. Obama also did strikingly well among Hispanic voters; Mr. McCain did worse among those voters than Mr. Bush did in 2004. That suggests the damage the Republican Party has suffered among those voters over four years in which Republicans have been at the forefront on the effort to crack down on illegal immigrants.

The election ended what by any definition was one of the most remarkable contests in American political history, drawing what was by every appearance unparalleled public interest.

Throughout the day, people lined up at the polls for hours — some showing up before dawn — to cast their votes. Aides to both campaigns said that anecdotal evidence suggested record-high voter turnout.

Reflecting the intensity of the two candidates, Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama took a page from what Mr. Bush did in 2004 and continued to campaign after the polls opened.

Mr. McCain left his home in Arizona after voting early Tuesday to fly to Colorado and New Mexico, two states where Mr. Bush won four years ago but where Mr. Obama waged a spirited battle.

These were symbolically appropriate final campaign stops for Mr. McCain, reflecting the imperative he felt of trying to defend Republican states against a challenge from Mr. Obama.

“Get out there and vote,” Mr. McCain said in Grand Junction, Colo. “I need your help. Volunteer, knock on doors, get your neighbors to the polls, drag them there if you need to.”

By contrast, Mr. Obama flew from his home in Chicago to Indiana, a state that in many ways came to epitomize the audacity of his effort this year. Indiana has not voted for a Democrat since President Lyndon B. Johnson’s landslide victory in 1964, and Mr. Obama made an intense bid for support there. He later returned home to Chicago to play basketball, his election-day ritual.

ADAM NAGOURNEY 

The Next President

This is one of those moments in history when it is worth pausing to reflect on the basic facts:

An American with the name Barack Hussein Obama, the son of a white woman and a black man he barely knew, raised by his grandparents far outside the stream of American power and wealth, has been elected the 44th president of the United States.

Showing extraordinary focus and quiet certainty, Mr. Obama swept away one political presumption after another to defeat first Hillary Clinton, who wanted to be president so badly that she lost her bearings, and then John McCain, who forsook his principles for a campaign built on anger and fear.

His triumph was decisive and sweeping, because he saw what is wrong with this country: the utter failure of government to protect its citizens. He offered a government that does not try to solve every problem but will do those things beyond the power of individual citizens: to regulate the economy fairly, keep the air clean and the food safe, ensure that the sick have access to health care, and educate children to compete in a globalized world.

Mr. Obama spoke candidly of the failure of Republican economic policies that promised to lift all Americans but left so many millions far behind. He committed himself to ending a bloody and pointless war. He promised to restore Americans’ civil liberties and their tattered reputation around the world.

With a message of hope and competence, he drew in legions of voters who had been disengaged and voiceless. The scenes Tuesday night of young men and women, black and white, weeping and cheering in Chicago and New York and in Atlanta’s storied Ebenezer Baptist Church were powerful and deeply moving.

Mr. Obama inherits a terrible legacy. The nation is embroiled in two wars — one of necessity in Afghanistan and one of folly in Iraq. Mr. Obama’s challenge will be to manage an orderly withdrawal from Iraq without igniting new conflicts so the Pentagon can focus its resources on the real front in the war on terror, Afghanistan.

The campaign began with the war as its central focus. By Election Day, Americans were deeply anguished about their futures and the government’s failure to prevent an economic collapse fed by greed and an orgy of deregulation. Mr. Obama will have to move quickly to impose control, coherence, transparency and fairness on the Bush administration’s jumbled bailout plan.

His administration will also have to identify all of the ways that Americans’ basic rights and fundamental values have been violated and rein that dark work back in. Climate change is a global threat, and after years of denial and inaction, this country must take the lead on addressing it. The nation must develop new, cleaner energy technologies, to reduce greenhouse gases and its dependence on foreign oil.

Mr. Obama also will have to rally sensible people to come up with immigration reform consistent with the values of a nation built by immigrants and refugees.

There are many other urgent problems that must be addressed. Tens of millions of Americans lack health insurance, including some of the country’s most vulnerable citizens — children of the working poor. Other Americans can barely pay for their insurance or are in danger of losing it along with their jobs. They must be protected.

Mr. Obama will now need the support of all Americans. Mr. McCain made an elegant concession speech Tuesday night in which he called on his followers not just to honor the vote, but to stand behind Mr. Obama. After a nasty, dispiriting campaign, he seemed on that stage to be the senator we long respected for his service to this country and his willingness to compromise.

That is a start. The nation’s many challenges are beyond the reach of any one man, or any one political party. >>>>

Bolivian President Evo Morales said Saturday that he was suspending the work of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration in Bolivia and that the government will take control of its activities in the war on drugs.

Morales made the remarks in a speech in a remote part of Bolivia, carried on national television and radio stations.

The announcement comes more than a month after Morales kicked DEA agents out of the country's coca-producing Chapare region, saying the government could no longer protect them amid a growing revolt. At least 30 people died in the violence, and Morales accused Washington of fomenting the unrest.

Bolivia and the United States each expelled the other's ambassadors in September as well, and Morales launched a verbal assault against the U.S. government at the United Nations General Assembly.

For its part, the United States accused Bolivia of not doing enough to stop the flow of drugs out of the country. Last month, President Bush said he had proposed cutting off special trade deals with Bolivia "until it fulfills its obligations."

As he left Bolivia after his expulsion, U.S. ambassador Philip Goldberg warned the Bolivian government that reducing ties with Washington was "a grave mistake."

Morales' accusations that the United States had helped foment the violence in his country are "false and baseless," Goldberg said in September, and Morales "insulted us."

The DEA has not been officially notified of any suspension or expulsion, spokesman Garrison Courtney said Saturday. He would not say how many agents are in Bolivia for security reasons but said it was not a significant presence.

"If this is true, it is an unfortunate situation," Courtney said. "We've been working with our counterparts for over 30 years and have a tremendous working relationship with our Bolivian counterparts."

The violence broke out in September as Morales, the nation's first Indian president, battled an autonomy movement in the natural gas-rich eastern departments of Santa Cruz, Pando, Beni and Tarija. The movement was triggered by Morales' pledge to redistribute wealth from the eastern departments to the country's poorer highlands.

