Robert Reich's Blog

Robert Reich was the nation's 22nd Secretary of Labor and is a professor at the University of California at Berkeley. His latest book is "Supercapitalism." This is his personal journal.

My Photo
Name: Robert Reich

Latest book, "Supercapitalism," is now out in paperback. For copies of articles, books, and public radio commentaries, go to www.robertreich.org. This blog is available as an RSS feed. Public radio commentaries are now available as a podcast.

Friday, April 18, 2008

Obama for President

The formal act of endorsing a candidate is generally (and properly)limited to editorial pages and elected officials whose constituents might be influenced by their choice. The rest of us shouldn't assume anyone cares. My avoidance of offering a formal endorsement until now has also been affected by the pull of old friendships and my reluctance as a teacher and commentator to be openly partisan. But my conscience won't let me be silent any longer.

I believe that Barack Obama should be elected President of the United States.

Although Hillary Clinton has offered solid and sensible policy proposals, Obama's strike me as even more so. His plans for reforming Social Security and health care have a better chance of succeeding. His approaches to the housing crisis and the failures of our financial markets are sounder than hers. His ideas for improving our public schools and confronting the problems of poverty and inequality are more coherent and compelling. He has put forward the more enlightened foreign policy and the more thoughtful plan for controlling global warming.

He also presents the best chance of creating a new politics in which citizens become active participants rather than cynical spectators. He has energized many who had given up on politics. He has engaged young people to an extent not seen in decades. He has spoken about the most difficult problems our society faces, such as race, without spinning or simplifying. He has rightly identified the armies of lawyers and lobbyists that have commandeered our democracy, and pointed the way toward taking it back.

Finally, he offers the best hope of transcending the boundaries of class, race, and nationality that have divided us. His life history exemplifies this, as do his writings and his record of public service. For these same reasons, he offers the best possibility of restoring America's moral authority in the world.

170 Comments:

Blogger STRONGBLOOD said...

Dear Americans: I fully support what robert rich has carefully stated here. I have been saying it. We really have only once choice and a good one for the President of the United States of America, and I am calling on all Americans stand behind this man. I am a staunch conservative and I know God's hand when I see one. Barack is a gift to America at such a time as this. Let me say few more things besides what Robert rightfully stated. As a strategic analyst and Professor in the area for many years, Obama is by far the better manager or will be a better manager of this nation than both Hillary and McCain. In fact, Obama is the one who is MUCH READY TO BE PRESIDENT ON DAY ONE than McCain or Clinton. McCain is not a manager and he will find it difficult to acquire the needed skills quickly. Both McCain and Hillaryand McCain (but more so for McCain) are more likely to commit management and national security blunders than Obama. As a Professor of strategic management and international business for over 16 years and have the honor of analyzing behavior, let me rate McCain, Hillary, and Obama on the following dimensions:

MANAGING THE NATION== McCain 45%, Hillary 55%, Obama 95%
PATRIOTISM == McCain 100%, Hillary 100%, Obama 100%
NATIONAL SECURITY== McCain 60%, Hillary 60%, Obama 98%
LOVE OF ISRAEL== McCain 100%, Hillary 100%, Obama 100%
ABILITY TO MAKE AMERICA BETTER OVERALL== McCain 45%, Hillary 65%, Obama 98%
[Feel free to call me for explanation]

I want you to know that the above factors are interdependent. Although I am a staunch conservative, I am calling on America to vote for this man Obama for use in rescuing, stabilizing, and prospering America again!!! People, there is nothing wrong about being a soldier for this nation, but do not commit suicide or even mass destruction of lives by equating soldiering with the complexities of running a nation. Ronald Reagan was no soldier but he was the best President of USA I witnessed in my life time; I am 52 now. Fortunately for America, this man Obama is an amalgam of J.F. Kennedy and Reagan. Both of these qualities are in Obama, and he will intrinsically and naturally showcase these qualities as the next President of this USA. I urge all states to vote for him overwhelmingly. I am a deep-seated conservative Christian, but I refuse to let one or two disagreement make me to fail to recommend this man to our nation at This critical hour!!! Obama will be used by God to shine America again in the world and to prosper America again. We better behave this time. he is extremely sensible, reasonable, loving, and has the ability to adjust given necessary contingencies. Feel free to contact me...Dr. FSAOS [Strongblood]

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

thank you Dr.Reich. we will remember your support.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Samuel ben Sharon said...

There was a verse in a movie that stated, my greatest gift is to return Rome to herself, return her to a Republic. Our Democracy has been stolen from us. Unfortunately, Mr. Bush has been wrong about EVERYTHING, and Mr. McCain see to follow in his foot steps. They must be stopped before we are turned inti a police/Nazi state.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Frank Thomas said...

Dr. Reich,

Congratulations on your stepping forward in support of Barack Obama!

Obama's unpretentious intelligence is obvious ... his Emotional IQ is more impressive to me. He's a man comfortably at peace with himself and his surroundings who demonstrates a discerning maturity beyond his age ... no doubt nurtured by his unique multi-cultural background.

I believe he has the backbone, humor and cultural equanimity to
handle the narcissistic character assassination tactics and latest Media HYPE and NO CONTENT games, so poisoning our political-journalistic system.

I've lived half of my life in Europe, mostly in The Netherlands in recent years. Like all my American relations, we are quite taken in by the refreshingly natural, civil, and rational social-political discourse here.Obama has these qualities in adundance. He appeals to most for his down-to-earth humanness and integrity. He's overwhelmingly liked by Europeans and Democratic/
Independent American voters abroad. He comes across as a person of clarity, good management skills and a genuine human touch that resonates broadly to all genders, races, and ages. He's right on with his message that sensible "bottoms-up-democracy" needs reviving in America.

As one American acquaintance said, "He knows the pains of Main Street, and is not controlled by Wall Street."

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger EmpowerTube said...

This is great. Wow! Robert is such a bold leader. This is what America should have especially after going through difficult years under the Bush regime. With People like Robert speaking out, I'm now believing that there's hope that America will rise up again.

Check out more election news

http://empowertube.blogspot.com/

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Dave C. said...

I appreciate the careful words that were chosen here, and the careful consideration given to the choice between these two candidates.

At the end of the day - at least over the last 4-6 weeks - the democratic campaign has become a Campaign About Nothing. No substance, no issues ... just two candidates clawing at each other.

However, while one candidate - Barack Obma - has done his best to turn the dialog toward John McCain's pandering policies (a summergas tax "holiday"? Heads-up John ... you're not currently the President!), Senator Clinton has done the only thing she can: attempt to tear Barack Obama down.

It's clear at this stage that the Clintons (yes, both of them) realize that the only move they have left is to diminish Barack Obama. Anyone ... ANYONE ... can be torn down if the light is shown brightly enough. We're electing a President, not a god. So where does this get us?

Democratic party logistics aside, Senator Obama is the candidate who can take the country forward. What Senator Clinton and her supporters seem to miss is the fact that the "change" that's being called for in the country isn't an empty call ... it's not charisma ... it's not academic ... it's a desire to move beyond the last 30 years of dem/rep politics.

No serious Obama supporter belives that the guy walks on water. But they do think that he's the only candidate that can break the country out of the malaise ... just because of who he is.

And who is he? He's a constitutional scholar and professor, a Harvard Grad, a community activist, an accomplised lawyer, a State Senator, a Federal Senator, and he's run a presidential campaign like no one in recent memory. Oh yeah ... and his policies are sound, grounded, and while they may differ slightly from Clinton's, they're firmly progressive.

The country has given Clinton 8 years. The country has given Bush/Cheney 8 years. Let's try something totally different.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous John Mavroudis said...

Perfectly stated... from the heart and the head. Well done!

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger kayxyz said...

On Thursday I thought that since we have entered new territory with Senators Obama and Clinton vying for the nomination, I hope the presidential debates this summer break new territory: I would appreciate seeing Senator Obama debate the real source of the Republican Party: Fox CEO Roger Ailes and then Rush Limbaugh, drug addict. Get right down to brass tacks.

On Friday I watched PBS's Jim Lehrer News Hour. David Brooks was hilarious. His comment about wishing the Democrat candidates hadn't stated they wouldn't raise taxes while in office, wishing they hadn't boxed themselves in, sounded just like Roger Ailes had send out the marching orders for how David will march and talk between now and November. I thought, gee, what if Obama does get elected and does stick to what he said about taxes.

Someone on the Washington Post blog put it best: people who were unemployed soon after Bush took office are still unemployed now, and the Republicans don't care.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Robert said...

Let's take just one point at a time: "He [Obama] has energized many who had given up on politics. He has engaged young people to an extent not seen in decades".

By my previous calculations (from CNN numbers), the popular vote difference is less than 0.3%. That means Hillary is practically matching every vote Obama is getting so far. Now, why then is Obama the only one getting the credit for "energizing" voters to participate?

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Alecki said...

I am very disappointed in your endorsement for Obama.
The press has destroyed the Clintons and now I feel like the superdelegates are listening.
The only station that finally was able to display Obama's qualities and issues was ABC and now they are being criticized.
Obama is very radical, has a pastor full of hatred for America. This was his mentor.
Obama has ties wth Tony Rezko of Chicago and William Ayers, a terrorist.
Reverend Wright, Obama's mentor of twenty years has embarrassed our first lady and white America.
Obama has an elitist attitude towards most of America. He has a cocky attitude from his own dislike for his grudges against American politics.
This man has his own anger problems. Show me your friends and I will show you who you are:
Tony Rezko, a criminal from Chicago that Obama has know for years.
William Ayers, a terrorist that he worked on a board with in Chicago.
Pastor Wright, a supporter of anti-Semetic, Louis Farrakhan.
Al Sharpton, fighting for the states of Florida not to seat delegates.
Michelle Obama not being proud of her country until now.
This man will never survive against a war hero, John McCain.
I am saddened that the children and the media is controlling this electiion.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am in total agreement with "alecki"'s comments

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

With friends like you. Why did you have to endorse anyone? Why not just go quietly to the ballot box and cast your vote? Are you that self important? What a stab in the back for the Clintons.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Zaher said...

Dr. Reich,

I want to thank you for this endorsement. AS someone who immigrated to the US 9.5 years ago, this administration has drained almost all hopes and dreams I have had in this nation. It felt like being in a psychologically abusive marriage and Obama has rekindled a love this president and his administration almost put out.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Dr. Reich, If only the media would take the time and the space (upper right side of the front page!) to fully report on your REASONS for endorsing Senator Obama. He is the finest presidential candidate in years, with a world view that just might save us from repeating the horrific and stupid blunders of the last 8 years.

But I fear American voters will be swayed by all focus the media has given to Senator Obama's unadorned lapel, and that ultimately many white voters will follow the unspoken racist script, that "this black man does not know his place." That, I believe, is the hidden subtext underneath all the frenetic focus on his (admitted awkwardly spoken) comments about the disenfranchised white working class.

Charlotte Udziela
Older white female voter

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you for stepping up to the plate and making your endorsement known!

People want CHANGE!!! I'm 46 and in my whole voting career there has been a Bush or Clinton on the ticket...IT'S TIME PEOPLE!!!

Obama has already created change...and it's not even 1-20-09. Now that's change I can endorse!

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Jack said...

So disappointed in your latest comments, Bob, and will not be buying your book -

You as a politican should know what a candidate goes through to get to an elected office - and you have to answer the questions posed to you.

You should know better.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous beebop said...

The wonderful thing about America is that when you have strong feelings about her future, you can express them. I trust that you have taken the full opportunity to visit the blogs and witnessed the "real" lynching that has been taking place.

Come the end of the day -- when each of us is wrapped in little more than our reputations -- I would rather have Hillary's than Barack's and I pray to the God that Jews, Christians and Muslims honor each in their own unique and timeless fashion -- that Senator Clinton and each of the time tested advisors who support and defend her will also serve the America we all cherish.

If you honestly believe that she has been the only negative force in this campaign, you are choosing to overlook what is clearly there to be seen. Gerri Ferraro is no racist. Bill Clinton is no racist. You know these people. Why do you choose not to speak up for them?

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Nancy said...

Given the excruciating-to-watch tone the campaign has taken in the past few weeks, I am thrilled to see Robert Reich make an endorsement for Obama. His tone, even when he is critical, is one that offers solutions. The better path, the greater good. An endorsement from a brilliant solution-minded thinker can only auger hope for real change.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Frederick Ferguson said...

I started out supporting Hillary Clinton last year because I viewed her as a back alley, no holds barred fighter. Today, I am no longer supporting her because I believe she is in fact that and a pathological liar to boot. We have just had 8 years of self-serving happy talk and lies. We need someone to tell the truth despite the risks of doing that in our country. I don't know Obama that well. I mostly support him because he has inspired so many of the disaffected to come out and vote, especially people under 30. Frankly if Hillary manages to steal this nomination I am content to let the Republicans spend the next 4 years dealing with all of GWB's mess. I cannot compromise my principles and vote for Hillary. Electability is not the issue but integrity is.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bravo Robert pour votre courage!!
Go Obama
From France
Camille

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Shirley Keller said...

Thank you Mr. Reich for taking this position. It must have been a hard one, since you were on the Clinton Team for so many years. I hope people like Carvel will not call you traitor like he did Richardson. But sometimes one must follow ones heart in spite of everything. I agree with one of the writers that the Clintons are not racists. Had Obama not turned out to be in this race I certainly would have supported her, even if she does "politician" speak after so many years in the game. I have learned to accept "they" lie. Sad, but we vote for them anyway, ex: Bush twice. I hope that something else might be allowed to happen with so many young people now interested in politics. It is exciting to think about. I cannot remember an election in my 65 years where I really cannot figure out the outcome. Usually it is all decided and we the voters just go through the motions. This is good.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger John Warren Gotsch said...

Just wanted to thank you for your thoughtful and pointed endorsement of Barack; its going to be exciting to watch him govern.
I am an expat in Budapest. it feels strange to be proud to be an American, again.
Thanks.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Josh said...

Prof. Reich,

I am still torn in support for either Democratic candidate, personally. And though I understand the pressures on you as a public figure to offer support, I fear the vitriol (a typical Democratic primary, but really important this time) may take down quite a few people.

I don't believe the Democrats can win with a Senator. On top of that, I'm concerned with Senator Obama's position on health care, in that it is very "centrist", or catering to independents. I'm immediately reminded of Truman's claim, "If you give voters a choice between a Republican and a Republican, they'll vote for the Republican every time."
Last, I'm worried that his attempt to take the nomination through caucuses (vs. direct primary elections, which he has trouble winning) and independent voters will come back to bite the Democrats in November, when those independent voters have the choice between a media-crowned independent McCain, or a new, young, African American Senator named Obama. Keep in mind the demographics of Independent voters. If you can't recall, just look up a picture of Perot's '92 campaign.
That said, I do believe the Democrats need to win this election. It is too important to lose.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Art A Layman said...

Dr. Reich:

So good to see you come out of the closet. You are aware, of course, that the closet door has been open for the last 8 or 10 months. Those here heaping praises on your final determination have apparently not been reading your blog posts. The announcement is, at best, anticlimactic.

I am not one who would suggest that you depress your thoughts or actions predicated on previous friendships. I am a firm believer that emotional feelings should not govern thought, albeit a difficult hurdle for most of us.

Obama has much going for him. Many of his laudables, referenced by you, are sound and bode an improved political climate. You, as does he, get a little Valhallic, however. Your wistful conclusions of his impact on the political scene seem less the musings of a learned mind and more those of an enrapt member of the herd.

Movement conservative is not based on the invention of the smokeless cigarette. They have built strong support for their euphoric ideas, predicated as they are in whimsical economic theory and their interpretation of God's will. They will not react as "a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more". They have feasted from the trough of political power and they are far from sated.

Be it Hillary or Obama who is successful, movement conservative will marshal their resources and they will fight on vehemently. Obama's inexperience on the national political stage portends a inability to be effective in the face of such an onslaught. Recent history would tend to discount your assertions of a renewed, involved citizenry. For the most part the American public views its responsibility as over once they have voted. Other than Monday morning quarterbacking, as a whole, the public seems devoid of interest in the daily machinations of political haraunging.

One could posit that the time is ripe for one of those rebellions which Jefferson spoke of. Alas, the will of the American people falls far short of that of our founders.

Obama is an orator with impressive skills. He is not a Reagan, nor a Bill Clinton, maybe not even a JFK. He is gifted, but oratory skills alone will not solve the deep seated problems this country faces. To my mind the bulk of the cultural/economic problems we face started with Reagan's terms. Bill Clinton added some exacerbating factors but all in all we are firmly entrenched in a movement conservative climate and undoing that aura will be a huge undertaking.

Hillary, by virtue of her involvement in her husband's administration, has been fire tested; Obama has not. Those who marvel at Obama's cool reserve under fire fail to notice, through his facial expressions and body language the consternation and frustration seething at the constant barrage of questions regarding his associations and perhaps, lack of good judgment. You know, as do I, he ain't seen nothing yet. The campaign will be hard enough; being effective if he wins will be even tougher.

Obama seems a good man. He appears honest and full of integrity (so did Reagan). Certainly his ideas are far preferable to me than Reagan's, but I have serious concerns about his ability to be effective. Even the smallest of missteps or catastrophes beyond his control and movement conservative will be waiting to pounce. His approach to politics is inviting but his entry to the halls of power may be premature.

There is understandable reason for politicians to be proclaiming their favorite. Those experts, theoretically outside the political maelstrom, might best abstain at this point and better position themselves to be a part of the solution whomever the eventual candidate will be. Maybe your relationship, or lack thereof, with the Clintons, leads you to the conclusion that you will not be a player in a new Clinton administration. You may be right but I would argue passionately that great progressive minds such as yours should have a voice in any Democratic administration.

The bed is made. You must now lie in it. Let us hope you are more right than wrong.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger magikpowerwoman said...

I was so happy to hear Mr. Reich is supporting Obama and to read his reasons why. When this race started (how many eons ago?)I didn't know who I would vote for in the Democratic race and I was certainly open to Hillary. It is so very sad to see how she has campaigned. In fact, I think she is mentally ill and I hope she gets some help when this is all over. She and Bill are pathological liars and there's no way to parse that. It just "is". If Obama does not win I will leave America. I've been thinking for some time that I cannot live in this Empire any longer. If Obama does win (and I pray he does), I'll stay, observe, and act for change. For her to throw "Farakahn" in that miserable tv circus was unforgivable. But Obama dusted himself off and the numbers are still his. Thank you again Mr. Reich.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree with the several comments that have called you out on your lack of defending the racist labels the pundits have used on the Clintons and their supporters... You of all people know these are not racist people. It calls in to question for me the full reason for your endorsement. There is something very sadly unspoken here in the context of your integrity and sincerity.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The poster is correct. The Clintons are not racist. This is precisely what makes their repeated use of the race card even more dispicable.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks, Robert, from Europe!

Have a look to those political donations by Wall Street, they tell a lot:

http://www.portfolio.com/graphics/2008/04/Wall-Street-Divided-Loyalties

Go Obama!

asuk

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dr Reich,

Thank you for stepping forward and supporting Senator Obama.

Best to you.

p.s. That sketch you did with Conan was hilarious. You're a great sport and you really come across as a good hearted guy.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Lois Peterson said...

Thank you Robert Reich!! I am glad that you have given your support to Barack Obama in such an all-encompassing statement. I am hopeful that the "old politics" can be pushed aside soon and we can really discuss issues that are vital to our country. I hope that you will give ongoing suggestions to the Obama campaign as it prepares to confront the Republicans and in the Obama administration as well. Your dedication to the good in America is appreciated!

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr Reich,

I salute your courage and integrity by endorsing Mr Obama.

I believe no one without his world view, life experience, integrity, courage, philosophy, optimism, temperament, and pragmatism can lead us out of this morass.

I salute you for not kow-towing to the expected fielty by the Clintons. I hope you would not suffer the same attack from rabid Clintonistas like Carville on Bill Richardson.

Thank you for doing the RIGHT thing.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Alan said...

Hillary is scheduled to make an appearance in about 45 minutes here in PA. From the standpoint of a casual observer, the absence of genuine enthusiasm or "buzz" is palpable.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger BC said...

http://www.dropouthillary.org/

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous No Spring Chicken said...

