Approximately 1 million people will attend the Caribbean Day Parade on Eastern Parkway in Brooklyn on Monday, September 7. Help us spread information about our broken health care system and the Obama plan for health care reform. We will set up tables along the parade route with flyers listing online sources for issues such as comparative costs and results of health care spending (US vs. other countries), the economics of health care, how we will actually save a lot of money by investing in health care reform now, etc. We will also provide info on how to connect with other people who want to bring real change to our health care system and help people to get involved in pressuring Congress to pass a health care reform bill with a strong public option. VOLUNTEERS NEEDED
Details here.
Hello:My name is Allie Feldman, and I'm helping Ben Baruch with Organizing for America here in New York. We just wanted to make sure everyone sees the email and video below discussing OFA's next nationwide initiative -- the Pledge Project. Please feel free to contact me or Ben if you have any questions or concerns.Stay tuned for more updates coming by the end of the week!Thanks,Allie--Allie FeldmanVolunteer Organizing for America | New Yorkallie.feldman@gmail.com 908-370-2689
Ben BaruchVolunteer LiaisonOrganizing for America | New York
bennett.baruch@obamaalumni.com
Just over a week ago, President Obama submitted his first budget and made it clear he was ready for the fight to come.The President isn't alone. We're ready for that fight too -- it's what you built this movement for.Watch a video I recorded announcing our new initiative, the Organizing for America Pledge Project:Americans are ready for the bold new direction this plan offers. It's what they voted for in November, and it's needed now more than ever as we continue to face an unprecedented economic crisis.But the special interests and old ways of Washington won't go away easily. In fact, they'll only fight back harder.It's up to you to organize support for President Obama's plan throughout the country. It's the only way we'll get the change this country needs.Take the next step now in our fight to bring change:http://my.barackobama.com/pledgeprojectThanks,MitchMitch StewartDirectorOrganizing for America
On Valentine’s Day, concerned citizens of Harlem took to the streets against Columbia University's. As a Columbia Graduate and a Harlem Native, I am against the current Columbia Expansion Plan. At Columbia I obtained my master's in Real Estate Development and we studied the expansion plan as a part of our curriculum. A majority of the students were against the expansion. After Columbia I worked in the construction industry for 5 years. As part of the expansion plan Columbia has pledged to hire local labor forces to construct the project. Unless Columbia has struck a deal with the local unions to expand their training programs to residents of Harlem, Columbia will not be able to commit to this pledge. Columbia has the right to obtain properties through the normal channels but it is insulting they are using Eminent Domain to obtain a majority Manhattanville. Columbia's expansion would bring obvious benefits but it will also bring heartache & displacement to many New Yorkers. Harlem needs more schools. Columbia is only building one school for the community, on a 33 acre parcel. As a beacon of education Columbia should have at least built 3 schools for the community. Columbia should also offer 50 full scholarships a year to original residents of Harlem. 30 undergraduate Scholarships
I am not sure how we can stop the Columbia Expansion or 125th Rezoning Expansion since City Councilman Jackson & Dickens have basically given Harlem away in a gift basket. They can at least attempt to care about the community and force Columbia to take Eminent Domain off the table.
I think it is time that a new leadership stand up in Harlem. We need someone who will fight for the people.
This Upcoming Wednesday there is a Civic Awareness Seminar located at PS.92 222 W.134th St
Some of these pols will be on the panel. I will also be speaking at the event. If you come please look for the Uptown Dems Table.
We are looking for people with Campaign Experience... We are trying to cause change in Harlem, and we need people who know how to organize and mobilize... Please let me know if you are interested in joing our cause...
Thank you.
At last, after many weeks in the planning and development stage, our very own Mybarackobama.com (MYBO) inaugural celebration event has finally found its form, nature and place, and we are thrilled and proud to announce the...
MYBO Grassroots Inaugural Ball 2009, the Social!
http://grassrootsball2009social.eventbrite.com/
We've come full circle, right back where we were supposed to be!
Initially intended to be held in a Capitol Hill church social hall -- and always imagined as an "alternative" ball --, the event grew rapidly in the early flush of euphoria and excitement of our victory in the days following the election, but through the worries and the vagaries of fundraising and just exactly how crowded Washington, DC would be for this historic occasion that we all want to witness and celebrate in a financial environment that encouraged anything but confidence, the MYBO alternative ball's future in the balance, we find ourselves welcomed by the Universalist National Memorial Church, "a liberal Christian church in the heart of the city."
The MYBO Grassroots Inaugural Ball 2009, the Social is intended, as one of our fundraising volunteers put it, to be a ball:
“that will celebrate Obama's election, and celebrate the hard work we did to get to this point – and provide a space to network with fellow Obama supporters to get "fired up" for real change, going forward.
There are tons of official and unofficial inaugural balls, but the difference is this one will be affordable (hence the need for sponsorship) and Obama volunteers will have the first crack at tickets (rather than the tickets just going to the highest bidder.)”
Universalist National Memorial Church provides us an ideal space in the community at a price that allows us to accomplish our mission -- tickets priced so that everyone who would like to attend to meet so many people with whom they have exchanged on MYBO and want to meet after all these months can afford to attend.