Some of Latin America's leaders have supported Morales. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, long a critic of Bush and the United States, expelled the U.S. ambassador from Caracas in solidarity with Bolivia and recalled his own ambassador from Washington.

In late October, Bolivia's Congress approved an agreement between the government and opposition leaders to hold a referendum on a constitution that would grant more power to the nation's Indian majority, according to the Bolivian Information Agency, or ABI, the state news agency.

To spur the negotiations, ABI reported, Morales agreed to seek only one more term as president.

The agreement followed weeks of negotiations between the government and political opponents, including the governors of the eastern provinces. >>>> 

Bolivia's Morales bars "spying" U.S. DEA agents

---

CHIMORE, Bolivia (Reuters) - Bolivia's leftist President Evo Morales accused U.S. anti-drug agents of spying on Saturday, and barred them from fighting cocaine traffickers in the Andean country until further notice.

"There were DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) agents that were doing political espionage, ... financing criminal groups so that they could act against authorities, even the president," Morales said.

Morales accused the DEA of maintaining ties with anti-government groups that staged violent protests in eastern and central regions governed by the opposition in September. He said the organization's actions amounted to conspiracy.

"This is a personal decision. ... From now on, the DEA is not allowed to act in the country until further notice," said Morales, who stopped short of expelling DEA agents.

Morales had already banned DEA flights over the country.

Impoverished Bolivia is the world's third-largest cocaine producer after Colombia and Peru. Last month, the United States added Bolivia to a list of states that had "failed demonstrably" to meet their counter-narcotics obligations.

The United States called Morales' accusations absurd.

"We reject accusations that the DEA or any other U.S. government agency has supported the opposition or conspired against the Bolivian government," the U.S. Embassy in La Paz cited a State Department official as saying. "These accusations are false and absurd."

"If cooperation with the United States is suspended, more drugs will be produced in Bolivia," it added. "The resulting effects of corruption, violence and tragedy will mainly hurt Bolivia itself."

The U.S. government has taken steps to suspend trade benefits for Bolivia because of what officials described as its poor cooperation in fighting drug trafficking.

Washington says coca acreage in Bolivia has increased significantly, but the Morales government says it rose only 5 percent last year.

Relations between the two nations were upset in September when Morales expelled the U.S. ambassador, after accusing him of meddling.

The State Department then ejected the Bolivian envoy, calling Morales' action a grave error, and said it was the first time in three decades a U.S. envoy was declared "persona non grata" anywhere in the world.

Since taking office in 2006, Morales has pursued a policy of "zero cocaine but not zero coca," which gives tens of thousands of farmers permission to grow coca on small plots for legal uses.

Morales built his political career as a leader of Bolivia's coca growers and wants to develop legal markets for coca leaves while fighting the cocaine trade. 

The coca leaf is the main ingredient for cocaine but it is also widely used by Bolivian Indians, who chew it for its medicinal and nutritional properties.

Carlos Quiroga

Whether the Republican presidential ticket wins or loses on Tuesday, a group of prominent conservatives are planning to meet the next day to discuss the way forward, and whatever the outcome, Gov. Sarah Palin will be high on the agenda.

Ms. Palin, of Alaska, has had a rocky time since being named as Senator John McCain’s running mate, but to many conservatives her future remains bright. If Mr. McCain wins, she will give the social conservative movement a seat inside the White House. If he loses, she could emerge as a standard bearer for the movement and a potential presidential candidate in 2012, albeit one who will need to address her considerable political damage.

Her prospects, in or out of government, are the subject of intensive conversations among conservative leaders, including the group that will meet next Wednesday in rural Virginia to weigh social, foreign policy and economic issues, as well as the political landscape and the next presidential election.

Ms. Palin’s aides insist that winning this time around is her sole objective. But there are signs that she, too, is making sure that she is well positioned for the future if she and Mr. McCain lose.

In a week that most candidates give over to big rallies and closing arguments, she is giving policy speeches, like one on Wednesday on energy security, a move aides say is intended to help her be seen as more substantive.

On Monday, she held a brief meeting with the Israeli ambassador, reflecting an interest that aides say she expresses in intense foreign policy tutorials. She has increasingly separated herself from Mr. McCain’s positions, and this week tried to quarantine herself from the damage caused by news that the Republican National Committee had spent $150,000 on clothing and accessories for her and her family.

More and more, she has broken out of the cloister imposed early on by McCain aides, doing more interviews with local television stations and newspapers, and speaking off the cuff to reporters who travel with her.

Despite all the criticism, she has many supporters among Republicans who see her as bright, tough and a star in a party with relatively few on the horizon.

“She’s dynamite,” said Morton C. Blackwell, who was President Ronald Reagan’s liaison to the conservative movement. Mr. Blackwell described vying to get close to Ms. Palin at a fund-raiser in Virginia, lamenting that he could get only within four feet.

“I made a major effort to position myself at this reception,” he said, adding that he is eager to sit down with her after the election to discuss the future. Asked if the weeks of unflattering revelations and damaging interviews had tarnished her among conservatives, he replied, “Not a bit.”

Brent Bozell, president of the Media Research Center, a conservative group, called it a “top order of business” to determine Ms. Palin’s future role. “Conservatives have been looking for leadership, and she has proven that she can electrify the grass roots like few people have in the last 20 years,” Mr. Bozell said. “No matter what she decides to do, there will be a small mother lode of financial support behind her.”

The presidential campaign has allowed Ms. Palin to develop as a candidate, and to make many useful connections as she travels the country. On the campaign, she has become close to people with extensive experience in Republican politics, including Steve Biegun and Randy Scheunemann, two foreign policy conservatives.

She has received extensive policy tutorials and been briefed on foreign policy almost daily. Aides say she has taken particular interest in Pakistan and Israel and in causes of Islamic extremism, which she has related to the economic despair that plagues parts of Alaska.