It's time for the grownups to stand up and take over. Thank you for supporting Barack Obama.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous eebaltimore said...

Dr Reich, after seeing you as a commentator here and there over the past few months, I thought you were ALREADY in the tank for Obama! Your "official" endorsement smacks of an egotistical "in your face" kind of slap at the Clintons. Given the respect you've enjoyed, and your stature in your field, I think it's a pretty cheap shot...

I whole-heartedly disagree with your analysis of the two candidates' positions on the issues. I think that Sen. Clinton is one of the most outstanding presidential candidates to come along in our lifetime. Her thoughtful plans for all of the important issues facing our country today are far superior to Sen. Obama's. Many of his positions were crafted by, frankly, using her ideas and then coming forward with his plan a few days later. That's why his are so similar! Moreover, Sen. Clinton will geninely work her heart out to get done what she promises. I really doubt that Obama has the experience, contacts or know-how to deliver. If he is the nominee and wins the Presidency, I believe he will limp through 4 years with nothing accomplished, and be defeated after his first term. Is that your hope for America?

Many of us have serious concerns about Obama's judgement and patriotism, given some his past political cronies. And, it has nothing to do with whether or not he wears a flag pin. Are you aware, for example, that he and Wm. Ayers funneled funds to the PLO through Professor Rashid Khalidi, a known terrorist sympathizer? Is this the sort of person we want representing the USA? (http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=8310)

Sen. Clinton has been been very unfairly vilified by the media, her opponents, Obama supporters, misogynistic men and some truly hateful women. And yet, here she stands, on the eve of the PA primary, poised to win, and just a few percentage points behind Obama in the popular vote. This just goes to show how strong she is, and how much support she has.

If you think your endorsement of Obama will somehow erase that support, or sway undecided voters, you are seriously out of touch.

And, please don't worry about some sort of backlash from Clinton supporters. Your endorsement is just not that big of a deal... sorry!

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous lacaliffa said...

Particularly after his poor performance in the recent debate and the whining about the questions afterward, I'm convinced that Obama is not ready for prime time. It wasn't ABC's fault that he performed poorly. Delivering well-written "West Wing" dialogue is for TV shows, not debates. I can only assume that Hillary Clinton has failed to court favor effectively, considering that all of her so-called friends are deserting her but we don't need a "likable" president - I want capable. I want determined, experienced, confident, and tough as nails.

People voted for W because he was likable and look where we are now. Americans seem destined to repeat the same bad judgments and mistakes over and over again.

Another concern is what we don't yet know about Obama. Everyone has their baggage and, as Clinton says, hers has been thoroughly searched. Her detractors are big on mentioning the investigations but the truth is - nothing was ever found after wasting $70 million. What is yet to be discovered about Obama? Democrats constantly undermine any opportunity at success and this election seems to be well on its way to disaster.

On a personal level, the Clintons must be very disappointed that decades of public service, peace, and prosperity don't mean much to an ungrateful public or even their personal "friends."

I hate to see 4 more years of (Mc)Bush and the damage that will do to our country but that's where I fear we are headed.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob,
I had you for two classes at the Kennedy School in 1985-1986, among the best ever for me. Congrats on your successes, including this thoughtful endorsement. --Casey

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous donna said...

Aleki,

Obama's pastor was a Marine and signed up for a second tour in the Navy during Vietnam. How about you?

Radical is in the eyes of the beholder, and is a stupid slur.

_______

In 1961, a young African-American man, after hearing President John F. Kennedy's challenge to, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country," gave up his student deferment, left college in Virginia and voluntarily joined the Marines.

In 1963, this man, having completed his two years of service in the Marines, volunteered again to become a Navy corpsman. (They provide medical assistance to the Marines as well as to Navy personnel.)

The man did so well in corpsman school that he was the valedictorian and became a cardiopulmonary technician. Not surprisingly, he was assigned to the Navy's premier medical facility, Bethesda Naval Hospital , as a member of the Commander In Chief's medical team, and helped care for President Lyndon B. Johnson after his 1966 surgery. For his service on the team, which he left in 1967, the White House awarded him three letters of commendation.

What is even more remarkable is that this man entered the Marines and Navy not many years after the two branches began to become integrated.

While this young man was serving six years on active duty, Vice President Dick Cheney, was born the same year as the Marine/sailor, received five deferments, four for being an undergraduate and graduate student and one for being a prospective father. Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, both five years younger than the African-American youth, used their student deferments to stay in college until 1968. Both then avoided going on active duty through family connections.

Who is the real patriot? The young man who interrupted his studies to serve his country for six years or our three political leaders who beat the system? Are the patriots the people who actually sacrifice something or those who merely talk about their love of the country?

After leaving the service of his country, the young African-American finished his final year of college, entered the seminary, was ordained as a minister, and eventually became pastor of a large church in one of Americas biggest cities.

This man is Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the retired pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Maria Rivera-Carvalho said...

Support Obama if you like words and charisma instead of substance. This life long Democrat can distinguish between a media creation and a real leader. I can't support him and I am not alone. A MacCain Thank You card must be in the mail.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

THANK YOU MR. REICH.

CLARIFICATION HELPS.

CAW

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Frank Thomas said...

To Art Layman,

Art,as usual, you do an excellent, elucidative job in analyzing the social-psychological factors driving the conflicts in our social-political model. But Im going to start calling you the "Great Hedger" ...
who carefully debunks ideas and people and then speaks positively or praises them. A very safe approach ... but hardly connecting to something you wisely said earlier that Big Steps are sometimes necessary to solve Big problems. Obama's Presidential candidacy is precisely an example of such a Big Step that takes some calculated daring.

So, I've already prepared and welcome that you're going to give me a very challenging headache when I finally come forward with my PART III-Transition to a Stable Economy... a solution framework to our current social-economic mess, which I'm still trying to find time for putting down on paper in my own, hopefully, simple way.

I wonder if you honestly think Hillary will build bridges across the huge divides in American today better than Barack ... on basis of her so-called added experience as Bill's moral confessional soulmate combined with her demonstrated talents for dividing people?

One has to dare to take some risks in this life. We took a big one with BUSH Jr. If we think the system needs fundamental reforms, we'll take an even Bigger risk of stalemate with the not so amiable, easy to work with Hillary... whose professed loyalties to Main Street are somewhat compromised by her being financed to a large extent by Wallstreet.
Obama's legitimate qualities to meet the daunting tasks ahead is not romantic thinking ... neither is the reality of the Clintons migration to the upper class money networks ($109 millon in earnings the last 8 years, $500 million for Bill´s `Good Deeds´ Trust Fund, $170 million for Bill´s library) while preening themselves about their allegiances to the less advantaged in our society. This hypocrisy is illustrated amply by those ignored, displaced workers in Pa. who -- contrary to the fatuous nonsense of Paul Krugman's recent article entitled, "Clinging to a Stereotype" -- are no further ahead after 3 Republican and 1 Democratic (Clinton) administrations. No progress! This is Obama's honesty of calling an Ace an Ace. He's really not into the blame game but wants to evolve balanced solutions that do not bring our nation further into financial chaos. He gets sidetracked with the Media's obsession with the trivial and the Clintons' recourse to the old contrived, dirty political detours that have got us to our widening social stratification and financial mess today.

We´ve become so cynical we have trouble recognizing the deep system flaws and who can best lead the way to correct them in these difficult times. We all want someone who can bring together constructive, integrated solutions for repairing a ship about to capsize ... someone who shows the best potential of quelling our cynicism and prejudices, of binding us sufficiently to sail through all the stupid ideological dogma that has kept us on a long course to Nowhere -- concerning particularly our social-educational fabric.

It's character that decides real strength, not the pretense of being tough with words. Pres. Bush Jr. has been the latest unpleasant reality lesson on this.

Here´s another quote from my favorite President, Harry Truman, that I feel has a more direct correlation to Barack´s native leadership skills (to achieve real change he's already remarkably awakened the need for) than to Hillary´s leadership skills, as intelligent as she is,:

"A successful leader cannot afford to lose the common touch ... He's using his head if he talks to everyone in sight and listens to everyone and listens hard ...
You'll find that the willingness to talk to people is true of all of the great men in our history."

I'm going "to throw the dice", another of Bill Clinton's coy fatuities about Barack, in confidence that Barack knows how he must listen to Mainstream America and the rest of the world ... to bring our economy and world respect back to normality... to steer clear of "a serious collapse waiting to happen."
Frank Thomas, The Netherlands

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous bob mann golf pro said...

There has been a lot of talk about Senator Obama "losing" the pa. debate . It appeared to me that his dignity, quality and class prevented him from lowering himself to vetting Sen clinton or multiple fronts. The Obamas bring back the class of Jfk and Jackie to a country that has suffered thru the poorest and based prendency in modern times or more with Bush and the Obamas will bring dignity , Inteeligence and most important , thought thru actions and renew the world respect for our country.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Dr. Reich,

Thank you for taking this courageous stand on principle and hope by endorsing Barack Obama for president. I admire your courage to step out there and lead the way by doing the right thing -- even when it is hard to do.

Well done!

-M

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger notsofast said...

Robert said.....
"He has put forward the more enlightened foreign policy and the more thoughtful plan for controlling global warming".

Amen. Well said.

A month ago I didn't think Obama had a snowball's chance in hell to win the the general election. I think he's got a fighting chance now but still faces very stiff headwinds. Namely: racism/xenophobia. Never underestimate the fear and distrust the majority of Americans feel toward those outside their circle. Very prevalent among the less sophisticated.

Billary was always unelectable so we can forget about her.

It's interesting that things are seemingly so ripe for a dem to be our next president but by some twist of fate they're going to nominate a candidate who's going to have a very difficult time against McCain or one who would have absolutely no chance. Go figure; unpopular war, an economy worsening by the day and a very unpopular George Bush would seemingly give them a huge advantage.

Obama is an interesting politician and clearly the most creative of those still standing. This should help him survive what's left of Billary and can help him overcome the racism assault later in the year.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Deb said...

I am very disappointed that you support Obama. I knew Obama was deceptive but I was really disappointed in him for publishing a pamphlet in Iowa against John Edwards. The more I research Obama, the more concerns I have. I have always been a Democrat. And now my party (actually Obama) has done the unspeakable...disenfranchised two states. The may be the first year in my life that I vote republican! I am not alone...so you nominate Obama and Obama will self-destruct under the Republican scrutiny and by all the voters you have disenfranchised from the Democratic Party!

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Nicco said...

Robert Reich, you should be ashamed of
yourself. After all Pres. Clinton has done for you, you stab him in the back by not supporting his wife, Hillary. What's wrong with you? Are you afraid of a strong, smart woman? You know damn well she is much more qualified to lead this country than Obama, who has no experience. You are nothing but a big (excuse me, little, phony
runt). Go to hell, you two-faced bastard!
Better yet, drop dead.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Henry Y. Shen said...

I listened to Mr. Reich's comment yesterday on KCBS radio and read it just now in here. I think they are well said and well written. As an immigrant, that's my first time to listen to his voice and that voice hits the point. It is like something from a genuine American heart. We all have got fed up by mudslinging, like he said, and we got to see the CHANGE.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger kayxyz said...

This post has been removed by the author.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger kayxyz said...

From one Raleigh North Carolina's News and Observer, one editorial states George W Bush has given awesome power to the two current Democrats running for the nomination, a black man and a woman. Check out Barry Saunders's column

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger pecadillosam said...

Robert,

Thank you for your very well-stated endorsement. It's consistent with your outstanding ability to articulate your arguments.

As a parent of a Cal graduate, two years ago I had the privilege to hear your commencement remarks at the outdoor Greek theatre, for the political science graduates. I thoroughly enjoyed your diplomatically worded, but heartfelt remarks then, as I do now in the text of your endorsement. I also agree wholeheartedly with them.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you for taking your stand for Obama - many great comments from others with support. Some were unfortunately not American because you have a right to vote for who you want without branded as a trader. What's wrong with this country? Everyone has a vote and should use it for the person of their choice.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. Reich,
I was so happy and excited to read about your endorsement of Barack Obama. I have followed your career since the Clinton administration, and I greatly respect your intellect and opinions. Like you, I believe that Senator Obama has much to offer this nation. His intelligence, judgment, and optimism will change America for the better. Thanks for your service to America, and I look forward to future blog posts.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous eduardo said...

JUDAS II.
I used to have a great deal of repect for you.
I just wandered what you got in excahnge, what kind of deal you got, or is it just that you are so narcisist that you seek th espot light that you have lost.
In either case go to hell traitor!!!

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/us/politics/20loyalty.html?ei=5065&en=bdeed0067115920a&ex=1209268800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Frank said...

Mr. Reich:

I was unhappily surprised by your decision. At this point in time, when serious questions about Mr Obama have been raised, with his popularity in decline, one would expect that a thoughtful person like you would think carefully about his decision. It sounds very suspicious. Is the Obama camp going around looking for new friends to get him out of his abyss? In the end Repulicans are the beneficiaries of actions like yours because it shows the magnitude of betrayal and disloyalty among democrats. YOU MADE THE WRONG DECISION SIR.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/us/politics/20loyalty.html?ei=5065&en=bdeed0067115920a&ex=1209268800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger PeonInChief said...

Hey, comrades, you can agree or disagree with Dr. Reich's decision (which I must admit I expected), but calling him names and telling him to "go to hell" is really bad form.

I'm resigned to having to vote for either Obama or Clinton, and frankly see little difference between the two and expect neither of them to do anything but continue catering to Wall Street, diverting us occasionally by tightening the embargo against Cuba (if there's still anything we can do to that country), and reminding us to wear our seat belts.

Now I might have something more emphatic to say if Dr. Reich had endorsed McCain.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have always respected your intellect and apparent thoughtful analysis of the issues-whatever they are. I must say, however, that your endorsement of Obama is very disappointing...not because you are supporting Obama, but because of the way you chose to do it. Given your long history with the Clintons, your position in the Clinton Adminstration (in which you made quite an impact)and basic human decency...you should have kept your "endorsement" to yourself.
I fully support Hillary Clinton-not because she is married to one of the greatest US Presidents of our times, but because she's a smart, experienced, caring individual who will bring America back.

It will be a sad day for America when McCain wins-because my fellow Democrats were so misguided.

(I will be happy to vote for Obama...in 8 years-not now..there's just too much going on!)

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dr. Reich,

I really thought you were a lot smarter than this. I must admit that through the years I've enjoyed your commentary on TV, but this time, WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?

You now place yourself amongst the ranks of the media (who for the most part can hardly be considered journalists by even the loosest definition; most are nothing more than entertainers these days).

Just wait for the Republicans to take this Obama guy apart on the character issues he was so infuriated by in the last debate. And then, if they don't fully succeed, just watch him change the culture of Washington.

He'll never do it, and the way he has run his campaign against Sen. Clinton proves it. He's raised tons of MONEY with his rhetorical skills and has used it to level plenty of bogus and unfair assaults against her.

Needless to say, my opinion of you has dropped more than a few pegs.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Kara said...

I've admired you for a long time, very dissapointed that you are backing Barack.

KB

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous keir said...

Dr. Reich,
Thank you for endorsing Barack Obama.

There are those that have left comments here that disagree with your decision...they are backing Hillary and so are loyal to her.

They have many misconceptions that are wrong, but if you told them they would not believe you because they do not wish to. Reading some of the comments I was very amused by some of the so called truths of Obama. That he is a terrorist in cahoots with Ayers sending money to a terrorist group? Good grief! But no one can prove they are wrong, even with the facts that have come out. It seems that even common sence has left the building; hate and distrust has become a staple in this country. Seems so many have picked up the Elitist word...Hillary started that, and so we have "arrogant" add "cocky", what they mean is "uppity."

Poor Rev. Wright, all those years of sermons and they are cooked down to 30 seconds. No one really wants to know the truth, lies are so much more fun. If they cared about truth the people making such stupid remarks about him would already have dug out YouTube or the transcripts of the sermons, asnd the remarks would not be littering up cyberworld. But lies are so much better and takes less energy.

I know that as far as you oweing the Clintons anything, you do not. If you did not have the abilities that you do, they would not have added you to the cabinet. You and the other advisors aided them with the prosperity that all lived under. You are certainly not a Judas, and the person who said so is a fool.

Thank you sir for endorsing someone I truly believe will lead this country with honor and with strength. I am truly excited about an election for the first time in years...I have been voteing for 40 years and this election has meant the most.

Thank you...from a 60 year old White woman in the south...

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Kathie said...

Supporting or not supporting a candidate is a right we have as Americans. But when one who is a public figure endorses one candidate over another publicly the inpact can be devestating. Your public announcement that you support Obama was a public rebuke of Hillary, yet one more fair weather friend throwing her under the bus lest you be left behind the band wagon.

Last week's debate is an example of why Obama cannot win. "Hope" and "change" are not policies Mr. Reich, they are pandering mantras. You and Governor Richards have shown the fabric of your character, or perhaps lack thereof. Anyone who was an adult in the 1990s knows you both owe your careers to Bill Clinton who publicly supported and encouraged you both.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous daj;djfdf said...

drama queen.
lol.


this post is so totally toasted. it's obvious you were rooting for obama all along, and found the perfect opporunity to give this guy some 'credibility' back when he need[ed/s] it most. though, your opinion doesn't count for much in my world.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger We are DEBT WARRIORS! | Debt Settlement Experts said...

Dr. Reich,

I've been a fan of your principled centered approach and commentary (on radio) for a while now.

After the "elitist" comment made by Senator Clinton, I made the decision to support Senator Obama.

Thanks for staying true to your principles.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger T.Ahmed said...

Thank you, Dr.Reich for supporting OBAMA at this crucial time.
I admire your courage and patriotism. To strengthen our country you , like Governor Richardson and many likes,made a tough choice overlooking Hillary Clinton. The majority in the country-grassroots emphatically support Barak Obama.
By your support we all have are convinced that our Economy will be better under him. You are a person who raptures our attention on TV and news-articles about our economy.

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Anonymous Robert Lynch said...

Thank you for speaking the truth!

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger Shaun King said...

Professor Reich,

You are a thoughtful intellectual who knows the value of public discourse and civic involvement. Your "Supercapitalism" was brilliant.

www.shaunking.com

Saturday, 19 April, 2008  
Blogger eddie joe said...

Dr Reich is writing this blog in part because President Clinton gave him the opportunity to be in the national spotlight rather than remain an academic writer preaching solely to the converted.

I enjoy most all of Dr Reich's opinion pieces ("Supercapitalism" is indeed brilliant) but I cannot agree with his endorsement in spite of his long support and apparent friendships with both Senator and President Clinton. In this age of 24/7 news and vapid headlines, loyalty is no longer valued.

Senator Clinton deserves this nomination, and make no mistake, Senator Obama is winning because he is not female: even liberals are seemingly more comfortable voting for a man. This is evident by Obama supporters' belief in his superior policy positions which are virtually identical to Clinton.

We're becoming a color blind electorate but we have a long way to go towards becoming gender blind voters.

Tuesday, 22 April, 2008  
Blogger Lizard Wizard said...

Washington is full of managers (including Ms. Clinton) as it the U.S and most of the world for that matter, acting as leaders. What we don't have is many true leaders. Mr. Obama is one such who is a true leader. And after the buffoonery of the last 8 years, we really need a leader.
Obama for president.

Tuesday, 22 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am amused by those who are dissapointed by Reich's support for Obama despite all that Bill Clinton has done for him and his career. Where is the unquestioning loyalty that Hillary, via her husband, deserves?

Hillary Clinton = politics as usual

Tuesday, 22 April, 2008  
Blogger Art A Layman said...

frank thomas:

One would presume you are a Democrat from most of your postings. That you voted for Reagan creates concern, but other than that your ideas seem to lean more toward the liberal persuasion. Your latest proclamation raises doubt, once again. It has always been the failing of the conservative mind to see things as nothing but black and white; right and wrong; either, or. No room for shades of grey. No thought of mitigating circumstances. That conservatives have welded that into the American psyche is as awesome as it is abhorrent. You find an incongruity in my expositions. You see my willingness to observe and appreciate the various sides to an issue or an individual as a “hedge”; perhaps, even as a failing to understand and take a position. I see it as a realistic view that recognizes perfection as an allusive quality, never truly attained, but constantly sought. To analyze and pursue perfection we must view all arguments, pro and con, for their merit, accepting some, rejecting others, and in the sense of the only real democratic solution, come to a compromise. In our uniquely American form of democracy we do not have the ability to call for new elections and disband the current government if a resolution to a particular problem is not taking the form of what is best for the public’s interests.