People loyal to her say Ms. Palin is well aware of the political job in front of her. One aide said she had “gotten on the offensive,” pushing to include more policy in her speeches. “It’s important for her personally, for how she’s perceived, to ensure that she gets to show her depth.”

In a development that could be telling whether or not she ends up as vice president, she has also been asserting her independence from the McCain campaign. She disagreed publicly with the decision to pull out of Michigan and questioned the use of automated calls and the decision not to bring up Senator Barack Obama’s relationship with his controversial former pastor. She said she would release her medical records after the campaign declared she would not, and has in the past week even wandered over to talk to reporters who travel with her, sending staff members scurrying to cut off conversations.

Ms. Palin’s rallies have drawn many times more supporters than Mr. McCain’s, with people waving eager signs: “Palin Power,” “Iowa is Palin Country,” “Super Sarah,” “You betcha!”

Matthew Dowd, a former Bush strategist, said Ms. Palin’s challenge was to show substance.

“She’s an attractive woman who can give a great speech, but the American public doesn’t view her much beyond that,” Mr. Dowd said. “She’s vastly unpopular among moderate and independent voters, and while she could be in a position to be popular among an increasingly smaller Republican Party, she’s got to figure out a way to extend that and figure out a way to strengthen her weaknesses.”

And should she not become vice president, Ms. Palin will have to navigate a changed landscape in Alaska, a task Les Gara, a Democratic state representative, said could prove to be “a rocky road.” Revelations that she charged the state an expense allowance (generally collected for travel away from home) while staying at her home and for her children to travel with her, and about the clothing, have dragged down her public image and her poll numbers.

And some Democrats who in the past saw Ms. Palin as someone willing to buck her own party say they have been put off by her partisan attacks as part of the national ticket.

At times, Ms. Palin’s family and friends have seemed shaken by the attention. Her sister, Heather Bruce, described recent months as “the most stressful period of my life,” and her father, Chuck Heath, said he felt pure outrage when he saw spoofs involving his grandchildren.

But some elements of the Republican base are already looking ahead to the day, whenever it comes, that Ms. Palin is at the top of the ticket.

“I would hope she would consider running for president,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, which raises money for candidates who oppose abortion.

The group’s donations increased threefold, she said, after Ms. Palin was named to the ticket, and a “Team Sarah” conference call last week among voters who oppose abortion attracted 40,000 women. The group is planning a similar event after the election whether or not the Republicans win the White House.

“We have to get concrete about where we take this energy from here,” Ms. Dannenfelser said.

KATE ZERNIKE and MONICA DAVEY 

Palin is too much fun

Hyperbole is the currency of presidential campaigns, but this year the nation’s future truly hangs in the balance.

The United States is battered and drifting after eight years of President Bush’s failed leadership. He is saddling his successor with two wars, a scarred global image and a government systematically stripped of its ability to protect and help its citizens — whether they are fleeing a hurricane’s floodwaters, searching for affordable health care or struggling to hold on to their homes, jobs, savings and pensions in the midst of a financial crisis that was foretold and preventable.

As tough as the times are, the selection of a new president is easy. After nearly two years of a grueling and ugly campaign, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois has proved that he is the right choice to be the 44th president of the United States.

Mr. Obama has met challenge after challenge, growing as a leader and putting real flesh on his early promises of hope and change. He has shown a cool head and sound judgment. We believe he has the will and the ability to forge the broad political consensus that is essential to finding solutions to this nation’s problems.

In the same time, Senator John McCain of Arizona has retreated farther and farther to the fringe of American politics, running a campaign on partisan division, class warfare and even hints of racism. His policies and worldview are mired in the past. His choice of a running mate so evidently unfit for the office was a final act of opportunism and bad judgment that eclipsed the accomplishments of 26 years in Congress.

Given the particularly ugly nature of Mr. McCain’s campaign, the urge to choose on the basis of raw emotion is strong. But there is a greater value in looking closely at the facts of life in America today and at the prescriptions the candidates offer. The differences are profound.

Mr. McCain offers more of the Republican every-man-for-himself ideology, now lying in shards on Wall Street and in Americans’ bank accounts. Mr. Obama has another vision of government’s role and responsibilities.

In his convention speech in Denver, Mr. Obama said, “Government cannot solve all our problems, but what it should do is that which we cannot do for ourselves: protect us from harm and provide every child a decent education; keep our water clean and our toys safe; invest in new schools and new roads and new science and technology.”

Since the financial crisis, he has correctly identified the abject failure of government regulation that has brought the markets to the brink of collapse.

The Economy

The American financial system is the victim of decades of Republican deregulatory and anti-tax policies. Those ideas have been proved wrong at an unfathomable price, but Mr. McCain — a self-proclaimed “foot soldier in the Reagan revolution” — is still a believer.

Mr. Obama sees that far-reaching reforms will be needed to protect Americans and American business.

Mr. McCain talks about reform a lot, but his vision is pinched. His answer to any economic question is to eliminate pork-barrel spending — about $18 billion in a $3 trillion budget — cut taxes and wait for unfettered markets to solve the problem.

Mr. Obama is clear that the nation’s tax structure must be changed to make it fairer. That means the well-off Americans who have benefited disproportionately from Mr. Bush’s tax cuts will have to pay some more. Working Americans, who have seen their standard of living fall and their children’s options narrow, will benefit. Mr. Obama wants to raise the minimum wage and tie it to inflation, restore a climate in which workers are able to organize unions if they wish and expand educational opportunities.

Mr. McCain, who once opposed President Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy as fiscally irresponsible, now wants to make them permanent. And while he talks about keeping taxes low for everyone, his proposed cuts would overwhelmingly benefit the top 1 percent of Americans while digging the country into a deeper fiscal hole.

National Security

The American military — its people and equipment — is dangerously overstretched. Mr. Bush has neglected the necessary war in Afghanistan, which now threatens to spiral into defeat. The unnecessary and staggeringly costly war in Iraq must be ended as quickly and responsibly as possible.

While Iraq’s leaders insist on a swift drawdown of American troops and a deadline for the end of the occupation, Mr. McCain is still taking about some ill-defined “victory.” As a result, he has offered no real plan for extracting American troops and limiting any further damage to Iraq and its neighbors.

Mr. Obama was an early and thoughtful opponent of the war in Iraq, and he has presented a military and diplomatic plan for withdrawing American forces. Mr. Obama also has correctly warned that until the Pentagon starts pulling troops out of Iraq, there will not be enough troops to defeat the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

Mr. McCain, like Mr. Bush, has only belatedly focused on Afghanistan’s dangerous unraveling and the threat that neighboring Pakistan may quickly follow.

Mr. Obama would have a learning curve on foreign affairs, but he has already showed sounder judgment than his opponent on these critical issues. His choice of Senator Joseph Biden — who has deep foreign-policy expertise — as his running mate is another sign of that sound judgment. Mr. McCain’s long interest in foreign policy and the many dangers this country now faces make his choice of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska more irresponsible.

Both presidential candidates talk about strengthening alliances in Europe and Asia, including NATO, and strongly support Israel. Both candidates talk about repairing America’s image in the world. But it seems clear to us that Mr. Obama is far more likely to do that — and not just because the first black president would present a new American face to the world.

Mr. Obama wants to reform the United Nations, while Mr. McCain wants to create a new entity, the League of Democracies — a move that would incite even fiercer anti-American furies around the world.

Unfortunately, Mr. McCain, like Mr. Bush, sees the world as divided into friends (like Georgia) and adversaries (like Russia). He proposed kicking Russia out of the Group of 8 industrialized nations even before the invasion of Georgia. We have no sympathy for Moscow’s bullying, but we also have no desire to replay the cold war. The United States must find a way to constrain the Russians’ worst impulses, while preserving the ability to work with them on arms control and other vital initiatives.

Both candidates talk tough on terrorism, and neither has ruled out military action to end Iran’s nuclear weapons program. But Mr. Obama has called for a serious effort to try to wean Tehran from its nuclear ambitions with more credible diplomatic overtures and tougher sanctions. Mr. McCain’s willingness to joke about bombing Iran was frightening.

The Constitution and the Rule of Law

Under Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the justice system and the separation of powers have come under relentless attack. Mr. Bush chose to exploit the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, the moment in which he looked like the president of a unified nation, to try to place himself above the law.

Mr. Bush has arrogated the power to imprison men without charges and browbeat Congress into granting an unfettered authority to spy on Americans. He has created untold numbers of “black” programs, including secret prisons and outsourced torture. The president has issued hundreds, if not thousands, of secret orders. We fear it will take years of forensic research to discover how many basic rights have been violated.

Both candidates have renounced torture and are committed to closing the prison camp in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

But Mr. Obama has gone beyond that, promising to identify and correct Mr. Bush’s attacks on the democratic system. Mr. McCain has been silent on the subject.

Mr. McCain improved protections for detainees. But then he helped the White House push through the appalling Military Commissions Act of 2006, which denied detainees the right to a hearing in a real court and put Washington in conflict with the Geneva Conventions, greatly increasing the risk to American troops.

The next president will have the chance to appoint one or more justices to a Supreme Court that is on the brink of being dominated by a radical right wing. Mr. Obama may appoint less liberal judges than some of his followers might like, but Mr. McCain is certain to pick rigid ideologues. He has said he would never appoint a judge who believes in women’s reproductive rights.

The Candidates

It will be an enormous challenge just to get the nation back to where it was before Mr. Bush, to begin to mend its image in the world and to restore its self-confidence and its self-respect. Doing all of that, and leading America forward, will require strength of will, character and intellect, sober judgment and a cool, steady hand.

Mr. Obama has those qualities in abundance. Watching him being tested in the campaign has long since erased the reservations that led us to endorse Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic primaries. He has drawn in legions of new voters with powerful messages of hope and possibility and calls for shared sacrifice and social responsibility.

Mr. McCain, whom we chose as the best Republican nominee in the primaries, has spent the last coins of his reputation for principle and sound judgment to placate the limitless demands and narrow vision of the far-right wing. His righteous fury at being driven out of the 2000 primaries on a racist tide aimed at his adopted daughter has been replaced by a zealous embrace of those same win-at-all-costs tactics and tacticians.

He surrendered his standing as an independent thinker in his rush to embrace Mr. Bush’s misbegotten tax policies and to abandon his leadership position on climate change and immigration reform.

Mr. McCain could have seized the high ground on energy and the environment. Earlier in his career, he offered the first plausible bill to control America’s emissions of greenhouse gases. Now his positions are a caricature of that record: think Ms. Palin leading chants of “drill, baby, drill.”

Mr. Obama has endorsed some offshore drilling, but as part of a comprehensive strategy including big investments in new, clean technologies.

Mr. Obama has withstood some of the toughest campaign attacks ever mounted against a candidate. He’s been called un-American and accused of hiding a secret Islamic faith. The Republicans have linked him to domestic terrorists and questioned his wife’s love of her country. Ms. Palin has also questioned millions of Americans’ patriotism, calling Republican-leaning states “pro-America.”

This politics of fear, division and character assassination helped Mr. Bush drive Mr. McCain from the 2000 Republican primaries and defeat Senator John Kerry in 2004. It has been the dominant theme of his failed presidency.

The nation’s problems are simply too grave to be reduced to slashing “robo-calls” and negative ads. This country needs sensible leadership, compassionate leadership, honest leadership and strong leadership. Barack Obama has shown that he has all of those qualities. >>>> 

McCain: I'm not George Bush 

Zimbabwe's rival political parties are taking their dispute to Swaziland in hopes of forging a deal on a new government. The parties signed a power-sharing agreement more than a month ago, but have been unable to agree on which party should occupy several key ministries. VOA's Scott Bobb reports from our Southern Africa Bureau in Johannesburg.

Leaders of the Southern African Development Community called a special meeting of its political commission for Monday after a week of intense negotiations between Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe and two opposition parties failed to agree on a new cabinet.
Opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai told reporters after the talks broke up late Friday that negotiations were stalemated.