The hard philosophical, political lines that have evolved in the liberal vs. conservative camps often lead to resolutions which are “settling”. Solutions that are far from perfect but rather are expedient; Dr. Reich alludes to this fact in his post. The difference in these political views was what Kristof was referring to in his article and I’m not sure you totally grasp the issue. They are hard wired in the opposing camps and there is little wiggle room for meaningful resolve. Few, especially in the conservative group, are willing to consider reasoned debate as anything more than political posturing.

I respect Dr. Reich, as I do most all men. I do not revere him, as I do not any other man. Dr. Reich is a bright, competent, well educated fellow. Much of what he asserts I find right on. Some of his expositions and decisions I do not agree with and I reserve the right to do that. This does not make me a “hedger”. Rather, it makes me an honest observer of the wisdom and ignorance of all men; albeit as defined by me.

Those who feel a sense of duty to fall in line with all that their heroes posit or who, through fealty, feel a servile need to accept those hero’s judgments, do not express an independent mind. I am a realist. Generally a pragmatic one but sometimes tinged with cynicism. For instance; you propose that investment banks, hedge funds, whatever, should be required to maintain sufficient capital for all their financial finagling. One could hardly argue with the soundness of that proposal, except that it will be argued that it seriously impairs the use of financial leverage as a viable profit making tool.

Good risk management, another of your epiphanies, is hardly arguable. I would bet that at the outset of the securitization of mortgage products, risk was considered minimal. Even if a concern, the egos and intellect of the Wall Street wizards would have presumed they could get out before catastrophe occurred. Our quest for more money/profits has segued from establishing firms to make things for a profit, to bypassing the logistical and monetary risks of labor and capital paradigms and conjuring up ways to make more with pieces of paper. Be that paper, currency or stocks/bonds or securitized debt obligations, it represents a greater liquidity, or so they thought, than millions in plant and equipment and labor. One of the largest investment banks employed good risk management with the subprime mess: They marketed the products to their customers while selling the same vehicles short. Surely a wise risk management strategy but leaves the issue of ethics a conundrum.


Since you read the NYT, if you haven’t read Sunday’s article, CHAPTER ONE; Worked Over and Overworked, please read it. It is a glaring example of where this nation has been going for the past few decades, if not from our inception. Alexis de Tocqueville recognized that money making was our dominant ethic. It is this ethic, rather than the lack of sound banking regulation and practices that is the crux of many of our current dilemmas.

These are but a few facts and observations of our culture and where we have transitioned. Changing culture is not like changing the minimum wage or flipping on the light switch. It is a generational progression, requiring a constancy of principles and mores. It might begin with allusions to hope and change but those allusions are vacuous if a significant alteration of our focus is not forthcoming. Obama does speak in eloquent, awe inspiring tomes. What he, and you, fails to realize is that “movement conservative” is not looking for where their theories went wrong. They believe we are still on the right track with only a couple of loose rails popping up here and there. Listen to John McCain. Essentially he is preaching stay the course, both in Iraq and in the economy and in our society. McCain and the conservatives are not panting at the opportunity to sit down in a bipartisan setting waiting to sing Kumbaya. Should they lose the presidency and/or suffer further losses in the Congress they will not be inclined to forsake their postulates and exercise introspection as to how they can get along with an Obama regime. They will focus their efforts on how to undermine and submarine any attempts at raising taxes or introducing “socialistic welfare” via universal health care or improving global warming.

Dr. Reich, when expounding on public policy and economic issues, is a giant among men. When he enters the political maelstrom he becomes just another pundit spinning justifications and arguments for his position. He states that Obama’s ideas are better the Hillary’s, not because they are better in principle, but because they are more easily saleable and passable. This is not change. It is the status quo. Only the philosophical underpinnings have been altered. His exclamation of the “old politics”, akin to those who talk of the 21st century this and that, is nothing more than spin. It is an adherence to the idea that at the turn of the century all history and knowledge and practice was discarded and we started over with a clean slate. It is an assumption that an “old” way has disappeared and a new way awaits nothing more than an opening to be fruitful. Come fall he will find that someone forgot to tell the conservatives that the “old politics” was dead.

There is an old adage in business: “Nothing happens until somebody sells something”; this is what Dr. Reich is attempting to do; “sell something”. His, and your, views of Obama border on the ethereal. You take an eloquent, well educated, admirable fellow and elevate him to some sort of saintly position. You ascribe to him the ability, if not to leap small buildings in a single bound, to alter a dialog mentality that has become entrenched in our culture. His appeal to the masses proves little. We have experienced many evangelical preachers who have appealed to masses of folks, yet effected very little, other than making some of them rich. There is reasonable argument that Obama could be more effective, eventually, in the role of a Dr. Martin Luther King, spurring an emphasis for change from outside the system, or at least the White House, rather than from the middle of the battles. Though a heinous analogy, when entering a dogfight - and that is what the next few years will be – you go in with a Pitbull not a French Poodle.

Does our culture need changing? No doubt! Do we need to go away from “crass individualism”? Who could argue! Can Obama bring about that redirection from the White House? Highly questionable! Currently, I believe we need changes, but those changes are going to have to be spoon fed to the opposition; while holding their noses, if necessary. Speaking and dealing with conservatives as a Dutch Uncle (pardon the pun), will, in the short run, will be far more productive than engaging them in friendly speak. I am not averse to taking chances but to your point that was done with GWB and we see how well that turned out. For the record, I never considered GWB a wise choice. I was not enrapt with his “passionate conservatism” tripe. My sense, from the get-go, was that he was a dimwit who would bode us ill. Even I, however, failed to envision the extent of that ill.

Dreams and optimism are wonderful things. Reality has a way of exposing them as mere frames of mind; of figments of what should be, often far removed from what could be.

Tuesday, 22 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"His plans for reforming Social Security and health care have a better chance of succeeding"

I don't know about you, but this is an absolutely important statement made by the former Secretary of Labor. Mr. Reich is far more qualified to make such a statement about public policy than the average surrogate, from either camp. Yet you still see the vindictive supporters of Senator Clinton disparaging every person who supports Senator Obama. Is Mr. Reich a silly twit who is supporting Senator Obama for no good reason? You would think that a person in Mr. Reich's position would garner more respect. But they go on attacking Mr. Reich, attacking him as if he has no good sense or intelligence. Yes, you know better than someone who actually worked on public policy. And now Mr. Reich is being called a traitor, a media puppet, uninformed and of course unimportant. I'm sorry, but the more hardcore supporters of Senator Clinton are really starting to lose it...

Tuesday, 22 April, 2008  
Blogger Troy Camplin said...

Well, it shouldn't be difficult to overcome "divisions of class" in what is already a classless society. It seems to me that it's the Left that consistently tries to set up a class system in this country -- of Leftist rulers and the ruled. Obama's statements about small town people belies this statement too -- he is an elitist who thinks he's smarter than everyone else, which is why he should be in charge of our lives. He's not. When someone runs for office who acknowledges that they don't and cannot know what is best for anyone but themselves, I will acknowledge that they are smart enough to be in government, because they will have at least acknowledged that the world is far more complex than anyone could understand well enough to control.

Tuesday, 22 April, 2008  
Blogger Jim Jordan said...

The truth is that most Americans are economically liberal yet socially conservative. I was disappointed to see that Obama is adamantly pro-abortion. Any Dem who threw abortion under the bus won easily in 2006 (Bob Casey - PA, Ben Nelson - Neb). Abortion is inconsistent with being anti-war. Obama needs to reach across the aisle to attract former Dems like myself - the Reagan Democrats. The key to him forming the unbeatable coalition is to change course on his abortion politics.

Tuesday, 22 April, 2008  
Anonymous Michelle said...

Eloquently said, though I find some of your rhetoric (namely, America's "moral authority") a bit heavy-handed. Smart foreign policy would be to encourage a cooperative partnership with other nations to work toward common goals, rather than asserting our ideological superiority over them. Whether or not we are the "moral authority" in the world, it will be hard to convince other nations to fall in line with us so long as we continue to blatantly pursue our own private interests (both within and without existing world institutions) over those of the international community.

Tuesday, 22 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am nervous about Michelle. She seems angry - will this be pay back time?

Wednesday, 23 April, 2008  
Anonymous ForGodsSake said...

What the hell is this comment about Michelle Obama and being concerned about payback time? Are you a dunce? Is Barack secretly going to pass legislation to enslave white people as Jon Stewart jokingly asked? Is Michelle going to use the position of first lady as an act of vengeance against you by baking cookies for the homeless?

Let me tell you something. If you are black in America, you have tremendous opportunity compared to any other nation but at the same time, you fight injustice every day. Crime is almost always because of economics. The fact that our government has built these inner city public works projects to keep black people in a state of welfare as opposed to encouraging urban revitalization and providing capital to minorities is a self fulfilling prophecy. Some minorities have a right to be bitter and yet still love their country.

These drones who believe the US is beyond criticism are maddening.

Wednesday, 23 April, 2008  
Blogger Athena Smith said...

You said, "I will go to another land, I will go to another sea.
Another city will be found, better than this.
Every effort of mine is condemned by fate;
and my heart is -- like a corpse -- buried.
How long in this wasteland will my mind remain.
Wherever I turn my eyes, wherever I may look
I see the black ruins of my life here,
where I spent so many years, and ruined and wasted."

New lands you will not find, you will not find other seas.
The city will follow you. You will roam the same
streets. And you will age in the same neighborhoods;
in these same houses you will grow gray.
Always you will arrive in this city. To another land -- do not hope --
there is no ship for you, there is no road.
As you have ruined your life here
in this little corner, you have destroyed it in the whole world.

Constantine P. Cavafy (1910)

Wednesday, 23 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mrs. Clinton should stop attacking Senator Obama's character. Be careful that skeletons do not fall out of your closet like White Water. We remember how untruthful you can be...i.e., Sniper fire and the fake story of a woman denied healthcare. You were for NAFTA and now you are not to obtain the blue collar vote. By the way, stop playing the gender card. Shameful

Wednesday, 23 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hilary and Bill Clinton and White Water Scandal:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/whitewater/whitewater.htm

Wednesday, 23 April, 2008  
Blogger Lorraine DeLuca said...

I love Rob Reich's financial wisdom but don't support his political preference. Barack Obama is an idealogue and while that may be appealing to the very young, who may not appreciate the difference between ideas and actions, it has no allure to a pragmatist like myself.

Wednesday, 23 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OBAMA against NAFTA? ???Reich pimped NAFTA for the Clinton's . Now the little squirt is pimping for OBAMA. Screw the job killers at the Harvard Business School, screw the trust fund hobo's who have waged war on the American worker. What's next? Janet Reno for Obama's Attorney General ? I'll vote for Clinton just to spite the little squirt who pimped my job out and ruined my family. Screw Harvard , Reich and Obama.

Thursday, 24 April, 2008  
Blogger betterthannader said...

well, i obviously didn't expect that you'd think out of the box and endorse someone other than one of the corporate candidates, none of whom is anywhere close to anything resembling the country's interests.

but nonetheless, i would still be interested to know how you can talk about Obama's foreign policy and enlightenment in the same sentence--and keep a straight face!

Thursday, 24 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First of all, I am so proud of you for thoughtfully choosing the best candidate, stating it so eloquently and concisely. Considering your long standing friendship and professional relationship with the Clinton's, you have helped me have faith in the [political] process with your endorsement of Sen OBAMA. I could add my praise of this man, but I'd just be preaching to the choir. You and Bill Richardson (along with many other Obama endorsers that the Clinton's assumed were in their corner), are very brave souls that deserve our respect on the highest level.
You are an intelligent, compassionate and patriot man that cares about the future of this country,
thank you,
Barb Heiam-Bjornsen, 56 yr old well educated, upper middle class, Caucasian female- Barack Obama's demographic now!!

Friday, 25 April, 2008  
Blogger Art A Layman said...

Dr. Reich:

I think you can forget salvation and accepting Jesus. From the sounds of many of the posters here your political decision has opened the gates of heaven for you.

Friday, 25 April, 2008  
Blogger The Bag of Health and Politics said...

True patriots are those who put loyalty to their country above loyalty to their friends. The top two names on that list at the moment:

Bill Richardson
Robert Reich

This was a patriotic act. As a citizen, thank you. If anyone should call you a Benedict Arnold, please remind them of what true patriotism is.

Friday, 25 April, 2008  
Blogger scott said...

obama was one of the leaders of farrakhan's million man march.

an hamas-linked group may have been raising money for obama.

Saturday, 26 April, 2008  
Anonymous Frank Thomas said...

To Art Layman,

Correction: impertinences

Sunday, 27 April, 2008  
Anonymous Frank Thomas said...

To Art Layman,

Correction: impertinences

Sunday, 27 April, 2008  
Anonymous Frank Thomas said...

Dr. Riech:

I simply think Obama is a class apart, unfortunately for Hillary.
I watched her lie three times on national TV about the sniper bullets in Bosnia, and just heard her say she would BOMD IRAN if they presented a threat! She's not my ideal Commander in Chief!

I'm not impressed with her economic ideas, like suggesting the Fed should buy out the home mortages of victims of sub-prime lending. Obama/Dodd/Barney have a far more financially and humanly responsible plan in this regard if one takes the effort to study this major difference between the two Democratic candidates. Hillary comes across as the old-fashion Democratic socialist who panders Government program answers to too many things without the slightest idea of how to balance all the Debits and Credits.

The press willingly joins the chorus soap-opera inflating and distorting Obama's remarks about working people and Reverend Wright. Even Paul Krugman, elitist Prof. of Economics at Princeton who doesn't allow ordinary people to respond to his writings on a public blog as Robert Reich does, has joined some of the right media in jumping upon the utterly competent, original and intelligent Obama. Slight human gaffes are conviently

As someone from a poor middle-class family who worked his way through some difficult Eastern colleges and paid every cent himself, I think I know better than Paul Krugman when I see integrity, class, and grit to do decent good things for our nation. Is Obama perfect? NO. And he doesn't pretend to be. The Krugmans and the Bennents place their bets on those who can be the most traditionally fighting ugly and adept in the dirty verbal fights over nothing that for so long have poisoned constructive, informed discussions in our social-political culture. They play the innuendo game with great aplomb, like "He's really not well-known," and "He's not up to the Republican slam it in your face politics." Well, I'm sick of this disgusting concept of balanced, substantive dialogue in our society...which has nothing to do with Truman's `If you can´t stand the heat in the kitchen, then get out´ remark recently promoted by Hillary and Bill.

Truman was referring to the reasonable heat of civil, tough debate and not the personal slash and burn dialectic that has degraded our politics.If you want to know Truman´s concept of fair play in politics, here is a short story of his quality of DOING THE RIGHT THING:


Truman´s opponent in the 1940 primary, Missouri Governor Lloyd Stark, berated Truman for his ties to the Pendergast machine. But Stark himself had run for Governor with Pendergast support. Truman even had an old letter from his opponent thanking him for an introduction to Tom Pendergast. He never made this letter public. When a supporter asked why, Truman said, `I am not sure it would be the right thing to do.´


Well, for once, I hope civility, humanness and intelligence wins.
If Americans haven't had it up to their ears with the dirty, superficial politics in America by now, they never will be and we´ll all get what we deserve.

Obama's clever fund raising concept which energizes all types of Americans with a modicum of acrimony in his campaign organization speaks mountains about his own and his team's management skills... as is his winning the most States, the most delegates, and the a slight majority of the most votes. What an achievement and human contact touch this represents!

Hillary's contrived, more divisive personality attacks and false pleading of being the out-moneyed victim is indicative of her weak management skills and double talk... of course Obama can outspend her because of his innovative idea to raise money "bottoms up;" and of course has to outspend her (without tying himself to lobbyists) because the 10-12 year Clinton BRAND NAME is well-known and Pres. Clinton is acting as her constant ex-Presidential spokesman everywhere.

If this powerful combination doesn't smack of power thirst ESTABLISHMENT and ENTITLEMENT thinking, then I give up! As mentioned, Obama can outspend her because he has been more imaginative in raising money from everyday Americans, like me. As a Maine native, this is the kind of grass roots democracy that appeals ...not the upper-class connections of candidates who are networking multi-millionaires largely exploiting the rich while pretentiously saying ONLY they have the "working class" most in their hearts. I believe Obama knows working class pains and hasn't lost sight of where his ancestors have come from. I trust him on this point.

I want Americans real change in improving our social-
infrastructure and educational fabric. I intend to stay loyal to an unusual talent who has already proven his skills to come from nowhere to reignite half the nation into believing our country can reach across our differences to really do good things for the majority of Americans and not just for the top 10%!

Hillary, I respect. Obama I trust and want to take a risk on to take the right actions that will concretely help middle-class Americans and our economy, without bankrupting the system any more than it is already bankrupted.
Frank Thomas,. The Netherlands

Sunday, 27 April, 2008  
Anonymous Frank Thomas said...

Dr. Riech:

I simply think Obama is a class apart, when compared to Hillary.
I watched her lie three times on national TV about the sniper bullets in Bosnia, and just heard her say she would BOMD IRAN if they presented a threat! She's not my ideal Commander in Chief! This sounds like Bush War-Mongering doggeral.

I'm not impressed with her economic ideas...for example, like suggesting the Fed should buy out the home mortages of victims of sub-prime lending. Obama/Dodd/
Barney have a more financially sound and humanly responsible plan in this regard if one takes the effort to study this particular major difference between the two Democratic candidates. Hillary comes across as the old-fashion Democratic socialist who panders Government program answers to too many things without the slightest idea of how to balance all the Debits and Credits.

The press willingly joins the chorus soap-opera inflating and distorting Obama's remarks about working people and Reverend Wright. Even Paul Krugman, elitist Prof. of Economics at Princeton who doesn't allow ordinary people to respond to his writings on a public blog as Robert Reich does, has joined the dogmatic right media in jumping upon the utterly competent, original and intelligent Obama. Slight human word gaffes are conviently suddenly portrayed as character flaws, but lying is not of course nor is `war-crying´ demogoguery.

As someone from a poor middle-class family who worked his way through some difficult Eastern colleges and paid every cent himself, I think I know better than Paul Krugman when I see integrity, class, and grit to do decent good things for our nation. Is Obama perfect? NO. And he doesn't pretend to be. The Krugmans and the Bennents place their bets on those who can be the most traditionally fighting ugly and adept in the dirty verbal fights over nothing that for so long have poisoned constructive, informed discussions in our social-political culture. They play the innuendo game with great aplomb, like "He's really not well-known," and "He's not up to the Republican slam it in your face politics." Well, I'm sick of this disgusting concept of balanced, substantive dialogue in our society...which has nothing to do with Truman's `If you can´t stand the heat in the kitchen, then get out´ remark recently promoted by Hillary and Bill.

Truman was referring to the reasonable heat of civil, very tough debate and not the personal slash and burn dialectic that has degraded our politics.If you want to know Truman´s concept of fair play in politics, here is a short story of his quality of DOING THE RIGHT THING:


Truman´s opponent in the 1940 primary, Missouri Governor Lloyd Stark, berated Truman for his ties to the Pendergast machine. But Stark himself had run for Governor with Pendergast support. Truman even had an old letter from his opponent thanking him for an introduction to Tom Pendergast. He never made this letter public. When a supporter asked why, Truman said, `I am not sure it would be the right thing to do.´


Well, for once, I hope civility, humanness and intelligence wins.
If Americans haven't had it up to their ears with the dirty, superficial politics in America by now, they never will be and we´ll all get what we deserve.

Obama's clever fund raising concept which energizes all types of Americans with a modicum of acrimony in his campaign organization speaks mountains about his own and his team's management skills... as is his winning the most States, the most delegates, and the a slight majority of the most votes. What an achievement and human contact touch this represents!