"We have failed to agree on the first key issue, which is the allocation of key ministerial portfolios and therefore a deadlock has been declared," he said.

Mr. Mugabe's ZANU-PF and two opposition parties signed a power-sharing agreement last month in which the opposition would receive 16 cabinet portfolios and ZANU-PF would received 15. Sources say the two sides could not agree on who would control key ministries such as Finance, Defense and the Interior.

But former South African President Thabo Mbeki, who has been mediating the crisis as mandated by SADC, remained upbeat.

"The negotiations are continuing. And on Monday we will all of us be meeting with the troika of the SADC organ on politics in Mbabane, in Swaziland, because they are meeting and they want to hear a report about how far the negotiations have gone," said Mr. Mbeki.

He said leaders of the three members of the Community's special committee on politics, Angola, Mozambique and Swaziland, would discuss how to proceed.

SADC said in a statement that the leaders would also discuss the renewed fighting in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the political stalemate in Lesotho.

Tsvangiari, who earlier said the matter should be referred to the African Union or the United Nations, told a rally Sunday that he hoped the issue would be finalized Monday.
But the chief negotiator for ZANU-PF was quoted by the government-owned Sunday Herald newspapers as saying that the SADC leaders could offer guidance, but could not impose a solution.

Despite the gloomy mood, Mr. Mugabe indicated the talks would continue.

"Enough is enough? No, we can never say enough is enough about this problem that affects us. No, it would be a poor attitude," he said.

Southern African leaders have been trying to mediate the Zimbabwean crisis since controversial elections in March gave the opposition a majority of seats in parliament for the first time since independence.

But Mr. Mugabe was re-elected unopposed after Mr. Tsvangirai pulled out of the presidential run-off election citing a campaign of intimidation in which more than 100 of his supporters were killed.

Scott Bobb

Zimbabwe Opposition Leader Blames Lack of Trust for Breakdown of Power-Sharing Deal

Zimbabwe's main opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai says a lack of trust between him and President Robert Mugabe has led to the deadlock in power-sharing talks between the two sides.

Tsvangirai told a crowd of supporters Saturday in Bulawayo that there was nothing wrong with the deal signed last month between Zimbabwe's opposition and ruling ZANU-PF parties.  

He said they only ran into problems when it came to implementation of the agreement.

After the fourth day of talks failed once again Friday, Tsvangirai called on the African Union and the Southern African Development Community to help end the deadlock on forming a unity government.

President Mugabe said Friday the discussions went in the wrong direction.

The mediator of the talks, former South African President Thabo Mbeki, has said negotiations will continue Monday in Swaziland.

Last week, Mr. Mugabe unilaterally gave his ZANU-PF party several key Cabinet positions that oversee the military, police and foreign affairs.  This prompted the opposition to threaten to pull out of the power-sharing agreement.

The original deal, reached in September, was meant to end the crisis stemming from Zimbabwe's disputed presidential elections.

It calls for ZANU-PF to control 15 ministries, with the two factions of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change getting 16.  Mr. Mugabe would remain as president, with Tsvangirai becoming prime minister.

The sides are under pressure to reach a final deal so Zimbabwe can start to recover from its deep economic crisis.  The country has 80 percent unemployment and an inflation rate officially estimated at 231 million percent. >>>>

Zimbabwe Opposition Says Power-Sharing Talks Fail

Zimbabwe's opposition leader says several days of negotiations have failed to break a deadlock in power-sharing talks, and called for African leaders to intervene. Morgan Tsvangirai said after talks Friday with President Robert Mugabe that the two men had failed to agree on the allocation of key Cabinet ministries.

He said he is committed to a power-sharing deal signed last month but called on the African Union and the Southern African Development Community to help end the deadlock on forming a unity government.

President Mugabe said Friday the discussions went in the wrong direction.

The two leaders held four days of talks in Harare this week meditated by former South African President Thabo Mbeki.

Last week, President Mugabe unilaterally gave his ZANU-PF party several key Cabinet positions that oversee the military, police and foreign affairs. This prompted the opposition to threaten to pull out of the power-sharing agreement.

The original deal, reached in September, was meant to end the crisis stemming from Zimbabwe's disputed presidential elections.

It calls for ZANU-PF to control 15 ministries, with the two factions of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change getting 16. Mr. Mugabe would remain as president, with Tsvangirai becoming prime minister.

The sides are under pressure to reach a final deal so Zimbabwe can start to recover from its deep economic crisis. The country has 80 percent unemployment and an inflation rate officially estimated at 231 million percent.

Witnesses are reporting severe food shortages nationwide, especially in the south. >>>>

Democrat Barack Obama won the endorsement of The Washington Post in an editorial saying the Illinois senator "has the potential to become a great president."

The newspaper said its choice was made easy in part by the "disappointing campaign" of Republican candidate John McCain and his decision to pick Sarah Palin, the governor of Alaska, as his vice presidential running mate for the November 4 election.

"It is made easy in larger part, though, because of our admiration for Mr. Obama and the impressive qualities he has shown during this long race," the Post said in the editorial for its Friday editions published on its website on Thursday night.

The paper, which endorsed Democrats in the two previous presidential elections, praised Obama as a "man of supple intelligence, with a nuanced grasp of complex issues and evident skill at conciliation and consensus-building."

It said Obama also has a sophisticated understanding of the world and America's place in it and that he was committed to maintaining U.S. leadership.

In endorsing Obama, the Post said a McCain presidency would not equal four more years of Bush administration policies. But the paper said McCain would draw on many of the same policymakers who have brought the country to its current state.

"We believe they have richly earned, and might even benefit from, some years in the political wilderness," the editorial said.

(Writing by JoAnne Allen; Editing by John O'Callaghan)

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE49G0LJ20081017

Obama and McCain trade wisecracks, not attacks

Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain shared the same stage and microphone again on Thursday, but this time they traded wisecracks instead of campaign attacks.

One night after battling in their final debate, the rivals in the White House race donned white ties for a more genial political tradition -- a New York dinner that has attracted presidential candidates in every election but two since 1945.

McCain told the glittering Manhattan crowd at the annual Al Smith dinner, a fundraiser for area Catholic charities named after the four-term former New York governor, that he had an announcement -- he had dismissed all of his campaign advisers.

"All of their positions will now be held by a man named Joe the plumber," McCain said, citing the Ohio small business owner who McCain made an overnight sensation in Wednesday's debate.

The Arizona senator also poked fun at his reference to Obama as "that one" in an earlier debate.

"He doesn't mind at all. In fact he even has a pet name for me: George Bush," McCain said.

McCain saluted Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York, Obama's bitter rival in the Democratic primary whose level of enthusiasm for Obama's campaign for the November 4 election has been a subject of great media fascination.

"I can't shake the feeling that some people here are pulling for me," McCain said. "I'm delighted to see you here tonight Hillary." 

When Obama took the microphone, he said he needed to correct some misconceptions since McCain had been asking "Who is Barack Obama?"

"I was not born in a manger," he said, adding the name Barack, given by his Kenyan father, was Swahili for "that one." He also had an explanation for his middle name, Hussein.

"I got my middle name from somebody who didn't think I would ever run for president," he said.

Obama listed his greatest strength as humility and his greatest weakness: "I'm a little too awesome."

Without naming her, he also made reference to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, McCain's running mate. She has been touted by Republicans for her foreign policy expertise because of Alaska's proximity to Russia.

Obama noted the dinner was held at the Waldorf-Astoria hotel.

"I'm told from the doorstep you can see all the way to The Russian Tea Room," he said.

The only times presidential candidates did not speak at the Al Smith dinner were 1996, when President Bill Clinton was not invited after he vetoed a late-term abortion ban, and 2004, when sponsors cited the divisive nature of the campaign and skipped the invitations.

Both candidates closed with warm words for each other, with Obama praising McCain's service to country in the Navy and as a Vietnam prisoner of war. 

McCain noted Obama's history-making bid to be the first black U.S. president.

"I won't wish my opponent luck but I do wish him well," McCain said.

John Whitesides and Jeff Mason

Obama warns against overconfidence

Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama warned his supporters to guard against overconfidence on Thursday as he and underdog Republican rival John McCain opened a 19-day sprint to Election Day.

The two candidates hit the campaign trail -- Obama in New York and New Hampshire and McCain in Pennsylvania -- after their third and last presidential debate on Wednesday, a testy face-off that made an Ohio plumber famous.

So far, all the stars seemed to be lining up in Obama's favor. He leads in national opinion polls and in many of the battleground states where the November 4 race will be won or lost.

Late on Thursday, The Washington Post delivered an endorsement of Obama and a rebuke to McCain in an editorial on its web site (www.washingtonpost.com). The Post, one of America's most respected newspapers, said its endorsement of Obama was "without ambivalence."

"The choice is made easy in part by Mr. McCain's disappointing campaign, above all his irresponsible selection of a running mate who is not ready to be president," the Post editors wrote. "It is made easy in larger part, though, because of our admiration for Mr. Obama and the impressive qualities he has shown during this long race."

A confident but cautious Obama told supporters in New York, "We are now 19 days not from the end but from the beginning. The amount of work that's going to be involved for the next president will be extraordinary."

Traders betting on future events in the political prediction markets are overwhelmingly predicting an Obama victory, giving the Illinois Democrat a better than 80 percent chance of winning.

Ireland's biggest bookmaker, Paddy Power, was already declaring Obama the winner. The Dublin-based bookmaker said it would pay out early more than 1 million euros ($1.35 million) on bets that Obama will be the next U.S. president. 

REMEMBERING NEW HAMPSHIRE

But Obama pointed out to deep-pocket contributors at a fundraising breakfast in Manhattan, and later to supporters in a driving rain in Londonderry, New Hampshire, that he was supposed to win New Hampshire last January in the Democratic primary but lost the state to Sen. Hillary Clinton.

"We are 19 days away from changing this country -- 19 days. But for those who are getting a little cocky, I've got two words for you: New Hampshire. I learned right here that you can't let up or pay too much attention to the polls," he said.

In New York, he said, "I've been in these positions before when we were favored and the press starts getting carried away and we end up getting spanked."

The new star in U.S. politics -- at least for a news cycle or two -- is Joe Wurzelbacher, "Joe the plumber," who told Obama at a campaign stop that he wanted to buy a small plumbing business in Holland, Ohio.

Joe came up about two dozen times during the debate as each candidate argued that their prescriptions for America's economic ills would help the plumber best.

Wurzelbacher was all over morning television shows and was not saying who he would vote for, but he sounded like a McCain backer.

"McCain came across with some solid points, and I was real happy about that," he told the Toledo Blade newspaper.

McCain, speaking at a rally in Downingtown, Pennsylvania, quickly worked Wurzelbacher into his stump speech, arguing that small business operators like Joe the plumber would see their taxes go up under Obama. 

"Senator Obama told Joe that he wanted to spread his wealth around. America didn't become the greatest nation on earth by spreading the wealth; we became the greatest nation by creating new wealth," McCain said.

"This is the choice that we face. Three weeks from now, you will choose a new president. Choose well. There is much at stake," he said.

Although McCain went after Obama aggressively in the final debate, it might not have done much to change the shape of the race in its final stages.

DIFFICULT ODDS

Karl Rove, the architect of President George W. Bush's two electoral victories and now a political pundit, wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday that McCain faced difficult but not impossible odds.

"If Mr. McCain succeeds, he will have engineered the most impressive and improbable political comeback since Harry Truman in 1948. But having to reach back more than a half-century for inspiration is not the place campaign managers want to be now," Rove wrote.

The two candidates were on the same stage again on Thursday night, trading wisecracks instead of campaign attacks at the Al Smith charity dinner, a political tradition in Manhattan named for the former New York governor and a regular stop for presidential candidates.

John Whitesides

China has canceled or postponed several military exchanges with the U.S. in reaction to last week's announcement that the U.S. is selling weapons to Taiwan, a Defense Department spokesman said Monday.

Officials announced last week an intention to sell $6.4 billion in arms to Taiwan, though the deal still needs to be approved by Congress.