Hillary's contrived, more divisive personality attacks and false pleading of being the out-moneyed victim is indicative of her weak management skills and double talk... of course Obama can outspend her because of his innovative idea to raise money "bottoms up;" and of course has to outspend her (without tying himself to lobbyists) because the 10-12 year Clinton BRAND NAME is well-known and Pres. Clinton is acting as her constant ex-Presidential spokesman everywhere.

If this powerful combination doesn't smack of power thirst ESTABLISHMENT and ENTITLEMENT thinking, then I give up! As mentioned, Obama can outspend her because he has been more imaginative in raising money from everyday Americans, like me. As a Maine native, this is the kind of grass roots democracy that appeals ...not the upper-class connections of candidates who are networking multi-millionaires largely exploiting the rich while pretentiously saying ONLY they have the "working class" most in their hearts. I believe Obama knows working class pains and hasn't lost sight of where his ancestors have come from. I trust him on this point.

I want Americans real change in improving our social-
infrastructure and educational fabric. I intend to stay loyal to an unusual talent who has already proven his skills to come from nowhere to reignite half the nation into believing our country can reach across our differences to really do good things for the majority of Americans and not just for the top 10%!

Hillary, I respect. Obama I trust and want to take a risk on to take the right actions that will concretely help middle-class Americans and our economy, without bankrupting the system any more than it is already bankrupted.
Frank Thomas,. The Netherlands

Sunday, 27 April, 2008  
Anonymous Frank Thomas said...

Dr. Reich,

Correction: 1st sentence next to last paragraph should read:

I want a fresh wind offering chance of Real Change in improving our social-infrastructure and...

Sunday, 27 April, 2008  
Blogger Kathie said...

All I have to say if everyone needs to read the New Republic's article asking whether Obama is the new McGovern.

That's it.

Monday, 28 April, 2008  
Blogger Art A Layman said...

frank thomas:

So enamored with your comments that you posted them twice?

One must wonder whether you were still "high" when you composed your rant. Your condemnation of various people; Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Paul Krugman, etc., seems diametrically opposed to the message that Obama is communicating.

Let me suggest to you that given the failure to secure a nuclear free Iran and a nuclear dismantled North Korea, leading to a presumption that there will be more nuclear armed countries in the future, we reenter the sphere of the old Cold War. A period of a "mutually assured destruction" doctrine.

In that vain it will be important for each nuclear country to understand that should they use nuclear weapons on their perceived enemies and our allies, then their actions will be met in kind. This is not pre-emptive war this is retaliatory war; the kind of war which America and Americans have always held as justified. Threats such as these will be the only deterent available in a nuclear proliferated world. Everyone, including Hillary, hopes that it will never be necessary to actualize such threats but they will be necessary to minimize the possibility of nuclear holocaust. They can also help lead to dialogue; that which is the preferable method of resolution.

Harry Truman ended up an honorable and greatly admired politician. He did not start out that way and would not have been in the Vice Presidential role were it not for the backing of an old-style political machine, one with little interest in the welfare of all our citizens, that helped him attain the political position providing him the national exposure.

Although the action was very debatable, he is the only person in world history who approved the use of nuclear weapons.

If you believe that vitriolic political campaigning is somehow a 20th century phenomenon your knowledge of American history seems wanting. That the process was fine-tuned to 30 second sound bites and simplistic selling platitudes, primarily through the efforts of Lee Atwater and the Reagan campaign, is clearly a 20th century phenomenon.

Winston Churchill said: "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." That remains true today. A system which assumes a "bottoms up" selection of government officials is highly dependent on the presumption of wisdom and knowledge in those "bottoms up". Empirical evidence would speak to the contrary.

The American people are a good people. For the most part they care about the plights of the world's citizens and many get involved and provide aid and funds to improve those plights. When faced with a perceived threat from some of those "other" people their altruism fades quickly. This is human nature and is neither unfair nor unexpected. Survival is the basest of instincts.

Though a good people, the vast majority are unknowledgable of their own history and that of the world. One can little expect them to be fluent in the varied and complex machinations of governing but most have no idea of how their government works or the history of the evolution of their government. Posed as humor the various "man in the streets" episodes reveal an abject ignorance of even the simplest of civics.

This leaves them particularly susceptible to eloquent, motivational speakers. This is not to say that all those fitting that description are bad people with selfish desires but the lack of knowledge and a real world view leaves many unable to discern a good one from a bad one. This was clearly true in GWB's election in 2000. Though fraught with voting difficulties GWB secured enough votes to be competitive because of his appeals to "compassionate conservatism" and bi-partisanship, of bringing people together to solve the nations problems. Now he didn't argue this nearly as majestically as does Obama and my take is that he was nothing but a pawn put out front to "sell" a program that he had little knowledge of and even less adherence to.

Senator Obama, glowingly, provides us a similar rhetoric. Personally I have more faith in his earnestness but it does leave us begging the question of whether he is nothing more than a Democratic GWB. Granted his background lends more support to his pleas than did GWB's but even his background includes a little spin. He is portrayed as coming from very humble beginnings, meandering his way through life's various hurdles to achieve admirable results. In fact he came from middle America. Not rich but far from poor and with a family fully knowledgeable of the necessary tools for achieving success.

I do believe that Obama is a man of great integrity and honesty. I believe he firmly believes what he speaks. I also believe that his limited time on the national political stage makes him terribly naive as to how far you can get by reaching across the aisle. It is one thing to find a modicum of agreement on a specific issue and then nuture that agreement to effect bipartisan compromise. It is entirely another thing to try and engage a completely different governing philosophy and try and find common ground to solve problems. We are still faced with a number in Congress who believe that government is the problem and not the solution. They abhor any attempt to find government solutions through additional spending and regulation.

In the public's view the President is the decider. An idea nurtured and furthered by GWB's actions. In reality GWB has been successful in that vain because of an impotent Congress. The political makeup of the next Congress will be far more influential in moving forward and solving problems than any of the Presidential candidates.

You and many rail about management skills and how Obama has them and Hillary doesn't. The Presidency of the US is not a management job. Other than decision making skills the vastness of the US government and its worldwide responsibilities render it unmanageable by any one individual. For the most part the President, ex emergencies, doesn't even set his priorities. Others, I'm sure with input from the President arrange his schedule and set the agenda's that he will address from day to day. As you well know, the Congress is the real power in our federal government, notwithstanding its current sheepishness.

Support your favorite candidate. Promote him or her with solid, valid debate. Appeals based on his intelligence, Hillary is no slouch in that department, or his management abilities, I'll guarantee you he is not personally managing his campaign finances, or some dream that he will in one presidential term, or even two, change the dialogue in DC to one of comradeship with a common vision to heal our nation's ills, is little more than indulging in euphorias, as if you were following an Elmer Gantry.

Monday, 28 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Best Delphy-verfahren models by Robert Reich's

MANAGING THE NATION== McCain 45%, Hillary 55%, Obama 195%
PATRIOTISM == McCain 100%, Hillary 100%, Obama 200%
NATIONAL SECURITY== McCain 60%, Hillary 60%, Obama 198%
LOVE OF ISRAEL== McCain 100%, Hillary 100%, Obama 200%
ABILITY TO MAKE AMERICA BETTER OVERALL== McCain 45%, Hillary 65%, Obama 198%

Further movie:
http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=4483031931325571818&hl=en

Monday, 28 April, 2008  
Blogger Art A Layman said...

anon 10:21:

That was enlightening?

Monday, 28 April, 2008  
Anonymous Frank Thomas said...

Art Layman±
Article repeated by mistake. But I did have a big misprint gap in 3rd paragraph. Long posts, yours also, invariably seem like `rants´ because blog answers are not the right vehicle for serious, nuanced discussions of complex matters. I´m doing it though because I´m so far away and have another background of perspectives.

The next Congress will be overwhemingly Democratic so Omama's new approach to focus on middle class needs and our social-educational fabric haa more chances of succeeding than you
posture. Sofar, he´s shown me he surrounds himself with very good people, so I´m not worried about your`naive´ problem over him. Half of America and vast majority of Europeans see him as a quite mature, competent fresh breath of air.

His brains and emotional IQ are a far cry from Bush Jr.´s ... your analogy there is a bit off the mark, to say it politely. On the contrary, his `bottoms-up´ open, honest approach (relatively devoid of ugly stigmitizing dirt)of straight talk is appealing to broad sectors of American society. His entire campaign has reflected excellent organization and creative thinking. So this is all Hopeful ... for those who haven´t yet been transformed into incurable cynics by the system.

On the other hand, Hillary is showing leadership weaknesses in how her campaign organization is, i.e., runing out of money, losing key people, showing abnormal level of friction abounding internally, etc., etc. No wonder her desperate attempts to get Obama into debate number #22 to distort his attention by more contrived personal attacks.

Your not saying much not already known when you say a President alone can´t run the country but rather a President´s ability to work well with Congress on new courses is equally if not more critical.

You and I can respectfully differ on this point ...but I think Obama will do just fine with a majority Democratic Congress, but Hillary less so because dislike of her by the Republicans is so intense. It will be old politics at its vitrolic against the vitrolic best ... real inspiring for the young people who want compromise and substance and none of the old slash and burn politics.

I separate the issue of striving
for high tech-efficient military with sound nuclear deterrent -- which I support-- from issue of flagrant, wasteful overspending which is contributing largely to bankrupting our Treasury (in addition to tax cuts going mainly to the upper 10% with no compensating windfall in tax revenues). As stated earlier, even Rumsfield wanted this very trimmed/down quick/response defense establishment approach BEFORE 9/ll occurred. He then got sidetracked and went adventuresome irresponsible with the Iraq fiasco of preventive war.

A country is only as strong as its financial house and economy ... and right now we are in terrible structural shape in many areas simultaneously. But more on this when I have time to gather some coherent thoughts for debate on how to approach these problems.
Frank Thomas, The Netherlands

Tuesday, 29 April, 2008  
Blogger Athena Smith said...

This post has been removed by the author.

Tuesday, 29 April, 2008  
Blogger Athena Smith said...

I was literally shocked by Hillary's statement on obliterating Iran if the latter attacked Israel.
I was further shocked by the zero attention that statement received by the US media who are seemingly oblivious to the chilling editorials published in Arab newspapers. And it is the Arabs supposedly whom we are trying to approach!
The only exception was the .


If the link does not show you may read the story at
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2008/04/27/hillary_strangelove/

Tuesday, 29 April, 2008  
Blogger Art A Layman said...

frank thomas:

It is certainly arguable that being removed from the day to day harangues might afford one a more objective view. It is not a clear cut convincing argument however.

It is far from clear that the next Congress will overwhelming be a Democratic one. Probably the best thing we Dems have going for us in that vain is that McCain is currently running strongly in the polls against either Clinton or Obama. This has spurred hope on the conservative side that the presidency is still in play. Should the metrics begin to change and McCain begins to look like a loser the Reps will turn their focus to the Congressional races and they have proven in the past to be very effective at placing their people in the Congress.

As much as we all abhor it, if Obama is the general election candidate there will be a groundswell of support for Congressional Republicans in the South. The Republican Party would be nowhere today were it not for the old "Southern Democratic" block. The longer we can keep McCain appearing viable the shorter will be the time that the Reps have to focus on Congressional races. This is a positive byproduct of the long drawn out vitriolic Democratic primary process.

I don't share your view that Obama focuses specifically on "middle class needs". No doubt any improvement in our social/economic institutions and processes will benefit the middle class but his distinct efforts seem more directed at the poor and less fortunate; not a necessarily a bad thing. His educational ideas are not different from Hillary's or most other Democrats. He does allude to the fact that families are a big part of the problem but there is little government can do to alter individual behavior unless it can be effected through the tax and regulatory process and there is little to work with there for our primary and secondary educational shortcomings.

Surely he has done a better job in amassing a campaign staff to fit his campaign role, to date. Much of this success was due to setting up a staff to help him run as the underdog. Hillary, at the outset of the primaries, was the presumptive favorite and she structured a staff to run the race as a frontrunner. If you look closely Obama has had his own share of loose lips in his campaign and has had his own share of resignations (firings) at key levels. The higher profile of many in Hillary's staff has made her difficulties appear far greater. There is no valid argument that Obama is equipped to better staff an administration than Hillary is. She has Bill and a long history of political connections to the leading Democratic minds available to choose from.

Half of America and a vast majority of Europeans would find anyone a breath of fresh air after GWB. Europeans are less interested in the overall welfare of the US and more focused on an American President who will not involve them in difficult problems. Most Europeans would be happy if we took a laissez-faire approach to the world's issues except when there is a crisis; then it seems they want us to open our checkbook or activate our military.

Most all of the Democrats who entered the primary process were very bright people. The two we have left are both very bright, so brains is no issue, until we bring McCain into the equation. Emotional IQ is an interesting phrase. I guess in comparison to GWB it's a reasonable perspective. You do assume his emotional IQ from his words and in the political arena that can be a huge assumption. He preaches his sermon of hope, change and getting along, even though he may believe in it, because he had nothing else to differentiate himself from all the other candidates. He did not have a long history on the national stage and while he achieved some good things at the state level, that is bush league stuff (pardon the pun) when compared to the major leagues of politics.

If you watch closely his facial expressions and body language when faced with issues he doesn't want to discuss or that he considers inane, you can see a seething, a suppressed anger that is not a positive emotional sign.

We have been blessed, with notable exceptions, with bright, competent leaders throughout our history. The successes of most of those men has been based on strong egos and powerful personnas. Even FDR, clearly one of the greatest presidents we have ever had tried to stack the Supreme Court to get his way. Our political history is fraught with vicious, hateful dialogue and performance. It has been our nature from the beginning. Powerful, egocentric men do not suffer disagreement gladly.

The American public has always disdained the political vitriol but they have reacted to it and proven it to be effective. It is easy to appeal to a kindler, gentler interaction. It comforts the senses of the public, who, due to a lack of knowledge and appreciation of all sides of the issues, wishes we would all just calm down. In the real world of ideological polarization it doesn't work. Until such time as we come together with a reasonably common belief in how best to maintain our greatness, happy talk will render us little more than a continuance of the "honorable x" and the "gentleperson from y".

We are now seeing the beginnings of an unraveling of Obama's campaign strategy. Attacks from Hillary, the press, and now the emergence of Reverend Wright on the national stage, have all put Obama on the defensive. His campaign staff suggests "fight back", meet attack with attack, denounce Reverend Wright! But fighting back belies his message; his solution methodology. This leaves him looking less like "Rocky" and more like a punching bag.

Even the act of refusing to debate Hillary again, looks wimpish. Clearly she fairs better in the debates than does Obama so there is little for him to gain from engaging her. Running from a head to head fight is not a part of the American psyche. For her it may be a win-win scenario.

Many of Hillary's problems you list are not a function of mismanagement, but rather of strategic errors in how her campaign was set up to run. Obama is running up against his own set of problems based on his original strategy of running as the underdog. He doesn't have the money problems but many of the recent contests would suggest that money is not the answer it used to be. The press has frequently noted, and it is apparent, that Obama seems tired, his speeches are flat, his energy levels are run down. Hillary, on the other hand, seems vitalized, on top of her game, taking the fight to her opponent and exhibiting an almost superhuman energy level.

Hillary does illicit a strong resentment from the right. Much of that is based on her longer tenure in the spotlight, coupled with the rights extreme hatred of Bill, established long before the Monica issue. If we have a Democratic Congress Hillary will achieve as much or more than Obama. If the Reps have sufficient numbers to be obstacles Obama will not encounter much less vitriol. In fact, in the Senate, Hillary enjoys a great deal of respect from both sides of the aisle. The reaction of the Reps will be to the Dems ideological basis and far less on personalities.

Your perception of young people's desires is slightly skewed. The wonderful aspect of youth is a belief in principle and making decisions consistent with those principles. Young people do not find compromise appealing. They tend to view it as selling out principles for expediency, to them an abhorrent action. Young people are also much more susceptible to rhetoric. Most of them are less familiar with how things get done and words have much greater meaning to them than to we cynical realists.

All signs seem to suggest that Obama will be the Dem candidate. Not necessarily a catastrophic event but it looms as far more troublesome than it appeared a couple of months ago.

Rants are less determined by the length of posts and more on the espoused rationales.

Tuesday, 29 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Art a layman said
"If you watch closely his facial expressions and body language when faced with issues he doesn't want to discuss or that he considers inane, you can see a seething, a suppressed anger that is not a positive emotional sign."


REALLY????
Shall we call a medium or an astrologist to interpret the rest?

Tuesday, 29 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Another "Clinton" defection. Very curious. Very disappointing. I wonder how much of it has to do with "personal" reasons. It's too bad Robert Reich, Gov. Richardson have admittedly turned their backs on their "long time friends". Friends like this, the Clintons do not need. I feel hurt, I can't imagine how the Clintons feel. I have never heard the Clintons publicly stab anyone in the back-- especially their own long time friends or who they thought to be their long time friends. They have never publicly demeaned their own enemies!! More and more my respect for the Clintons grow. I see loyalty doesn't mean anything anymore...especially to the Obama supporters. Well Rev. Wright is finding that out the hard way too. Obama has dropped him so hard -- 20 years of such a close almost family like figure and Obama doesn't even want to be seen near him. Rev. Wright on his best day sounds like a raving lunatic -- whether this is the style of certain black reverends or not...I found his "performance" over the last few days looking like something out of a Fellini movie (very bizarre). And yet, that's him at his supposed best. 20 years of such antics to which Obama gravitated and applauded. Such hate, anger and division. And if Obama can't even control the rantings of his own close and beloved pastor...how can he have the ability and skill to control the rantings of dictators? I would also like to add the following:

What’s sad is that the “article” below was written by a kid of only 17 who displays more insight and knowledge than anyone in the Media, thus far. And this was before the veils began to fall about Obama. Are you truly comfortable with way Obama’s conning ordinary blue collar workers to think he’s against NAFTA when all the while, he intends to keep it, and MAYBE amend it. I bet you, he won’t touch it and if he does, he’ll be even more conservative with the handling of it than anyone before him. Plus all this talk of CHANGE and the funny thing is that the Sun Times of London reports he’s thinking of having Lugar as his Secretary of State….even just thinking of it is nightmarish!!!! The Media will definitely have had a hand in helping Obama dupe the American People and when Obama said to Hillary -- you think my people are delusional – unfortunately they are but through no fault of their own…they are being told “political rhetoric”that doesn’t mean anything (isn’t that the term Obama’s person used to the Canadian Government). I dare you to site one instance when the Clintons did such a thing!!!! Purposefully said one thing when all the while they did another. NAFTA created millions of jobs also. NAFTA has prevented the price of gasoline from going up to $10 a gallon for the American people. NAFTA did eliminate some factory jobs and they went to third world countries, but then again why shouldn’t they? Third world countries are prime for manufacturing jobs now, and the U.S. and its people should be trained better to hold better jobs than they did back when the Industrial Revolution first took hold. Or is it our goal to have people always hold factory jobs and be vulnerable to lay-offs, etc.

Are you comfortable with the way he’s handled questions about REZKO!!! Jim Warren of the Chicago Sun Times said that unfortunately Obama says he has addressed the questions but in actuality he has yet to answer all the questions that reporters have repeatedly asked him.

Just because Obama is an African American does not give him a free pass or license to get away with manipulating the Media or the people. Just because he smiles a broad smile and swaggers confidently when he puts on his Obama Show, doesn’t give him the right to get away with Republican antics. If he were a Republican, we would be swearing what a slime thing it was to be giving these poor people the impression that he’s anti-Nafta, and even anti-war when he’s helped to vote to support it. At least Kucinich votes where his mouth is…but Obama does not…he says one thing and does another. But don’t listen to me, read what this 17 year old kid wrote. He apparently did some research. Unlike those in the Media.



OBAMA: PRO-WAR, PRO-TYRANNY, ANTI-CHOICE, AND
A RECORD OF LYING TO EVERYONE
Ignore His Right-Wing Voting Record and Believe his Words
By Gary F. (age 17)

Obama has a big burden. He has to go to his events and pretend he is something he is not. His voting record shows that he supports the war. He voted twice in 2006 against bringing America's troops back home. He votes for war appropriations as if giving our money to Halliburton and Blackwater is his sworn duty. His latest bit of posturing S 433 allows the Bush Administration to suspend any troop withdrawal, which if not suspended, still keeps the troops in Iraq for a long time to come. The suspension is written right into Section 4 (b). The bill tells Bush to bring the troops home some day unless he doesn't want to. The very name of the bill, "Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007" is a lie. This is par for the course for Obama.