Taiwan split from the Chinese mainland in 1949 and the United Staes has vowed to support them if China initiates an unprovoked attack.

The arms deal comes at a time when the United States needs China in negotiations over Iran's and North Korea's nuclear programs.

Maj. Stewart Upton said the sale does not violate the Taiwan Relations Act, which allows the United States to provide Taiwan with items for self-defense.

"The Chinese reaction is unfortunate and results in missed opportunities," Upton said. "We feel that the global security environment calls for U.S. and [Chinese] officials to maintain close relations to address common security challenges."

The "bilateral events" China called off or postponed involve "senior level visits and humanitarian assistance/disaster relief exchanges" scheduled to happen by the end of November, he said.

The Chinese ambassador was said to be on his way to the State Department Monday afternoon to protest the proposed weapons sale to Taiwan.

One U.S. official said the tension with China will not affect the role China is playing in negotiations with Iran or North Korea over its nuclear program.

The official declined to speak for attribution because of the sensitive diplomacy involved.

The arms deal package includes a variety of U.S.-made weapons systems, including Patriot III anti-missile system, Apache attack helicopters, Harpoon missiles and Javelin anti-tank missiles. >>>>

The Alaska governor has lifted John McCain's support among conservative Christians, but some believe her work outside the home has turned 'husbands lead, wives submit' on its head.

In a white-steepled church along a stretch in picturesque canyon country, the preacher laid out the basic blueprint of a godly marriage: Husbands lead, wives submit.

Speaking recently before hundreds of worshipers at Placerita Baptist Church in Newhall, guest preacher Chris Mueller affirmed the view that loving male headship and gracious wifely submission are God's plan for spouses.

Placerita, like many conservative Christian churches, teaches that a wife's role is to be her husband's helpmate (Genesis), "workers at home" (Titus) and submissive to her husband in everything (Ephesians).

So how do these congregants square such teachings with their support for Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the conservative evangelical Christian who is aiming to become vice president while her teenage daughter is pregnant, her infant son has Down syndrome and her husband took a leave from work to serve as "Mr. Mom," as People magazine put it?

"It's probably presumptuous of us to figure out how she is going to balance all of this," said Pat Ennis, a Placerita congregant who heads the home economics department at The Master's College, a Christian institution in Santa Clarita. "The most important thing is that she can do it in God's strength."

Ennis reflects nationwide polling showing widespread support for Palin, Republican Sen. John McCain's running mate, among evangelical Christians. Earlier this year, some evangelicals criticized McCain for not speaking as openly about his faith as some candidates.

But according to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, his standing among white evangelical Protestant registered voters has risen from 61% in June to 71% in a poll conducted Sept. 9-14. Evangelical Christians form the bulwark of the Republican voting base.

And many, like Ennis, see no conflict between Palin's candidacy and biblical teachings on women's roles.

Many say that biblical restrictions on women's leadership apply to church and home, not the secular world -- clearing the way for a woman to run the nation but not a congregation. And so long as Palin's husband, Todd, approves, they say, her career conforms with teachings on wifely duties.

But to others, this view contradicts biblical teaching.

"The Palin selection is the single most dangerous event in the conscience of the Christian community in the last 10 years at least," said Doug Phillips, president of Vision Forum, a Texas-based ministry. "The unabashed, unquestioning support of Sarah Palin and all she represents marks a fundamental departure from our historic position of family priorities -- of moms being at home with young children, of moms being helpers to their husbands, the priority of being keepers of the home."

Voddie Baucham, a Texas pastor who has criticized the Palin selection as anti-family in a series of blogs, said that the overwhelming evangelical support demonstrates a willingness to sacrifice biblical principles for politics. "Evangelicalism has lost its biblical perspective and its prophetic voice," Baucham wrote. "Men who should be standing guard as the conscience of the country are instead falling in line with the feminist agenda and calling a family tragedy . . . a shining example of family values."

In an interview, Baucham said the hundreds of responses he's received are running 20 to 1 in his favor. But he said he has also been castigated for "breaking ranks" by some, who argue the election is too important to raise divisive issues.

He and other like-minded pastors disagree. "It's more important for us to truthfully represent the priorities of Scripture than it is for us to win an election," Phillips said.

Palin may have taken center stage at the moment, but the evangelical Christian world has been buffeted for years by growing tensions between those who support egalitarian roles for men and women and those who promote "complementarianism." That's the view that God values men and women equally but granted them distinctly different roles.

Some of the debate centers on whether the Bible allows women to serve as civil leaders. Vision Forum leaders argue that it does not. They cite passages in Genesis, Isaiah, Ephesians and elsewhere that they say establishes male headship over women and are critical of female leadership.

Others counter that restrictions on female leadership apply only to church and home. They include Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kentucky; and Randy Stinson, whose Kentucky-based Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood was established to combat growing feminism in evangelical churches.

Most of the debate on Palin, however, centers on whether a mother with young children is violating Scripture by running for such a demanding office as vice president. The key biblical verse at issue is Titus 2:5, which many evangelical Christians believe lays out God's command to younger women to be workers at home subject to their husbands.

Although many conservative Christians agree that women should place homemaking over working outside, many are hesitant to apply those views to Palin. Christian author Martha Peace, whose book "The Excellent Wife" tells women to submit to husbands and be good homemakers, said she would not make the same choice as Palin.

Ditto for Richard Land, who heads the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission and recommended Palin to the McCain campaign. He also would not do as the Palins have done. "I'm not hard-wired to be the 'First Dude,' " he said.

But Peace and Land are two of many who say the public should stay out of what is a matter between the Palins and their pastor. "I wouldn't presume to make that judgment for another family," Land said.

Others cite biblical passages they believe affirm Palin's decision to join the GOP ticket.

Take the woman at Placerita Baptist Church, where the women's ministry offers classes on "Heavenly Homemaking" and Bible classes on the apostle Paul's epistle that declared husbands are the head of wives, as Christ is the head of the church.