Bruce Dixon and Glen Ford of the Black Agenda Report have written articles exposing Obama's fraud in pretending to represent the interests of African-American voters. Before anyone believes that Obama cares about African-Americans, they should read, "Barack Obama and the Winds of War," "Putting Black Faces on Imperial Aggression," "Barack Obama: the Mania and the Mirage," "Barack Obama: Hypocrisy on Health Care," "The Barack and Hillary Show Plays Selma," "Black America's Real Issue With Barack Obama," and "Barack Obama vs. Charles Hamilton Houston." From these articles and others, readers can see Obama come down on the side of the oppressors of African-Americans. For someone whose ancestors owned black slaves, Obama tries to put pressure on African-Americans and fails. Al Sharpton's reaction to pressure to back Obama was, "I'm not going to be cajoled or intimidated by any candidate not for my support." Instead of supporting African American's Obama is into lying to them and intimidating them. What makes him different than others who oppress African-Americans?

Paul Street exposes the real Barack Obama very clearly in his article, "The Obama Illusion." Street shows how Obama, a Hamiltonian believer in free trade and supporters of globalization has lent his support to the "...Hamilton Project, formed by corporate-neoliberal Citigroup chair Robert Rubin and other 'Wall Street Democrats' to counter populist rebellion against corporate tendencies within the Democratic Party... ," how Obama provided valuable assistance to pro-war candidates (such as Joe Lieberman), and how he criticized the filibuster proceedings against Samuel Alito. Street shows how Obama voted for "... a business-friendly 'tort reform' bill that rolls back working peoples' ability to obtain reasonable redress and compensation..." from corporations. Obama considers single payer universal health care too socialist and has stated that he prefers voluntary solutions. Street's article goes on to discuss Obama's support for other aspects of the neo-con agenda, including neo-con propaganda against African-American culture.

Obama voted to bring low-cost foreign labor into New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. This was a slap in the face against the African-Americans who were displaced in that city. Obama also voted to place Michael Cheftoff, the man responsible for the Katrina catastrophe, in charge of Homeland Security. Obama voted for the bills that gave Blackwater the funding they needed to shoot the people of New Orleans who were only trying to save their own lives. He voted to allow Michael Chetoff to waive all laws, including murder, torture and kidnapping.

In voting for the Real ID Act, Obama voted to end political asylum for people seeking shelter in this country because of terrorism at home.

African-Americans consider Dennis Kucinich, not Obama, to be their candidate. See Bruce Dixon's article "Is Dennis Kucinich the "black candidate?"

Obama voted more than five times for USA-PATRIOT's renewal. This is a bill that is patently offensive to most Americans. City after city has passed resolutions condemning USA-PATRIOT. Obama chose to side with tyranny over freedom and Bush over the people on this issue. The Real ID Act, which would allow Michael Cheftoff to declare martial law and imprison all Americans, was supported by Obama, as noted above.

Obama's record on choice is less than 50%. He pretends to be pro-choice while voting for anti-choice justices who have vowed to end choice. Obama even voted for cloture on Priscilla Owen, a justice Alberto Gonzales felt was too far to the right.

Obama's pretense at being anti-war is a fraud on the American people. His actions are fully pro-war. He has voted anti-choice and to keep the USA-PATRIOT Act. A win for Obama will be a win for the neo-con agenda. An Obama nomination is a guaranteed loss for the American people who would have no major candidates to support in 2008.

If Obama had a conscience, he'd vote against himself. Voting takes place in closed booths. Will some decency overtake Obama in the voting booth? Or has he become so used to lying that he doesn't know what is up and what is down?

This is part of the reason the voting age should be lowered While some complacent, uneducated voters might support Obama, most Americans under 18 are studying the facts and have no intention of supporting such an obvious liar.

Tuesday, 29 April, 2008  
Anonymous Frank Thomas said...

Art Layman,

Your superiority in argumentation tone is already a bad start for anyone trying to answer your response to my post about Hillary and Barack.

1) Your assumption Obama, as opposed to Hillary, will elicit a greater groundswell of Republicans getting their Congressional people elected in the South I don't buy because you ignore the solid black support for Obama, incredible increase in Democrat voter registration and independents -- all favoring Obama over Hillary.

2) His focus on lower-middle class
needs is no more or less than Hillary´s, although she comes from a much more well-to-do background than he does. I trust he knows his roots and is quite sensitive to the working class' stagnant wage,
job displacement, and lack of support training.

3) You are in denial when you say Obama and his team have not shown more clever and efficient management of their campaign with a modicum of internal acrimony and dissention, have not achieved a very wise financing technique that makes him relatively free of lobbyist influences; Hillary´s having Bill and long list of connections have hardly been an impressive advantage sofar

3) You belittle the European genuine interest in our elections as being passive so long as they don´t need our military services --government authorities here will always be neutral out of respect; you´re kidding yourself if you don´t recognize Europeans in general (and peoples in many countries) genuinely like Obama as an intelligent, honest, uplifting, open, multi-cultural talent; in Holland the election process is followed very, very closely.

4) Obama has proved his major league politics credibility by coming from nowhere to win the most states, the most votes, the most delegates, and very importantly, energizing huge numbers of all ages to get involved in American politics

5) I have no pretensions to be a "professional face watcher" of politicians (I certainly didin't see "seething anger in Barack's eyes but a gentle patience" ... but Hillary certainly doesn´t fare any better with this "Face|" criteria in assessing Emotional IQ than Obama; my criteria are life experience, his use of his law degree to help the less priveleged, his books, his utter class in staying out of the dirty political games you seem to extol as a positive, necessary, and unchangeable feature of our system (not true for a top official of Obama´s team who raised over $500,000 for Hillary but just left because of the dirty games to join Obama´s team); I´m an old believer that actions speak louder than words and I like Obama's unassuming class and humor when confronted by the attack artists

6) Your statement "powerful egocentric men do not suffer disagreement gladly" as support for Hillary being tougher than Obama sounds like something Cheney would say in support of Bush Jr., and you know what that got us; if anything, Obama has shown determined qualities by sticking to his concept that our nation wants problems solved by merging the best of our conservative and liberal ideals and ideas to a far greater extent in the interests of Everyone; does this mean a never, never Happy Land? Of course not, but hopefully a more constructive government process than the the do-nothing system now in effect

7) You go on to say that gentler interaction and civility in political governence is nonsense because it doesn´t work in the world of ideological polarization --my answer is ,yes, that is one of reasons we are in our social-economic mess today and why Obama´s candidacy is so credible;
the public wants social-economic problems solved in the interests of Everyone-- this requires creative, constructive actions where there is greater cooperation
and merger of the best ideas and programs; in this respect, I think Hillary divides and Obama brings people together which conclusion you and I and voters can respectively disagree about forever; you came close to posing the right question when you said gentler interaction is impossible "until we come together with a reasonably common belief in how best to maintain our greatness" (whatever the definition of greatness is)...I believe Obama has the best qualities for bringing us together to overcome some huge problems requiring fresh perspectives. You don´t for your own good reasons

8) The attacks by press, Hillary and references to Rev. Wright are part of the trivial Garbage of our system; I hardly think they elevate Hillary´s competence to be Pres. of the U.S. I'm not on that indoctrinating, banal media bandwagon. I applaud Obama for not sinking into the mud by calling her to court directly for her numerous lies about sniper fire and her outrageous (Bush-Cheney type)fear mongering about Bombing Iran - didn't she earlier say a Pres. shouldn't broadcast his or her intentions in such matters.

9) Obama looks tired, flat and Hillary seems so vivacious and full of energy, a fighter who never gives up -- you're stretching a point here as the campaign for both has been exhausting and each has had their "tired" looks. I just saw Obama yesterday on the basketball court moving with great grace and energy, and then later interacting with hundreds in North Carolina. This kind of endorsement criteria is empty smokescreen stuff. Have you forgotten his remarakable speech on Race and Religion so quickly? It's refreshing to see these people show their humaness

10) You and I both agree nuclear weapons are a necessary deterrent to war; Harry Truman felt the same way and used them to save hundreds of thousands of lives. So, I know you are not suggesting he made a mistake here when you say nuclear weapons are vital as a deterrent to war.

11) As for Republicans liking Hillary, all poles published over last weeks have indicated just the opposite. She's much more disliked than Obama, also proven by fact a by far larger number of Republicans are voting for Obama in the primaries than for Hillary

As I've said before, I respect Hillary but do not think she's Bill (and neither do I want Bill as her shadow Vice-President- too much dynasty for my interpretation of our Constitution); I think Obama is a rare talent who has energized the younger generation from 19 to 30 in an amazing way.

You make a big mistake belittling this age group almost as fickle non-thinkers or in your own words "susceptible to eloquent, motivational speakers... can't discern a good one from a bad one" (I assume you would include Bill Clinton here also).

You appear to be denigrating a generation that has the most to lose over the next 25 years with U.S. Politics as Usual. I don't dismiss their awareness of knowing what they are doing for their country, just as we don't of our daughter who was Consultant Production Manager for the NY Philharmonic Orchestra's recent successful performance in Pyongyang, North Korea.

Obama, win or lose, has done something magical in awakening the young and large numbers of the lower-middle class to get involved in the democratic process. Let's not demean that in any way. I'm sure that was not your intention,
but your tones here are below your astute mind.

In the final analysis, democracy is dead if large segments of the polulation don't understand it and/or don't participate in it. That's just how the Bush Jr. types get elected (as the 19 to 30's were hardly voting in 2000).

I don't believe in Utopias, have always been a Realist who welcomes something new when it makes sense to me. Regardless who wins the Democratic nomination, I will support him or her...but I hope Obama wins for the good of the nation and the world.
Frank Thomas

Tuesday, 29 April, 2008  
Blogger Kathie said...

He has a valid point. Obama displays a visible disdain when he is forced to answer questions he finds beneath him.

How does he legitimately distance himself from Wright after 20 years of sitting in the pews, being married by him, him baptizing his children, dedicating his book to him, and referring to him as his spiritual advisor? He either threw his pastor under the bus or he subscribes to his teachings. Either way it's bad.

Tuesday, 29 April, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There you have Hillary who did not distance herself from a man who lied under oath for crying out loud....
There you have Mc Cain being glad to have the endorsement of who actually said that God inflicted Katrina on new Orleans because of the sins of the city.
But you guys love to get hung up on Obama and the Reverend and his body language for crying out loud.
Of course he is offenede by stupid questions. Would you rather he jumped up in joy every time the American people became more and more dumb?
You know what?
You deserve Bush or someone like him.
I do not.
Because I'm better than that.

Wednesday, 30 April, 2008  
Blogger Art A Layman said...

anon:

So you're telling us that we don't have a "perfect" candidate running for president? Thanks!

One must keep in mind that even though you may find discussions of body language and facial expressions tedious, we have here a candidate that is very much a blank slate.

He talks a good game and may very well be the mild mannered, get along with everyone guy he professes to be but how do we really know? His policy proposals are little different from Hillary's and his proclivity for voting "present", frequently, gives us scant evidence of his judgement.

We, concerned citizens who learned long ago that talk is cheap, will, in the attempt at making an informed decision, analyze all that is available to us to make a reasoned decision. Many of us are not as swept up with "happy talk" as others.

You might assert that our amateurish efforts are folly but I would counter with; many a used car is sold by fancy, targeted talk.

Thursday, 01 May, 2008  
Blogger mantraman said...

Dr Reich:

You were one of the main reasons why I liked the Clinton's. I am sure that there is more behind the scene's then any of us will ever know. I would vote for Hillary over McCain. I might have voted for McCain over anyone 8 years ago. Regardless, your standing with Obama seems to me most welcome. McCain is tainted by his support of the war. Hillary, our champion of universal health care, is tainted by the health care lobbyists dollars that she has accepted over the years. It might be that Obama gets taken apart by the conservative movement. It is certain that Hillary will do more of the same. As the daughter of a Washington insider, she has always been a Washington insider, and we no that they are beholden to far too many interests to get anything of substance accomplished. The American people need to wake up to the real challenges that are facing our nation.

You are brilliant and I have enjoyed most, if not all, of the perspectives that you have espoused over the years. Thank you.

a 36 year old white guy

Thursday, 01 May, 2008  
Blogger Art A Layman said...

frank thomas:

Argument tones notwithstanding, you and I and all the others here, including Dr. Reich, are making assumptions predicated on our views of all the factors.

1) Historically Dems have had the votes of blacks in the South yet the Reps tend to hold on to their control of Congressional delegations from the South. Obama certainly has invigorated their interest and many more may turn out if he is the Dem candidate. It is also likely that many of the newly registered would turn out and vote for Hillary should she be the candidate. They would be foolish not too.

Considerations that you are overlooking; many voters vote for a presidential candidate and no one else on the down ballot; many do vote straight ticket but for those who don't, there is no assurance that even if they vote for Obama that they will vote for Dem Congressional candidates.

The history of Congressional elections is full of coattails but in recent years many a political guru has queried why Congressional choices do not always mesh with either a presidential choice or with a party affiliation.

I will agree that blacks will turn out strong to support an Obama candidacy but Reps are at their best in the more "local" Congressional races and as abhorrent as it is a black presidential candidate will energize the Rep constituency in the South.

Current conventional wisdom has it that this should be a Dem landslide across the board. Conventional wisdom has often proven to be conventional "tilting at windmills".

2) Many seem to get all caught up with backgrounds. Hillary has exhibited a very strong concern and advocacy for the poor and lower classes, despite her "background". We know of Obama's work coming out of college, admirable given he had the opportunity to go to the highest bidding best of law firms. In his speeches, his policies, he gains no advantage on Hillary as a voice of the little people.

3) I am not in denial about anything. His staff has done a fantastic job. They have been especially superior in the feet on the ground leading to more success in the caucuses. Their charge and thus their strategies were much different than those of the Hillary camp. They had to introduce their candidate to the public and had little esle to sell other than a kinder, gentler approach and doing away with lobbyist influences. This latter is a bit of a straw man in that he can restrict their influence in the White House (sorely needed) but he can do nothing to alter their influence on the Congress - special note; this is where the laws are made.

Hillary's team had a huge advantage in name recognition but that was greatly mitigated by her negatives from the start. In looking over the competition in the Dem primaries it was not hard to believe that she would be the choice and the media, initially, furthered that thought. No one expected such a prolonged, furious battle and so their financing strategies had to be altered midstream. They have done a remarkable job of altering their approach and keeping funds coming in, albeit far from Obama's success overall.

The American public has always been susceptible to eloquent speak, sprinkled with grandiose, euphoric homilies. We have around the country huge evangelical church followings built on the words and delivery of founding ministers. We have also seen many of those inspiring preachers fall from grace because their deeds and their talk didn't end up jiving.

As much a disadvantage as was Obama's lack of name recognition, it was at the same time a huge advantage because his team could mold a personna and an image and then proceed to sell it. Hillary is, was, who she is. It ain't all pretty but she has proven an effective leader and yet her team had to overcome the baggage.

All in all, both teams have done a masterful job. As you well know the smoothness and effectiveness of any organization seeking a goal is their beginning strategy and as reasonable as Hillary's was at the outset it turned out to be lacking given the twists and turns of the race. One key to the value and success of a supporting staff is their success in altering strategies and tactics to meet a changed or unexpected turn of events. Would you argue that Hillary's staff has not been admirable in doing that?

Obama's staff is much lower profile and less well known than many in Hillary's camp. Therefore when riffs occur, aided by our ever glowing media, they gain much more attention. The two major players of Obama's staff, who resigned, made gaffes of much more significance than most of Hillary's players but the media made much less of the facts.

While not without validity the constant harping abount who contributes and to whom is of much lesser importance than, again, the media and the public make of it. It is not a given that contributing to a campaign in large dollar figures automatically gets your desires written into law. It happens, but again it generally comes more from Congressional action than from the presidency.

GWB and his administration, because they have pushed the envelope so hard, have distorted the separation of powers doctrine and lobbyist influences have been much more apparent in the White House. It can be a concern but reality is reality and the president is not supervising a staff of 6 or 7. The organization is huge and lobbying influence will seep in here and there much as water does into a leaking basement.

Talk about denial! Bill's influence, not without some guffaws, often magnified by the press, has been extremely effective in Hillary's campaign. Let us not forget that out of roughly 30 million votes only 500,000 votes separate the two candidates. Were it not for the ridiculous micromanaging of the process by the DNC, what with apportioning delegates and denying Fla/Mich voters a voice, the race would be far less close and Hillary would be in the lead.

4) (assume highness might have affected your numbering, your second 3))

I don't doubt that European interest is genuine for many folks but all in all they enjoy, as does the rest of the world, when our president steps in it. I'm sure they like Obama, who the hell wouldn't? I like Obama, I just don't feel he will be nearly as effective as the times demand. I'm sure all of Europe was enamored with Reagan and he proved to commence the decline of America.

5) (continuing the number discrepancy) Obama and his team have done a marvelous job in getting to where he is. Front running in a primary election, where for the most part the gloves are still on, does not establish his bona fides as a major political player.

He has energized many new voters. We have seen this aura in the past; Kerry didn't do a bad job at this. You fail to recognize that as many as have climbed on due to their desire for Obama, many others have climbed on to aid Hillary. The race itself has lead to much of the increase it cannot all be attributed to Obama. Though it may be different this time, this will not be the first time that youth got behind a candidate only to fail to show up in November.

6) You seem to be caught up in your own emotional Valhalla with Obama. See my post to anon for my retort regarding "professional face watching" I won't bother repeating it to honor your argument tone.

The game is the game, Frank. You and many, including me, do not like it, in fact abhor it, but I am realistic enough to understand that my personal feelings about the shenanigans are not, in the short term, going to amount to a tinker's damn. Politics is and always has been, in this country, a dirty game. It is survival of the fittest, not the nicest. Even if Obama is ultimately successful he will find achievement will often be predicated on the ability to get down and dirty.

One must never assume, in America, that switching loyalties between candidates or parties has anything to do with honor and integrity. Most often it is expedience that drives the bus. Many with less backbone jump ship after reading the tea leaves.

No one is telling you what to like nor denouncing you for liking it. The point is always who can be most effective and how quickly.

7) An amazing fallacy of human nature is to presume that because we find someone heinous then every thought, or uttered word, that person extols must be worthless. I do not like Cheney but I do not disavow that he has some wisdom.

Obama sticks to his message and concept because he has nothing else to cling to. The Senate is full of major players who, at one time or another, have reached across the aisle and worked hand in hand with the other party. Hell, John McCain is a prime example. The proof of success, going forward, is based on proof of success in the past and Obama, as well meaning and likeable as he is, does not have a strong history of success on the big stage.

Forget GWB; look at Jimmy Carter. He came along from nowhere with impressive educational qualifications and a message of hope and bipartisanship. Though I do not hold him responsible for the issues that brought him down, he nevertheless is viewed as one of our least effective presidents.

You are an educated man. You seem to have solid experience credentials. You know that cultural change does not happen overnight. Electing a different party to the White House or control of the Congress falls far short of changing the dynamic we call campaigning or governing. FDR fought vehemently with Reps and Dems in Congress and he frequently won. The Great Depression and WWII helped him in those endeavors. It was finally a reconciliation on the part of Reps, after years of haggling, that the New deal was here to stay and wasn't as catastrophic as the Reps had thought, that we embarked on a long period of prosperity for all of us and the rest of the world.

The media growth has produced more of a curse than a blessing in our culture. In the 40's, 50's, even much of the 60's, we knew of politics and lawmaking what we read in the papers or we heard in a whistlestop. Reporting in those days was focused on the facts and not the nuances of what was said or done. Movement conservative began this move to sound bite intellect and the advent of 24/7 TV coverage, with its attendent limited allotment of time to full discussion merely fed the beast. Add to that the need for TV and the other media venues to increase profits and they just nurtured the sound bite mentality of the American public as opposed to reasoned complete dialogue. This means that to alter the current political climate and tone it will take changes in many venues not just in the hallowed halls of DC.

8) I would not disagree that many of our problems are the result of our total inability to get politicians to focus on what is best and necessary for the welfare of our country. To a great extent that inability is not so much the haranguing and bickering as it is to the underlying philosophies of what is best. The ability of movement conservative to convince the American public that we can return to a simpler time, full of family values based on religious beliefs and where the wealthy will provide for all of us, has exacerbated the dialogue. Fortunately, GWB has gone a long way to creating the realization that the conservative way is not the answer.

You are a little naive to believe that the American people want solutions that are in the interest of all of us. We are a nation of individuals and though we have no problem if something that benefits me benefits others as well, it is my benefit that I'm concerned with.

Most of us who strongly desire a Democratic White House and Congress want things done. In the interim I don't really care whether conservatives like it, approve of it, or desire it. I, and most of us want action, NOW! The best way to bring both parties together will be to effect the changes and focus and prove that our way is better. In the longer term that will bring more adherents than singing Kumbaya together and we will be on our way to the necessary cultural change.

Again, with your education and experience, you are well aware of the time and energy necessary to bring differing, polarized sides together. We have neither the time nor the energy to waste. To quote someone you know, we are in, "The fierce urgency of now!"

9) Trivial or not, Frank, these are the realities of the system I explain. Are they stupid, ridiculous, not worth the time and effort expended on them? Absolutely! Are they effective as campaigning tactics? They have been in recent years and appear to be making a mark today. The Reverend Wright issue is to a great extent trivial but it is troublesome. Let us assume that truly Obama doesn't agree with his rantings, it still begs the question of why he would have stayed in Wright's church for 20 years and why he would have included him in his campaign, no matter how obscurely. Those are reasonable questions of judgement.

If you think that all this mud is bad, wait, you ain't seen nothing yet. Actually my take is that most of the media is in Obama's camp. They pound Hillary and Bill much harder. They do, unfortunately, relish in a juicy story.

The issues you mention do not have anything to do with Hillary's competence, they portend a question of Obama's competence and his ability to do the job. When there is essentially no difference in policies, to win requires that you grab whatever straws are put on the table. Come on Frank, this is true in any competition.

Not sure whether you are not listening or selectively listening but Obama and his folks have done their share of taking cheap shots. Some have been on the airwaves but many have been in mailers targeted to specific audiences. I don't complain about them, they are consistent with the rules of the game. For Obama it is more hypocritical than for Hillary, but again, winning is the objective. You may enter this arena pure but you do not leave it as a virgin.

10) I have the advantage, or disadvantage, being retired, of watching all day long the various interviews and snippets of the speechs as I sit on the computer spewing my tripe, and in my opinion Hillary appears much more energized than Obama. Admittedly some of that is due to his more laid back personna but he, at times looks far more tired than Hillary and more frustrated.

The observation is not entirely "smokescreen stuff". The president's job is taxing and requires a huge energy level. Hillary, notwithstanding Bill's inane remark, does exhibit the greater excitement.

I haven't forgotten his race speech. In his inimitable manner it was great and delivered eloquently. It did not speak to his energy and while it exhibited his humanness, often, in politics displaying your humane side gets mixed results. In the final analysis, at this point in time, it achieved little. He has had to revisit the main object of his speech.

11) Harry Truman did what he thought he had to do. Far be it from me to render judgement, one way or the other. He did save hundreds of thousands of lives but at a cost of hundreds of thousands of lives. He opened a Pandora's Box that still haunts us today and likely will forever. When you fill the hole back up you always end up with dirt left over.

12) I did not suggest that the voting Republicans admire Hillary more. What I said was that she has garnered significant admiration from the Senate and House Republicans in her ability to work across the aisle and effect bipartisan solutions. That, my friend is actual experience, not hope. You will pardon me if I do not vote for my candidate based on what the Republicans think. The contrary might be the better argument.

What does the Constitution have to do with this? Talk about "smokescreens". Frank that is beneath you; it is inanity at its utmost. I have no problem and in fact see great benefit having Bill in the White House again, provided we keep the bedroom doors open.

I happen to think that Bill was a very good president and I would classify him as a "good" one.

I am not denigrating youth as a general condemnation. There are many bright, competent, capable, achieiving young people out and about the world today. There are even some who are far more politically astute than I; though most would likely consider, me and astute, an oxymoron. It is however a fact that a far greater number than you would believe are sorely deficient in American history and civics making their judgement questionable. Further, as I stated, young people are much less cynical than we older folks and are more apt to be swayed by an eloquent, hopeful message; allowing you as the exception.

As I stated before we have seen energized political activity on the part of young people before but we have yet to see them deliver on the promise. That is why you don't see the demographic show up in the final election data. I would agree that in a larger sense it is more the election for the young than for me but in true American spirit I am concerned for the fierce urgency of me.

I have nothing against "new". I have nothing against "promising". Though perhaps not a solutionist I am an actionist. I want to see things done and SOON or your allusion to the death of democracy might be telling. I, too, will vote for Obama should he be successful. I personally believe that more will get done if it's Hillary and more quickly. Should it be McCain, the death knell may commence.

Thursday, 01 May, 2008  
Anonymous Louise D said...

Thank you, Dr. Reich, for your principled endorsement. I think it would be helpful to your readers, however, if you provide specifics on how Obama would better deal with the housing crisis, failures of our financial markets, education and/or poverty.

Thanks.

Friday, 02 May, 2008  
Blogger kenneth said...

My son was born in tanzania. I love afica. Therfore I love barack, But there is more. This is a man who sees the future as well as the present and is willing to use the best minds of our age (like dr reich) to accomplish the new america for a new century. Please listeb to these great americans who support him for they know what is necessary for the progress of uor nation. ayes god bless america but also god bless barack to bring us into this century with hope as teddy did 100 years ago/ Mungu abriki africa na amerika. God bless afica and america.

Friday, 02 May, 2008  
Anonymous Denise from San Marcos, CA said...

Poor Obama! He may be just now realizing he's been a patsy for the Clinton machine all along. And what a perfect patsy he's been. As the character Sam Blaine said in the movie Casablanca, "Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, she had to walk into mine". While coincidences happen frequently in the movies, they rarely happen in real life. Of all the Black churches in all the towns in all of America, why oh why were Rev. Wright's sermons being taped? How stupid does one have to be to believe this taping was a coincidence? Why were the Democratic party movers and shakers pumping up Obama immediately after the last Presidential election? Everyone knew Hillary was going to run, however disengenuously coy she was about her bid for the Whitehouse when asked. Obama was picked out a long, long time ago for his role as patsy. And Rev. Wright was the perfect hitman. After all, wouldn't it be easy for the public to believe another black-on-black crime, even if this one would be political? The answer is: of course it's believeable. The only problem for the Clintons is that Obama got just a little too popular, so time to implement the "failsafe mechanism" of his lack of maturity, experience, and dangerous liasons vis-a-vis Rev. Wright. Now for the finale, Obama will step down and let Hillary be the nominee during an overly-dramatic Democratic convention. He'll do it to preserve this so-called unity of the Democratic party. In return, he'll get the "nod" one day in the next 12 years or so. Since I typically vote conservative for financial reasons and I happen to be a Black female Republican, I find this whole charade somewhat entertaining and also feel a sense of vindication. I've received some verbal abuse about being a Republican from family members whose political ignorance and loyalty to the Democratic party are equally infinite. Now, they have learned what I've known for many years, that the rich, white liberals in the Democratic party care very little about minorities. And as far as the Black vote - they have to do absolutely nothing to get it. Pretty soon it will be time for Obama's performance as the Clintons "house boy" to begin. How could anyone believe that the Clintons wouldn't play dirty to get back in the Whitehouse? Most folks just don't even understand that "politics as usual" on the Clinton scale is larger, meaner, and more sinister than we'd like to believe.

Saturday, 03 May, 2008  
Blogger Art A Layman said...

denise:

My gracious! You exhibit the beginnings of a great career in writing fiction. Few could have conjured up such a conspiracy theory. Nice touch with the interminglings of church and ministers and God and such.

You seem to have more faith in politicians than I. I would not give most of them credit for anything that far thinking or complicated. If Hillary truly masterminded your scenario how can you not vote for her? That program displays not only vision but organization par excellance. Those are the kinds of minds we need running the country. Not mundane, mediocre, emptyheads who tell us how our economic fundamentals are strong, or that the mission is accomplished.

You might want to revisit your analysis of your family's political views. It could be in ignorance they have the better solution.

It was a Democratic president that pushed through the legislation that improved the plight of blacks in this country. Motivated by the efforts and lives of black and white folks we finally got legislation that began to change things. Wherever you are today it is greatly due to those people and a Democratic president.

Nobody enters a presidential race just for the fun of it. They enter it because they believe they can make things better and they do it to win. In our system this often requires getting down and dirty. It doesn't portend premeditation just perserverance. Do you really want a president who just backs into the job with an attitude of, if it happens it happens? Our culture demands that if you want something then you must fight for it. It is not enough to speak kind words and platitudes. You've got to be willing to get dirty, to go into the latrine trenches and bring on the fight.

Dems are not perfect, nor can a political party, no matter how well intentioned, totally effect cultural change. The Dems are a party with much more concern for the working class and that includes blacks and whites. What exactly is it that conservatives have done for blacks?

Saturday, 03 May, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I will agree that blacks will turn out strong to support an Obama candidacy but Reps are at their best in the more "local" Congressional races and as abhorrent as it is a black presidential candidate will energize the Rep constituency in the South.

...................

Udara

Wow, check out this site called http://www.fluc.com%3c/a>
Free SMS and free mobile ads!! Its fantastic

Sunday, 04 May, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am voting for Obama, or I am voting for McCain, or I am voting for Clinton. I am NOT voting for Obama's or McCain's or Clinton's ex-pastors, college roommates, fellow professors, etc. When will people, both here and in the MSM, get that simple truth?

How come all the media emphasis on the ill-chosen words of Obama's ex-pastor, and none whatsoever on Clinton's ex- (or current) pastor? What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Sen. Clinton spent eight years living in the White House. She is so gungho about returning there, so willing to lie and cheat and steal her way there, that I must wonder aloud: "Did she forget something there that she must be all means retrieve, or what?"

Thursday, 08 May, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Barack has her for vice president, he's a dead man.

Saturday, 10 May, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Online Dating | Work Loan | Online Loan | Best Office Loan | Online Loan Resources | Auto Loan Resources | Bad Credit Loan Resources | Bank Loan Information | Business Loan Resources | Cash Loan Resources | Commercial Loan Resources | Home Loan Resource Information | Three Way Link Exchange | Online Poker Game Site | Online Games | Best Online Casino | Sports Betting | Online SEO Tips | Sportsbook Betting | Travel Inforamation Manual | Online Technical Support | Technical Support Resource | Windows Technical Support | My Blogs | Cheap London Hotels | Discount London Hotels | Kareena Kapoor | Diya Mirza | Aamir Khan | Soha Ali Khan | Aamisha Patel | Priyanka Chwopda | sexy Mallika Sherawat | Kajol | Katrina Kaif | Aishwarya Rai Bachhan | Juhi Chawla | Aids The Fact | Cheap Hotels | Free Dating Websites | Christian Dating Sites | Carbon 14 Dating | Meeting Women Online | Online Russian Dating | Indian Beauty | Indian Girls Dating | Love Marriage Tips | Women Dating Tips | Discount US Hotels | Cheap US Hotels | Paddington Hotels | Seo Friendly Urls | Effective Advertising Tips

Wednesday, 14 May, 2008  
Anonymous kerry oravec said...

WHEN DID THE ROOSEVELTS, KENNEDYS & CLINTONS ALLOW THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY TO JOIN THE NATION OF ISLAM?

Wednesday, 14 May, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm really surprised how Clinton supporters can be so blind. Clintons did so many evil things to this country and to the rest of the world, many people died because of Clintons. Didn't you have enough of Clintons' dinasty? Have anyone watched The Clinton Chronicles, why no one mentions that:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6470450895164255089

Wednesday, 14 May, 2008  
Blogger lucape said...

The flags and banners are flying high. This candidate, that candidate: Do we fail to read the Moral Bearing ?.
A Nation that was established under Christian principles does not look very christian at all. Those who were denied the right to a clear and concise teaching on their religious heritage of the Christian Faith in the making of America have become (judging here) so Obtuse on their far-left ( NAZY Ideology ) stance. The murder of the unborn, sexual perversion of (GAY, LESBIAN) marriage being touted as equal with heterosexual marital relationships, secular-humanist ideology forced on the children of the nation( sexual promiscuity and indoctrination to same sex lifestyles to our school children): Reasons why GOD destroyed cities and abandoned nations to the ruin they cherished.
Make no mistake, the path you choose, as you follow it will have it's own consequences.

God would have you choose life, Jesus promised to give us abundant life. This cannot be done apart from Knowing God through His precepts taught in the Bible as the only authority on the same. The abundant life cannot be enjoyed apart from having the Faith of Jesus through Faith in the Work He has accomplished on our behalf. Satisfying the demand for a pure and perfect sacrifice for the remission of sins. This Jesus has done for all who will receive it thereby, being forgiven of the sin debt they owe and thereby justified before God, having been adopted into the Family of God, having the rights and privilege thereof to Boldly going Before the Throne of Glory and seeking whatever is true and just from the Father who, gives according to the Will of His intent in truth and justice.

Truth and consequences, Inseparables. Abandon them and you have the ___________ ideal.
"Nazism tried to lay a basis in race, Hitler's motto was that right and wrong are defined by what's good for the German people.
Marxism tried to fill the vacuum with class structure. Lenin's motto as that right and wrong are defined by what's good for an individual's own race or gender group" ( AMERICAN CHRISTIAN HISTORY, p. 196)"

The principles that founded America were Clearly Christian. The only accepted Law Book then was without mistake the BIBLE. The very same, Has been abandoned by the Nation Through the politics which have reshaped and are active in re-writing It's History.

Clearly, America has become a nation where Government of the People ( 6 ) by the People ( 6 ) for the People ( 6 ), as Abraham Lincoln put it, " shall not perish from the earth". 666..!!
'
Six, being the number of Man, is the focal point here.
The WILL OF MAN rather than, the 'Will of God', is the order of the day. "They shall not buy or sell without (of the hip here) the mark of the hand (signature and finger prints), The mark on the forehead (picture ID and Iris mapping) the number of his name ( social security number and DNA readout ). As the ONE NEW MAN who has rejected GOD we as a whole have ascribed to God head. As the Signs of our CHOSEN DESTINY point, ( you can read it in our economic dilemma ), OUR MONEY is becoming WORTHLESS with the end result being WE will require the other person to accept a monetary system ( already in place ) of credits and debits where, NONE can BUY or sell without the aforementioned ..... Mark of the BEAST. Beast being a description of the Govt. In this case that of (666) right to Govern "derived from the people by the people for the people".

The path we have chosen is inconsistent with The Christian Heritage we have received from our ForeFathers.

We have become " g o d s " unto ourselves, decreeing what we will.

WE THE PEOPLE, being responsible for the administration of Government, have become the 'g o d s' of our own destiny apart from the destiny which GOD would Have for us.
' To LIVE AND HAVE LIFE MORE ABUNDANT ' with GOD Through Christ, The only mediator of the true covenant of God unto Man.

Friday, 16 May, 2008  
Anonymous Rahul said...

Affiliate Program Dictionary | Auto Credit Information | Beach Exotica USA | Best Casino Information | Best Finance Information | Best Finance News | Best Hotel Search | Best Life Insurance Information | Best Lifestyle Information | Best Loan Information Online | Money Market Information | Personal Finance Information | Refinance Information | Car Loan Information | Casino Dalasvegas | Change The Fortune | Chicago Hotels Information | Cruise Holiday Planning | Dating With Madeeasy | Easy Estate Loans | Easy Web Adverting | Endless Health Informations | Exotic Holiday in India | Health Fitness | Free Online Dating | Casino Gamble | Herbal Information | Holiday Party Planning | Hotels Information | I Love Gambling | India Holiday

Saturday, 17 May, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I fully support what robert rich has carefully stated here.

................

Madusanka

http://fasttrackitc.com/sp/

Sunday, 18 May, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A vote for Obama is a vote for a fourth term of President Jimmy Carters failed Presidency!
President Clinton's two terms was enough of Carters failed policies!

Monday, 19 May, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

DEAR LOOSER WHO WROTE THIS:


MANAGING THE NATION== McCain 45%, Hillary 55%, Obama 95%
PATRIOTISM == McCain 100%, Hillary 100%, Obama 100%
NATIONAL SECURITY== McCain 60%, Hillary 60%, Obama 98%
LOVE OF ISRAEL== McCain 100%, Hillary 100%, Obama 100%
ABILITY TO MAKE AMERICA BETTER OVERALL== McCain 45%, Hillary 65%, Obama 98%
[Feel free to call me for explanation]




this means nothing because it means nothing. 98 and 65 and 45 make way more than 100. trust me. there's no way that mccain will loose anyway.

Tuesday, 20 May, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Dr. Reich,

While this is late in posting, I have to say "Thank you!" for speaking the truth with love and care. There is relationship and there is responsibility, and you have shown both. You are a brilliant analyst and commentator and I, for one, always appreciate hearing what you have to say. I am afraid for our nation, and I am afraid for Barack, because as much as I believe he will be elected -- and deserves to be -- it will be a hell of a burden...perhaps strongblood is correct in saying "Barack is a gift to America at such a time as this."

Wednesday, 21 May, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I find it hilarious that people in this country vote for someone because they are better than someone else. Not because they are right for the job. I don't want the lesser of 3 evils running by pocket book. Wake up people you are being played a fool!

Thursday, 22 May, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Another man supports an unqualified man over a woman who is qualified, we democrats must love losing.

Tuesday, 27 May, 2008  
Blogger red said...

thank you sohbet

Sunday, 15 June, 2008  
Blogger red said...

thank you mirc

Monday, 16 June, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

An Open Letter to Certain White Women who are Threatening to Withhold Support From Barack Obama in November
Your Whiteness is Showing:
(06/06/08)

(Tim Wise is a white man who lives and was raised in the south. He is a published author of a well regarded novel. He is a professor and he has spoken at over 400 college campuses including Harvard. Other articles by him can be found at www.timwise.org). He is a highly regarded commentator on these issues in part because it is unique to hear a white man speak as he does.

An Open Letter to Certain White Women who are Threatening to Withhold Support From Barack Obama in November
Your Whiteness is Showing:
By Tim Wise
June 6, 2008
This is an open letter to those white women who, despite their proclamations of progressivism, and supposedly because of their commitment to feminism, are threatening to withhold support from Barack Obama in November. You know who you are.

I know that it's probably a bad time for this. Your disappointment at the electoral defeat of Senator Hillary Clinton is fresh, the sting is new, and the anger that animates many of you--who rightly point out that the media was often sexist in its treatment of the Senator--is raw, pure and justified.

That said, and despite the awkward timing, I need to ask you a few questions, and I hope you will take them in the spirit of solidarity with which they are genuinely intended. B ut before the questions, a statement if you don't mind, or indeed, even if (as I suspect), you will mind it quite a bit.

First, for those of you threatening to actually vote for John McCain and to oppose Senator Obama, or to stay home in November and thereby increase the likelihood of McCain winning and Obama losing (despite the fact that the latter's policy platform is virtually identical to Clinton's while the former's clearly is not), all the while claiming to be standing up for women...

For those threatening to vote for John McCain or to stay home and increase the odds of his winning (despite the fact that he once called his wife the c-word in public and is a staunch opponent of reproductive freedom and gender equity initiatives, such as comparable worth legislation), all the while claiming to be standing up for women...

For those threatening to vote for John McCain or to stay home and help ensure Barack Obama's defeat, as a way to protest what you call Obama's sexism (examples of which you seem to have difficulty coming up with), all the while claiming to be standing up for women...
Your whiteness is showing.