Eighteen women gathered recently to discuss Palin. They included stay-at-home moms and home-schoolers, small business owners and nurses, some with high school diplomas and others with doctoral degrees. All of them expressed support of Palin, particularly for standing against abortion and embracing her infant son.

Janice Hodgson, who worked in the mortgage business until recently, said Proverbs 31 offers a positive view of working women with servants -- suggesting, she said, that it is fine for Palin to hire nannies to help care for her children.

Barbara Barrick, the women's ministry coordinator, said she looks to Deborah, a prophetess and judge, as a biblical example of a female leader. Ennis cited Abraham's wife, Sarah, and Queen Esther as other women called by God for special missions.

Teresa Watanabe

The Alaska governor has lifted John McCain's support among conservative Christians, but some believe her work outside the home has turned 'husbands lead, wives submit' on its head.

In a white-steepled church along a stretch in picturesque canyon country, the preacher laid out the basic blueprint of a godly marriage: Husbands lead, wives submit.

Speaking recently before hundreds of worshipers at Placerita Baptist Church in Newhall, guest preacher Chris Mueller affirmed the view that loving male headship and gracious wifely submission are God's plan for spouses.

Placerita, like many conservative Christian churches, teaches that a wife's role is to be her husband's helpmate (Genesis), "workers at home" (Titus) and submissive to her husband in everything (Ephesians).

So how do these congregants square such teachings with their support for Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the conservative evangelical Christian who is aiming to become vice president while her teenage daughter is pregnant, her infant son has Down syndrome and her husband took a leave from work to serve as "Mr. Mom," as People magazine put it?

"It's probably presumptuous of us to figure out how she is going to balance all of this," said Pat Ennis, a Placerita congregant who heads the home economics department at The Master's College, a Christian institution in Santa Clarita. "The most important thing is that she can do it in God's strength."

Ennis reflects nationwide polling showing widespread support for Palin, Republican Sen. John McCain's running mate, among evangelical Christians. Earlier this year, some evangelicals criticized McCain for not speaking as openly about his faith as some candidates.

But according to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, his standing among white evangelical Protestant registered voters has risen from 61% in June to 71% in a poll conducted Sept. 9-14. Evangelical Christians form the bulwark of the Republican voting base.

And many, like Ennis, see no conflict between Palin's candidacy and biblical teachings on women's roles.

Many say that biblical restrictions on women's leadership apply to church and home, not the secular world -- clearing the way for a woman to run the nation but not a congregation. And so long as Palin's husband, Todd, approves, they say, her career conforms with teachings on wifely duties.

But to others, this view contradicts biblical teaching.

"The Palin selection is the single most dangerous event in the conscience of the Christian community in the last 10 years at least," said Doug Phillips, president of Vision Forum, a Texas-based ministry. "The unabashed, unquestioning support of Sarah Palin and all she represents marks a fundamental departure from our historic position of family priorities -- of moms being at home with young children, of moms being helpers to their husbands, the priority of being keepers of the home."

Voddie Baucham, a Texas pastor who has criticized the Palin selection as anti-family in a series of blogs, said that the overwhelming evangelical support demonstrates a willingness to sacrifice biblical principles for politics. "Evangelicalism has lost its biblical perspective and its prophetic voice," Baucham wrote. "Men who should be standing guard as the conscience of the country are instead falling in line with the feminist agenda and calling a family tragedy . . . a shining example of family values."

In an interview, Baucham said the hundreds of responses he's received are running 20 to 1 in his favor. But he said he has also been castigated for "breaking ranks" by some, who argue the election is too important to raise divisive issues.

He and other like-minded pastors disagree. "It's more important for us to truthfully represent the priorities of Scripture than it is for us to win an election," Phillips said.

Palin may have taken center stage at the moment, but the evangelical Christian world has been buffeted for years by growing tensions between those who support egalitarian roles for men and women and those who promote "complementarianism." That's the view that God values men and women equally but granted them distinctly different roles.

Some of the debate centers on whether the Bible allows women to serve as civil leaders. Vision Forum leaders argue that it does not. They cite passages in Genesis, Isaiah, Ephesians and elsewhere that they say establishes male headship over women and are critical of female leadership.

Others counter that restrictions on female leadership apply only to church and home. They include Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kentucky; and Randy Stinson, whose Kentucky-based Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood was established to combat growing feminism in evangelical churches.

Most of the debate on Palin, however, centers on whether a mother with young children is violating Scripture by running for such a demanding office as vice president. The key biblical verse at issue is Titus 2:5, which many evangelical Christians believe lays out God's command to younger women to be workers at home subject to their husbands.

Although many conservative Christians agree that women should place homemaking over working outside, many are hesitant to apply those views to Palin. Christian author Martha Peace, whose book "The Excellent Wife" tells women to submit to husbands and be good homemakers, said she would not make the same choice as Palin.

Ditto for Richard Land, who heads the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission and recommended Palin to the McCain campaign. He also would not do as the Palins have done. "I'm not hard-wired to be the 'First Dude,' " he said.

But Peace and Land are two of many who say the public should stay out of what is a matter between the Palins and their pastor. "I wouldn't presume to make that judgment for another family," Land said.

Others cite biblical passages they believe affirm Palin's decision to join the GOP ticket.

Take the woman at Placerita Baptist Church, where the women's ministry offers classes on "Heavenly Homemaking" and Bible classes on the apostle Paul's epistle that declared husbands are the head of wives, as Christ is the head of the church.

Eighteen women gathered recently to discuss Palin. They included stay-at-home moms and home-schoolers, small business owners and nurses, some with high school diplomas and others with doctoral degrees. All of them expressed support of Palin, particularly for standing against abortion and embracing her infant son.

Janice Hodgson, who worked in the mortgage business until recently, said Proverbs 31 offers a positive view of working women with servants -- suggesting, she said, that it is fine for Palin to hire nannies to help care for her children.

Barbara Barrick, the women's ministry coordinator, said she looks to Deborah, a prophetess and judge, as a biblical example of a female leader. Ennis cited Abraham's wife, Sarah, and Queen Esther as other women called by God for special missions.

Teresa Watanabe