When I say your whiteness is showing this is what I mean: You claim that your opposition to Obama is an act of gender solidarity, in that women (and their male allies) need to stand up for women in the face of the sexist mistreatment of Clinton by the press. On this latter point--the one about the importance of standing up to the media for its often venal misogyny--you couldn't be more correct. As the father of two young girls who will have to contend with the poison of patriarchy all their lives, or at least until such time as that system of oppression is eradicated, I will be the first to join the boycott of, or demonstration on, whatever media outlet you choose to make that point. But on the first part of the above equation--the part where you insist voting against Obama is about gender solidarity--you are, for lack of a better way to put it, completely full of crap. And what's worse is that at some level I suspect you know it. Voting against Senator Obama is not about gender solidarity. It is an act of white racial bonding, and it is grotesque.
If it were gender solidarity you sought, you would by definition join with your black and brown sisters come November, and do what you know good and well they are going to do, in overwhelming numbers, which is vote for Barack Obama. But no. You are threatening to vote not like other women--you know, the ones who aren't white like you and most of your friends--but rather, like white men! Needless to say it is high irony, bordering on the outright farcical, to believe that electorally bonding with white men, so as to elect McCain, is a rational strategy for promoting feminism and challenging patriarchy. You are not thinking and acting as women, but as white people.

So here's the first question: What the hell is that about?

And you wonder why women of color have, for so long, thought (by and large) that white so-called feminists were phony as hell? Sister please...

Your threats are not about standing up for women. They are only about standing up for the feelings of white women, and more to the point, the aspirations of one white woman. So don't kid yourself. If you wanted to make a statement about the importance of supporting a woman, you wouldn't need to vote for John McCain, or stay home, thereby producing the same likely result--a defeat for Obama. You could always have said you were going to go out and vote for Cynthia McKinney. After all, she is a woman, running with the Green Party, and she's progressive, and she's a feminist. But that isn't your threat is it? No. You're not threatening to vote for the woman, or even the feminist woman. Rather, you are th reatening to vote for the white man, and to reject not only the black man who you feel stole Clinton's birthright, but even the black woman in the race. And I wonder why? Could it be...?

See, I told you your whiteness was showing.

And now for a third question, and this is the biggie, so please take your time with it: How is it that you have managed to hold your nose all these years, just like a lot of us on the left, and vote for Democrats who we knew were horribly inadequate--Kerry, Gore, Clinton, Dukakis, right on down the uninspiring line--and yet, apparently can't bring yourself to vote for Barack Obama? A man who, for all of his shortcomings (and there are several, as with all candidates put up by either of the two major corporate parties) is surely more progressive than any of those just mentioned. And how are we to understand that refusal--this sudden line in the proverbial sand--other than as a racist slap at a black man? Y ou will vote for white men year after year after year--and are threatening to vote for another one just to make a point--but can't bring yourself to vote for a black man, whose political views come much closer to your own, in all likelihood, than do the views of any of th e white men you've supported before.

How, other than as an act of racism, or perhaps as evidence of political insanity, is one to interpret such a thing?
See, black folks would have sucked it up, like they've had to do forever, and voted for Clinton had it come down to that. Indeed, they were on board the Hillary train early on, convinced that Obama had no chance to win and hoping for change, any change, from the reactionary agenda that has been so prevalent for so long in this culture. They would have supported the white woman--hell, for many black folks, before Obama showed his mettle they were downright excited to do so--but you won't support the black man.

And yet you have the audacity to insist that it is you who are the most loyal constituency of the Democratic Party, and the one before whom Party leaders should bow down, and whose feet must be kissed?

Your whiteness is showing.

Look, I couldn't care less about the Party personally. I left the Democrats twenty years ago when they told me that my activism in the Central America solidarity and South African anti-apartheid movements made me a security risk, and that I wouldn't be able to get clearance to be in some parade with Governor Dukakis. Yeah, seriously. But for you to act as though you are the indispensible voters, the most important, the ones whose views should be pandered to, whose every whim should be the basis for Party policy, is not only absurd, it is also racist in that it, a) ignores and treats as irrelevant the much more loyal constituency of black folks, without whom no Democrat would have won anythi ng in the past twenty years (and indeed the racial gap favoring the Democrats among blacks is about six times larger than the gender gap favoring them among white women, relative to white men); and b) demonstrates the mentality of entitlement and superiority that has been long ingrained in us as white folks--so that we believe we have the right to dictate the terms of political engagement, and to determine the outcome, and to get our way, simply because for so long we have done just that.

But that day is done, whether you like it or not, and you are now left with two, and only two choices, so consider them carefully: the first is to stand now in solidarity with your black brothers and sisters and welcome the new day, and help to push it in a truly progressive and feminist and antiracist direction, while the second is to team up with white men to try and block the new day from dawning. Feel free to choose the latter. But if you do, please don't insult your own intelligence, or ours, by insisting that you've done so as a radical political act.

Thursday, 19 June, 2008  
Blogger red said...

thank you sevgi

Friday, 20 June, 2008  
Anonymous Boris said...

Obama voted for FISA! now he will not get my vote!

Friday, 11 July, 2008  
Anonymous Anon-Stormscoming said...

Obama a political deity amongst the liberal left. But do you know who he is? One his website alone there are eleven citations supporting Guevara and his Cuban lackeys. Not only that he recently (and secretly) sent a political envoy to Venezuela. During a meeting with the Venezuelan dictator ( so called president) he pledged to veto any free trade bills with Colombia. On top of that he promised to end all military funding to Colombia and allowing F.A.R.C to run rampant. This would severely hinder the Colombian government and hinder it's democratic prosperity.Meaning he would have directly supported a communist uprising.

Lastly before I leave I would like to point a few things out from the first post. The original post is clearly founded upon a typical hyper nationalist worship. In no point in the entire short and unfounded post did you mention any factual bases to support your claim? Not only that for the remainder of these posts I see no factual bases for their support ( mostly I do see some well thought out posts...that does not include Kayxyz,strongblood).

The fact of the matter is Obama is not the man you think he is. He is neither a liberal nor a moderate. He is an opportunist, riding the wave of hyper nationalism his charisma has created. I hope you will open your minds and delve into it your self. Why am I voting for Obama? Who is he really and what does he stand for? Do you have the ability but lack the reason? I do hope you wake up from your hyper nationalist musings and dreams mister Reich. If you stay in this dream to long you might end up with a nightmare.
- We are all we are one we are Anon.

Saturday, 12 July, 2008  
Blogger Tikigod said...

Now, I haven't read Michelle Obama's Princeton Thesis, but here is the website that you can download it from Michelle Obama thesis was on racial divide - Jeffrey Ressner - Politico.com
The gist of what it appears to be is that Michelle Obama believes that once Blacks are educated, they tend to embrace the same values as White society.
As an American military Veteran, who worked and played with Americans from all races and backgrounds while serving on active duty in the United States Air Force for twenty years, I have a big problem with, as Politico put it, Michelle Obama viewing Americans through "a race-based prism". Apparently she has never stopped looking at the majority of Americans that way, and neither has her husband, or else he would have never insulted gun-owners, small-town regular church-attending Protestant Christians including Catholics with moderate to conservative values who would never look upon a teenage girl choosing to keep her baby as "punishment", the way Obama viewed not being allowed to get an abortion. He tends to see the world through the same type of prism as his wife. That is probably what made it so hard for him to leave a "wrong" church whose message was fueling racist hate messages.
If the majority of the American people have a gut feeling that is telling them not to vote for Obama, then they are probably correct in going with it. While some in the media and other venues are touting that voting for John McCain may be the intellectually wrong thing to do in November of 2008, often times going against that survival instinct is even more wrong. While the grass may look greener on the "change" side of the fence, that greener grass can sometimes turn out to be fake astro-turf loaded with lead or a chemically-maintained nightmare that you can never take your shoes off and walk in.
Americans are right to want to keep their status quo. Yes, there is still more of a nightmare that could exist, should the wrong candidate get elected to become president of the United States. Even with all of his flaws, John McCain is still more mainstream America than Barack and Michelle Obama, who are fringe America trying to convince everyone else to join them there. There is a difference. Michelle Obama believes that Black Americans are becoming White when they embrace values that have been ingrained through generations and can be traced back to our founding forefathers. In fact, she could not be more wrong.
After that last Amendment to the Constitution was passed 139 years ago giving Blacks / African Americans the same rights as Caucasians, those Caucasians extended an invitation that basically said "come join the rest of us and become full-fledged Americans", not Black Americans, just Americans. While some of recent our ancestors did discriminate based on skin coloring, it is that racial divide that far too many Black Americans have propagated through their version of racism that basically says "due to our skin coloring and type of hair" you cannot understand us. Unfortunately we do, they want to segregate themselves, and blame that segregation on the rest of us who are not like some of those who enable that radical rhetoric to exist.
The truth is that John McCain is a "safe" vote, because he has no history of discrimination against others except in the political arena, where two major political parties exist. Obama can make no such claim to fame, because he has embraced some of those same core ideologies as his wife, and let her loose to inflict her philosophy upon the rest of us, whether or not we want it. It is kind of like being dragged into a bar room fight when you were just sitting there enjoying your favorite brew. The vast number of Americans are sick and tired of the war that really exists, and the Obamas have just exposed them to another, as if the economy, the threat of terrorism attacks, the cost of vacations via fuel, the subprime mortgage crisis, terrorism, and other problems were not enough enemies for them to take on.
The weird thing is that the Democratic Party is clueless about the monster that they have enabled to be propagated upon the American public - not Obama directly, but his past baptism into a racist agenda, thus leaving many Americans to question what his political agenda really is. At this point in time, Americans want a candidate who will bring them all closer together, not remind them of their differences. More than ever, they want that safe uniter. Bush was anything but safe. While McCain may currently advocate staying the course in Iraq, he has also stated that he will not keep Americans in harm's way any longer than necessary, because he values all Americans, not just those of his own race. Obama's history of associating with racist radicals, no matter how seemingly innocent, does exist. The Democrats cannot see the forest from the trees. The American people can. They get the whole picture of what it will be like if each candidate is elected, and they may be willing to accept the status quo from the Republicans, because the Democratic leaders flatly refused to give them a previous successful status quo in the way of a second Clinton administration. The Democratic leaders shot themselves in the foot by embracing a problematic Democratic candidate.
While some are comparing electing Obama to JFK, they could not be more wrong. Kennedy was a moderately conservative Catholic president who represented the same values as mainstream America. The only difference was between him being a Catholic, and over all the overall ignorance of Protestant America regarding Catholics. Obama brings more threats to the table than security, by the existence of his mind set, his marriage, and his history. The only thing about the Obamas that is not threatening to the American people are their two young daughters, because like most kids, they are cute and innocent. However, to Obama, even his kids are now viewed as a problem. Most moderately conservative Americans with families do not appreciate that view.
To stay in favor with the American people all McCain has to do is keep reminding them that it is all about politics, and that it is the Obamas who started making comments about the Clintons and racism. That the Obamas are the ones trying to force their views upon the rest of us, by dragging us out of our security and into their insecurities. Perhaps if Michelle Obama had mainstreamed herself, instead of being on some kind of racial understanding quest, she would be a happier person, and more Americans would be seeing her husband as less of a threat, the same way they saw Colin Powell prior to the whole WMD in Iraq mess. The same goes for Condoleezza Rice, who had everyone's respect until she failed to read the initial report on Osama Bin Laden, and insure that precautions were taken to secure our nation. It is not about skin coloring in the political arena, it is all about getting it right the first time around. One would have thought that the Democrats would have gotten it, considering all of the bashing that both Powell and Rice took as seemingly devout Republicans. Nowadays, lemmings come to mind when I think about the Democrats, not robots. Robots are more advanced that most Democrats now appear to be.

Monday, 14 July, 2008  
Blogger Truth First said...

TF: During the past eight years we've seen the United States conduct a rather hostile foreign policy towards much of the world. America has attacked two Middle Eastern nations, resulting in many deaths, torture and the imprisonment of innocents. As President what can you do to correct these wrongs?

Senator Obama: As I have said from the beginning it was a mistake to go into Iraq for the reasons you cited. America has lost respect and does not have the creditability it had prior to the current administration. I intend to pull American forces out from Iraq as soon as we can. That's the first thing. What America has failed to do is seek justice. The current policy is more like a quest for vengeance, it is counter-productive. It has not made us safer.

We have to work with other nations instead of alienating them, we have common interests and we have to respect them and we have to learn how to work with other nations. We cannot be sloppy and cut corners. The Bush administration has been undermining the virtues of America that will I plan to lead America by.

TF: So you will stop the imprisonments?

Senator Obama: The Supreme Court has ruled that what the current administration is doing is illegal. It is a shameful chapter in American history when people are picked up in battle and imprisoned without access to legal representation. This has not happened before in American history. I intend to restore respect for the law and for human rights. That should always be the end-goal in all U.S. policy especially with foreign policy. We have to show our best, not our worst characteristics.

TF: Senator Obama, the people of Iran are understandably concerned that their nation may come under attack. What can be done between now and January to prevent another unnecessary conflict?

Senator Obama: We must continue to remind the current administration that war is not the solution here. Iran has not attacked us and Iran is not going to attack us. They have every right to develop nuclear power if that is their wish and removing American forces from Iraq would relieve tensions considerably.

We must not be afraid of diplomacy, not just with Iran but with Syria, the Saudis, Jordan, the United Nationals Security Council program members as well. Once it is clear that we’re not planning to stay in Iraq for 10, 20 years, all these nations will have an interest in working out how we can best stabilize the situation.

Monday, 21 July, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Barack Obama as next President of The United States of America


The die is cast and for reasons that only a privileged few know, you Sir, will be the next President of the United States of America. Your next 4 years will be a turning point in US history and planet earth. CHANGE, your advisors and high stake investors offer the nation will undoubtedly be the same rhetoric and empty promises that make up a political campaign, that campaigns for appointment for any public office in America.

The White House will be the Black House to some, the Aryan Brothers of America will not be so happy, but yet will blame you and your staff if you fail, which will reinforce their belief that the Aryan Nation is the true leader for America. The religious zealots will be busy bees making nests to survive the onslaught of lies, corruption and deceit. Business enterprises and other competing nations will capitalize off of your inexperience in the art of corruption and murder. The organized crime organizations from different nations including our own will benefit from the lack of control over national crime.

Military governments including our own will test your tolerance to pain and deception and trick you into needless and profitable domestic and international conflict. You will no doubt attempt to colorize your staff to soften the race conflict once in office.

As President you will be President. Nations will respect you only for your title of office. Americans will soon see after your appointment as President that your intentions were manipulated by those that make the rules. You will fill the spot in history as planned, and nothing more.

You will never while in office be able to pull the troops from conflict in any land we are engaged in. As a matter of fact we as a nation will be engaged in a new conflict of war, which will galvanize Americans to seek a different form of government and a different and honest Congress.

You will attempt to shore up Americas problems with false promise and lies, because you cannot directly affect the CHANGE you promised.

Your frustration will be your downfall while in office, and your co-dependence on those that you trust will also add to your demise.

Our Armed Forces in rank will respect you as good soldiers they are, but those under them will not, and for good reasons, that only a good soldier knows.

America will not be America until its government respects the People, and tells the truth. America is a Republic, not a Democracy or Fascist Government or is it?

Until you can walk thru the streets and neighborhoods of America unaided by Secret Service or any other law enforcement agency you will not be respected by the many, only by the fearful and selfish few. Americans can protect their leaders if they are honest and respectful of the people they were elected to serve. Our Government has forsaken us for many hundreds of years, and now we will wait until your 4 years are finished for us to come to fruition.

CHANGE FOR AMERICA FOR AMERICANS!
The American Republic
A Sovereign Republic

Thursday, 24 July, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr.Reich- With all due respect, this lifelong passionate Democrat will be voting Republican for McCain for the 1st time in my life. I am a Democrat but am an American first. I cannot in good conscience vote for this arrogant rookie who has a spectacular absence of any professional achievement to be the POTUS. Hot air, rhetoric and poetic words are not enough to be the President.

Wednesday, 30 July, 2008  
Anonymous GRITS said...

Why we love Obama. http://www.whyweloveobama.com

Thursday, 31 July, 2008  
Blogger red said...

thank you sohbet

Tuesday, 12 August, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reich is a closet socialist, he's never run a business, met a payroll, invented a product, developed and competed to sell it in the open market. In a word, Reich is a fraud.

His knowledge of economics is academic, not practical. He believes that taxes not collected are an expense to government, tax reductions are expenditures?

Here is a former lecturer at Harvard (who never did achieve tenure as a professor) tossing his ideas around as though they are practical -- they are purely conjecture and academic, except for his spouting statistics, which he doesn't fully understand anyway.

We need LOWER taxes, not more taxes. The purpose of government is not cradle to grave handouts and support, the USA has surpassed other nations in creativity, economic growth, product development, etc., because individuals with ideas were not hampered by unnecessary government confiscation of wealth and income.

Mr. Reich should keep to himself. Every time he appears on TV his comments solve nothing, and contribute little to understanding our real economic problems and solid practical solutions.

Stay in the classroom, at least there, you can only harm a small number of uninformed students, rather than try to peddle your ideas to the world using your hackneyed government credentials.

Or start a company, make a product, deal with regulations and taxes, and then tell us about your experiences.

Dr. Rogers, Orange County CA

Friday, 15 August, 2008  
Blogger ∨-1s丶蘦 said...

升降机 升降平台 登车桥 升降机 铝合金升降机 液压机械 升降台 高空作业平台 升降机 升降平台 无缝管 升降平台 弹簧 升降机 数据恢复 升降机 RAID数据恢复 北京心理咨询 服务器数据恢复 液压升降机 无缝钢管 升降平台 博客 升降机 Google排名 网站优化 心理咨询 升降机 升降平台

Cheap WoW Gold, World Of Warcraft Gold,the best WoW PowerLeveling and other MMORPG Power LevelingWOW Gold WOWGold World Of Warcraft Gold WOW Power Leveling WOW PowerLeveling World Of Warcraft Power Leveling World Of Warcraft PowerLeveling

Our company's products are Gas Alarm,Gas Detector,Breathalyser,Breathalyzer,Alcohol Tester,Co Alarm.Breathalyzer Gas Alarm Breathalyser Co Alarm Co Detector Alcohol Tester Alcohol Tester Gas Detector Please select one of our product categories to find out more.

Tuesday, 19 August, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

On Tue, 8/19/08, Michael Moore wrote:


Subject: "Caroline: Pull a Cheney!" An Open Letter to Caroline Kennedy (head of the Obama VP search team) from Michael Moore

Dear Caroline,
We've never met, so I hope you don't find this letter too presumptuous or inappropriate. As its contents involve the public's business, I am sending this to you via the public on the Internet. I knew your brother John. He was a great guy, and I know he would've had a ball during this thrilling and historic election year. We all miss him dearly.
Barack Obama selected you to head up his search for a vice presidential candidate. It appears we may be just days (hours?) away from learning who that choice will be.
The media is reporting that Senator Obama has narrowed his alternatives to three men: Joe Biden, Evan Bayh and Tim Kaine. They're all decent fellows, but they are far from the core of what the Obama campaign has been about: Change. Real change. Out with the old. And don't invade countries that pose no threat to us.
Senators Biden and Bayh voted for that invasion and that war, the war Barack ran against, the war Barack reminded us was the big difference between him and Senator Clinton because she voted for the war and he spoke out against it while running for Senate (a brave and bold thing to do back in 2002).
For Obama to place either of these senators on the ticket would be a huge blow to the millions that chose him in the primaries over Hillary. He will undercut one of the strongest advantages he has over the Hundred-Year War senator, Mr. McCain. By anointing a VP who did what McCain did in throwing us into this war, Mr. Obama will lose the moral high ground in the debates.
As for Governor Kaine of Virginia, his big problem is, well, Obama's big problem -- who is he? The toughest thing Barack has had to overcome -- and it will continue to be his biggest obstacle -- is that too many of the voters simply don't know him well enough to vote for him. The fact that Obama is new to the scene is both one of his most attractive qualities AND his biggest drawback. Too many Americans, who on the surface seem to like Barack Obama, just don't feel comfortable voting for someone who hasn't been on the national scene very long. It's a comfort level thing, and it may be just what keeps Obama from winning in November ("I'd rather vote for the devil I know than the devil I don't know").
What Obama needs is a vice presidential candidate who is NOT a professional politician, but someone who is well-known and beloved by people across the political spectrum; someone who, like Obama, spoke out against the war; someone who has a good and generous heart, who will be cheered by the rest of the world; someone whom we've known and loved and admired all our lives and who has dedicated her life to public service and to the greater good for all.
That person, Caroline, is you.
I cannot think of a more winning ticket than one that reads: "OBAMA-KENNEDY."
Caroline, I know that nominating yourself is the furthest idea from your mind and not consistent with who you are, but there would be some poetic justice to such an action. Just think, eight years after the last head of a vice presidential search team looked far and wide for a VP -- and then picked himself (a move topped only by his hubris to then lead the country to near ruin while in office) -- along comes Caroline Kennedy to return the favor with far different results, a vice president who helps restore America to its goodness and greatness.
Caroline, you are one of the most beloved and respected women in this country, and you have been so admired throughout your life. You chose a life outside of politics, to work for charities and schools, to write and lecture, to raise a wonderful family. But you did not choose to lead a private life. You have traveled the world and met with its leaders, giving you much experience on the world stage, a stage you have been on since you were a little girl.
The nation has, remarkably (considering our fascination with celebrity), left you alone and let you live your life in peace. (It's like, long ago, we all collectively agreed that, with her father tragically gone, a man who died because he wanted to serve his country, we would look out for her, we would wish for her to be happy and well, and we would have her back. But we would let her be.)
Now, I am breaking this unwritten code and asking you to come forward and help us in our hour of need. So many families are hurting, losing their homes, going bankrupt with health care bills, seeing their public schools in shambles and living with this war without end. This is a historic year for women, from Hillary's candidacy to the numerous women running for the House and Senate. This is the year that a woman should be on the Democratic ticket. This is the year that both names on that ticket should be people OUTSIDE the party machine. This is the year millions of independents and, yes, millions of Republicans are looking for something new and fresh and bold (and you are the Kennedy Republicans would vote for!).
This is the moment, Caroline. Seize it! And Barack, if you're reading this, you probably know that she is far too humble and decent to nominate herself. So step up and surprise us again. Step up and be different than every politician we have witnessed in our lifetime. Keep the passion burning amongst the young people and others who have been energized by your unexpected, unpredicted, against-all-odds candidacy that has ignited and inspired a nation. Do it for all those reasons. Make Caroline Kennedy your VP. "Obama-Kennedy." Wow, does that sound so cool.
Caroline, thanks for letting me intrude on your life. How wonderful it will be to have a vice president who will respect the Constitution, who will support (instead of control) her president, who will never let her staff out a CIA agent, and who will never tell her country that she is "currently residing in an undisclosed location."
Say it one more time: "OBAMA-KENNEDY." A move like that might send a message to the country that the Democrats would actually like to win an election for once.
Yours,
Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
MichaelMoore.com


1@go.netatlantic.com

Thursday, 21 August, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The reason many Clinton supporters will not vote for Obama is because they are embarrassed of him, his life, his unfair tactics and his beliefs. And they still don't know all about him.

1. They don't want a candidate that has been in a twenty year relationship with Reverend Wright and the Trinity United Church of Christ.

2. They don’t’ want a candidate that has a twenty year relationship with Father Pflaeger and refers to him as his compass in life

3. They don’t want a candidate that went to a church that supports Louis Farrakhan, an anti Semitic racist, that has led a rally of 20,000 Nation of Islam members to support Obama in Chicago

4. They don't want to defend Black Liberation theology.

5. They don’t want a candidate that lies about his relationship with Tony Rezko, the Syrian Criminal that sold his property to Obama and supported his campaign.

6. They don't want a candidate that could work with a domestic terrorist, William Ayers.

7. They don’t want a candidate that Hamas supports.

8. They don’t want a candidate that Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam support

9. They don’t want a candidate that has a wife that has just now realized she was proud of our country.

10. They don’t want a candidate that denies Florida and Michigan their voices

11. They don’t want a candidate that mentions 57 states in his speeches. 50 states in the USA and 57 states in the Nation of Islam (IOC website)

12. They don’t want a candidate that fights unfair and hyjacks Michigan delegate votes from his opponent.

13. They don't want a candidate that is inexperienced, especially dealing with military issues.

14. They don’t want a candidate that considers it a loss to not to be able to attend his anti American, racist Church.

15. They don’t want a candidate that has a “non practicing” Muslim father, but avoids the entire discussion of his father.

16. They don’t’ want a candidate that won’t debate

17. They don’t’ want a candidate that misleads the youth with an ‘Obama girl and her behind in their face”

18. They don’t want a candidate that says he’s an African American and missed the MLK Remembrance Day and the Louisiana Black Caucus meeting

19. They don’t want a candidate that enjoys laughing at sexism.

20. They don't want a candidate that switches his position on gun control, FISA, the war in Iraq and abortion issues.

21. They don't want a candidate that showcases his daughters on TV shows.

22. They don’t’ want a candidate that has poor judgment..

23. They don’t' want a candidate named; Barack Hussein Obama

24. He is embarrassing.

25. He scares them to death.

Thursday, 28 August, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My community and I are very disappointed in your endorsement for Obama.
The press has destroyed the Clintons and now I feel like the superdelegates are listening.
The only station that finally was able to display Obama's qualities and issues was ABC and now they are being criticized.
Obama is very radical, has a pastor full of hatred for America. This was his mentor.
Obama has ties wth Tony Rezko of Chicago and William Ayers, a terrorist.
Reverend Wright, Obama's mentor of twenty years has embarrassed our first lady and white America.
Obama has an elitist attitude towards most of America. He has a cocky attitude from his own dislike for his grudges against American politics.
This man has his own anger problems. Show me your friends and I will show you who you are:
Tony Rezko, a criminal from Chicago that Obama has know for years.
William Ayers, a terrorist that he worked on a board with in Chicago.
Pastor Wright, a supporter of anti-Semetic, Louis Farrakhan.
Al Sharpton, fighting for the states of Florida not to seat delegates.
Michelle Obama not being proud of her country until now.
This man will never survive against a war hero, John McCain.
I am saddened that the children and the media is controlling this electiion.
Saturday, 19 April, 2008
am very disappointed in your endorsement for Obama.
The press has destroyed the Clintons and now I feel like the superdelegates are listening.
The only station that finally was able to display Obama's qualities and issues was ABC and now they are being criticized.
Obama is very radical, has a pastor full of hatred for America. This was his mentor.
Obama has ties wth Tony Rezko of Chicago and William Ayers, a terrorist.
Reverend Wright, Obama's mentor of twenty years has embarrassed our first lady and white America.
Obama has an elitist attitude towards most of America. He has a cocky attitude from his own dislike for his grudges against American politics.
This man has his own anger problems. Show me your friends and I will show you who you are:
Tony Rezko, a criminal from Chicago that Obama has know for years.
William Ayers, a terrorist that he worked on a board with in Chicago.
Pastor Wright, a supporter of anti-Semetic, Louis Farrakhan.
Al Sharpton, fighting for the states of Florida not to seat delegates.
Michelle Obama not being proud of her country until now.
This man will never survive against a war hero, John McCain.
I am saddened that the children and the media is controlling this electiion.

Thursday, 28 August, 2008  
Blogger erstep said...

Why is anonymous afraid to identify his/herself? Oh, yeah - never mind!

On another note -

There is a woman promoting herself as the founder of the PUMAs. Her name is Darrah Murphy and I think it's important to "out" her since she is appearing on various television programs (tonight on Chris Matthews) in support of McCain's new running mate. All one has to do is "google" her name. She contributed to McCain in 2000 and to Bush in 2004. What will they think of next?

Friday, 29 August, 2008  
Anonymous Andrew said...

Obama for president are you out of your mind?!!! No one should vote our government is full of lies and unfulfilled promises. Ask them about 911 and who really put us in this war, Bush about the building 7 and why is collapsed. You people are so concerned about a president; you don’t look at the real picture. Live your life and start a revolution, our government is the worst thing that has happened to this country.

Sunday, 31 August, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is amazing that Americans are actually thinking of voting for a Muslim for US President... It was only 7 years ago that the Muslims bombed us in 9-11. We have a war hero vs. someone who does not even respect the American flag. We have a senior Senator vs. a junior one term Senator. We have proven Change Agent vs. some who preachs Change but when given a vote over the past years chooses to not vote. How this is this close is imazing to everyone.

Saturday, 06 September, 2008  
Blogger red said...

Thank you very much for this information.

sohbet
muhabbet
mirc
evden eve nakliyat
sevgi
mirc
chat
chat
mirc
sohbet
kelebek

Saturday, 06 September, 2008  
Anonymous LaLa said...

Does it make any sense that someone like Obama should be leading a country where the coloured people he stands up for are the minority? If a white guy becomes president of an African country (where he's the minority) wouldn't that look strange and all the blacks would revolt? I guess white people really do want to be run by black people. He may be intelligent and accomplished but America is not a black country.
And anyway, his bloodline is muslim, whether he chooses to accept that or not. I thought we were at war with muslim terrorists, now a born-muslim will run the country? Hilarious.

Saturday, 06 September, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Okay - we are 6 weeks away from the election and I have yet to hear a word from Senator Obama about exactly what his plan is for the national debt, national security, taxation, education...and the list could go on. I understand that he is for "change"...but what is the plan for change. I need details please. I have listened to every speech I can find on the internet and the words are great...but no detail on how to approach any of the problems - other than to place the blame on the Bush administration. I am not a fan of Mr. Bush - but in all honesty - he does not make the laws, that is the responsibility and as I recall - we have had a Democratic Senate and House for at least the last 4 years - maybe longer. So have to put the blame where it really lies - in the laps of the Congress and Senate. Cannot decide who I am going to vote for...but at least I am beginning to hear plans from the McCain side - wish I could hear the same from the Obama camp. Maybe then this election could be about issues and not race, women and parties - but about America United to fix our problems.

Saturday, 20 September, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am a progressive Republican, but believe that the current party leadership has abandoned the ideals as expressed by Ronald Reagan, Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln; and that the upcoming Presidential election is arguably the most important election to ever face this country. It is for that reason I am asking you to join me in supporting Obama for President.
I have been a student of economics all of my life and believe the financial crisis we face today is something that has not been seen since 1906 or 1929. As a result of deregulation during the time that the Republican Party controlled both the House and he Senate the financial markets have been allowed to enter into a number of risky transactions, all of which have now have imploded. Demands by the Chinese and other foreign investors to protect their investments have forced the government to take over Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and to loan 85 billion to AIG. These steps, which can be considered socialization of our financial markets, come on the wake of a disastrous eight years of leadership by the Bush administration. In 2000 the economy that was robust, inflation was low and the federal budget had its first surplus since 1969. Today, after eight years of pork barrel spending, crony appointments, an ill-conceived war, and mismanagement of the country we again have record deficits, a raising demand for oil, stagflation, and a financial crisis that has stopped the economy. This situation cannot continue.
Unlike McCain, who has been part of the problem in Washington for the last 23 years, Obama has clear understanding of the world situation. He understands that the war on Terrorism, while important, is last year’s war and that today we face a whole new set of challenges.
• ENERGY INDEPENDENCE. Since the 1973 Arab Oil embargo there was no question that we have been under the thumb of the oil producing countries. Yearly we send billions of dollars to countries that are not friendly to the United States while multi national oil companies bathe in excess profits. Obama has a vision of energy independence which includes using all available technology, unlike McCain whose sole idea is to drill.
• FINANCIAL FREEDOM: Every year we have borrowed billions from China and other foreign investors only to send the money overseas to buy oil. Obama understands that we, like any family, can not continue to live on borrowed money and that there is always a day of reckoning. Today, as a country, we are facing our day of reckoning and like any family that has gone deeply in debt it will be painful to correct, but Obama has shown the leadership needed to find our way out of this crisis . . . which is not a continuation of the Bush policies as suggested by McCain.
IT IS FOR THESE REASONS THAT I ASK YOU TO JOIN ME IN SUPPORTING OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT BEFORE FOUR MORE YEARS OF FAILED BUSH POLICIES WRECK OUR GREAT COUNTRY.

Wednesday, 24 September, 2008  
Anonymous Payday Loan Advocate said...

Many politicians are no friend to the payday loans industry. In order to raise voter support they choose to ignore what is best for the citizens. Some states including, Georgia, North Carolina, and Oregon have completely driven out the payday loan companies. Politicians still choose to disregard the benefits of the industry even though statistics in these states show a spike in bankruptcy filings, bounced checks and foreclosures. Even though these negative statistics have come to light, several governors are still trying to follow suit. If the efforts to wipe the industry completely off the map prove successful, some possible repercussions might consist of increased unemployment rates, more debt, more foreclosures and an even more inapt economy.

Post Courtesy of Personal Money Store
Professional Blogging Team
Feed Back: 1-866-641-3406
Home: http://personalmoneystore.com/NoFaxPaydayLoans.html
Blog: http://personalmoneystore.com/moneyblog/

Thursday, 02 October, 2008  
Anonymous Janice Linker said...

Dr. Reich,

I am very glad to see that you are supporting Senator Obama for president. I am by definition what is wrong with our current administration. I am one of the 600,000 Americans who have lost their job since January. I am also a single mother and a student and I am in danger of losing my education to the fact that I can not find employment. After hearing you speek on Sunday morning Sept.29,2008, I appreciate your common sense approach to the financial crisis that America now faces. We need improvements on both Wall Street and Main Street for our ecomony to function to its fullest extent and our current administration thinks that by bailing out the large coorporations that will change what is happening on Main Street. I do not feel good about this. It seems to me that this bailout will affect not only me but my son and possibly his children. I also applaud you for pointing out the importance of education. That is something that we must insure for ourselves and our future generations. We as Democrats and Americans in general must point out that it is now time to put morals back in our homes and politics back in Washington where they are despretely needed.

I also enjoyed your book "The Work of Nations" which was part of my assigned reading for my micro-economics class last spring. I look forward to reading some of your other works as soon as we have new blood in Washingtion that is willing to make changes to give people like me a chance.

Small town Single mom

Thursday, 02 October, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama said John Mcain couldn't use a computer.
Can Obama land a fighter jet on the deck of an aircraft carrier?....at night???????????

Sunday, 05 October, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I fully support Obama for President as long as minorities in USA are given equal importance in getting their voices heard and programs supported by Feds.

He needs to create an environment so that 'Whites' are not considered a superior race in the country.

The economy is the number one issue in this election. National Security is number two, and number three is improving our competitiveness globally and creating jobs in USA.

Obama though needs to be careful not to make mistakes, and should keep himself safe from white angru racists in this country. Recently, Mr. Mccain has encouraged crowds at his rallies to portray Mr Obama as terrorirst, un0american, and un patriotic. That is very dangerous politics at the eleventh hour. If anything happens to Mr Obama, we will have regressed back to the 60s, the times when Dr. Martin Luther King was assasinated.

That will not be good for this country. Globally, our position will decline if this happens.

Thursday, 09 October, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr Reich, you should be ashamed of supporting Mr Obama. You should have supported Hillary Clinton. You owe some loyalty to the Clintons. Your fame increased in the US due to Clintons.

Your reasons for supporting obama are not valid. Obama's campaign has mainly relied on rhetoric, short self serving slogans and young volunteers that really dont understand his empty slogan of change.

Obama has not proven to be a leader. At best he is simply a good community organizer. But the type of company he has surrounded himself with is sleazy, criminal and corrupt people. Obama has never ceased relationships with these people permanently, because they still support his campaign.

It is hard for me to associate Obama with Mainstream America. I don't think he is electable as President unless he has an agenda for mainstream america, its security and prosperity. As a voter four weeks before election, he has not convinced me he can be trusted with his programs & promises..

Thursday, 09 October, 2008  
Blogger Abbey said...

Dear fellow PR practitioners:
No small wonder for me and you to see Barack Obama winning his way convincingly to the November elections. Firstly, he has succeeded in addressing the American people's fear for the unknowns in the economy and domestic and foreign policy initiatives. Secondly, he has brought the American nation to a clear understanding of the causes of our economic downturns---he called it "corporate greed." Above all, he has shown in simple, down-to-earth, realistic terms how he will go about them when he becomes president of the United States. Split between our Democrat and GOP affiliations, we've been here before in similar contests; from our chosen sides we did think-tank jobs uncovering the best spin. But this time I appeal to your sense of judgment: A vote for Obama means a vote for change. For the better. We're neither Democrats or Republicans. We are Americans.

Thursday, 09 October, 2008  
Blogger Abbey said...

Dear fellow PR practitioners:
No small wonder for me and you to see Barack Obama winning his way convincingly to the November elections. Firstly, he has succeeded in addressing the American people's fear for the unknowns in the economy and domestic and foreign policy initiatives. Secondly, he has brought the American nation to a clear understanding of the causes of our economic downturns---he called it "corporate greed." Above all, he has shown in simple, down-to-earth, realistic terms how he will go about them when he becomes president of the United States. Split between our Democrat and GOP affiliations, we've been here before in similar contests; from our chosen sides we did think-tank jobs uncovering the best spin. But this time I appeal to your sense of judgment: A vote for Obama means a vote for change. For the better. We're neither Democrats or Republicans. We are Americans.

Thursday, 09 October, 2008  
Anonymous Chad said...

I just watched your talk to the Commonwealth Club on October 1 on http://fora.tv and I was so impressed. Will you please be Obama's Secretary of Labor when he wins? Please?

And even aside from your views, you're such a great speaker. That line was super about if greed was removed from Wall Street there would just be pavement. I also really appreciate the emphasis you place on problems being caused by the system, not by individuals within the system making the most of what the system allows.

Saturday, 11 October, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Back when black was not good enough
And skin color weighed more than integrity,
Racism was considered a value, not a weakness.
And despite that we learned that
Compassion and
Kindess far outweigh our differences.

One
Black
American
May change the course of history. He does not have to act
Alone. Each one of us can stand beside him. It's

2 thousand years later. Did Ground
0 teach you to hate or to love more deeply? Yes, we can.... learn
0 tolerance for racism, for hatred, for inequality, for unforgiveness
8 years in office can, and will, help us....

Change

Wednesday, 05 November, 2008  
Blogger Asher said...

here is a little servay we made that I whould like people to fill out. http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?key=pwbsnK9hvqQ_v1j2Scu23Kw

Wednesday, 05 November, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

IF you want to buy books by Obama..here are they: Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance
and The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream (Vintage)

Thursday, 06 November, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yez!!! OBAMA won omg im so happy!

Friday, 07 November, 2008  
Blogger Polly said...

Another point of view: Election results: Obama wins!

Saturday, 08 November, 2008  
Blogger Mberenis said...

I found this really interesting:

"Obama motivates D.C. to initiate new lower and middle class bailout"

Obama's Taxpayer Bailout

Saturday, 22 November, 2008  
Anonymous the Professor said...

At the end of the day Barack Obama will be the United States 44th President. This is a pivotal point in the history of the United States for many reasons. Many of which have been pointed out here, on this blog by you and your commenter’s. I would like to invite you and each of your commenter’s to visit and become active in a social blog I have started to cover the Obama Presidency and the incoming Administration. We are looking for all parties to be represented on this blog not just Democrats. So if you are a Republican, Constitutionalist, Greene, Libertarian or even a Democrat, we would like to have your input, your views and your thoughts on the day to day operations and movements of the 44th President and his administration during the next 1,461 Days

Thursday, 15 January, 2009  
Anonymous Loan Modification said...

Being a president of the United States is not an easy task. Mr Obama right is faced with a very difficult tasks. I just hope He and his economic advisers would somehow changed the world economy by restructuring America's. We should all help our government to fight this war.

Tuesday, 20 January, 2009  
Blogger Fashion, Travel, Music... said...

I love Obama
I love Whitley Kros (whitleykros.com)
I love Cat Power (album jukebox)
I love Bob Dylan (everything)
I love India (the children)
I love America (the hope)

share what you love.

Thursday, 22 January, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信, 徵信社, 感情挽回, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 感情挽回, 外遇沖開, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信公司, 女人徵信, 外遇, 外遇, 外遇, 外遇

徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信網, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信,

Thursday, 12 February, 2009  
Blogger Annie said...

ENDORSEMENT FAIL! lol. Ob is crashing and burning. Can we have a real president please?

Monday, 16 March, 2009  
Anonymous wow power leveling said...

cheap wow power leveling buy wow power leveling cheapest wow gold CHEAP power leveling BUY wow gold CHEAPEST wow powerleveling WANGGONGwow goldwow goldffxi gilwow gold

Sunday, 03 May, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home