For tickets -- $26 per person!! -- http://grassrootsball2009social.eventbrite.com/
BYOC, or bring your own champagne! The event will include food and a bar featuring wine and beer, an assortment of non-alcoholic beverages, but if you would like to raise a toast to Obama with bubbly, please feel free to bring your own bottle, or one to contribute to the bar. You may also help us off-set bar costs by contributing a bottle of white -- the church asks for no red in their furnished parlor, sorry! --, and the caterer will accept for refund any unopened bottles they provide and we do not need to consume.
There will also be music with performances by local and home-grown MYBO talent.
Attire is cocktail or semi-formal, but please wear what makes you feel comforable. If you need to come directly from another event that doesn't permit you to dress for the evening, such as the Day of Service at the MLK Memorial Library, please feel welcome to come as you are.
Sponsors needed! Help make the MYBO Grassroots Inaugural Ball 2009, the Social a success -- become a sponsor at any level you can. Your non tax deductible donation will help with food, bar and entertainment for the evening. It's simple. The more those of you who can afford to give something more, the better the evening for all. It's The Obama Tax Plan at work, so let's put our money where our mouths are! Click here to make your donation. It's easy and fast with Google Check-out.
DC for Obama and Mayor Fenty Office's MLK Day of Service Activity (9 am to 4 pm).
The MYBO Grassroots Inaugural Ball 2009, the Social is joining together with DC for Obama, which will be collaborating with Mayor Fenty's Day of Service events and will be sponsoring supporting those in need through serving food at the MLK Memorial Library throughout the day. Please join us and take a step towards supporting others who may have less.
We will be providing further information on how you can become a part of this important day of community service and hope that you will be able to join us in taking this step to fulfill President-elect Barack Obama's call to community service.
Then, join us for a memorable evening getting to know in person so many of the people with whom you have worked, and with whom you have become friends, on MYBO.
Thank you!
Mary Ritter Jacqueline Ashton de Floris The Organizing Committee
Please note, all ticket sales are final and non-refundable. In the event that you cannot attend, please let the organizers know so we can release additional tickets for sale. http://grassrootsball2009social.eventbrite.com/
Perhaps you have been checking here for news from time to time, wondering what's happening, if anything at all. I have sworn myself to a sort of discretion, a virtual white-out of news on the Ball because it is a complex and delicate business to organize, but we are in the final hours of decision-making, and we are not all of the same mind.Wait. That's what happens in government, too.We all felt so monolithically committed in our support for Obama, even while we fought monumentally over whether he was right or wrong to vote for the FISA bill this year, or right or wrong not to hate Hillary Clinton forever, or to pay her campaign debt, that it was always rather surprising to find ourselves in désarroi.But that is what is starting to interest me the most, oddly; it's the process itself, how we can start with a shared dream, build momentum from one another's excitement and passion, discover our points of désaccord, experience let-down, frustration, and even anger as we encounter difficulties, set-backs and conflicts, and then -- out of respect for one another and the importance of our relationships and work -- sit down and think about how to proceed, even manage to at all because the people involved are as important to all of us as the success of the project itself.How many times in the MYBO listservs did the atmosphere become tense, did a voice or two speak out and remind us all of why we were there, and that we hold one another in esteem, did cooler heads prevail and we go on? It's the same. It's a process that can teach us all a lot that we can use in our lives, at home, at work, in political action. Speak your heart, as well as your mind, and do it from that place in yourself.The ball has been hard. Harder than we imagined when we started out. I suppose no one starts out imagining the obstacles, or no one would ever begin anything. Those of us working to put it all together have made many discoveries about people -- most heartening, some laughable. There are some flakes out there, and they are not all falling to the ground to blanket Chicago in snow for its white Christmas.We succeeded, and we failed. Or, perhaps better said, we have met with success and with failure. We have raised money that can be considered significant from among the individuals supporting our ball, and we nearly did from an individual, who chose in the end not to, without ever really making that choice final, or clear. Inference is sometimes good enough, or has to be.
There have been successes that were very important to me. Yesterday, a $50 contribution arrived in the PayPal account from someone who has nothing to gain from their contribution to help make the ball happen, other than perhaps to help make sure there would be a ball for which to purchase a ticket, and at a price we can call "grassroots". That person might have thought that their $50 was "nothing" compared to others' $2,000, $1,000 or $500 (non tax deductible) donations, but that isn't how it felt to me when I heard. I felt indebted to that person and grateful for their gesture of support, that is really a gesture of belief in the dream that I had, that the other organizers had, that the more than 600 people who contacted us to get themselves and their friends and family on our list for news of the ball, when the tickets would be available had, too.And the people who have joined us to offer their time and energy, their encouragement, their contacts, anything they had, and offered their thanks for our efforts. No matter what happens to this ball, I will carry forward their group of people like a community that will live inside me. I don't know how to visit that place, or see all those people, but knowing they are there is about enough. I know that one day there will be another project, another mission, and I will reach out to them, or they will reach out to me.Today, we are asking everyone on our lists to go to the website and take a survey. The answers to the three questions are "Yes, I still planning to purchase tickets to the Grassroots Ball for the people of Mybarackobama.com to meet and celebrate our victory in Washington, DC on January 19, and hurry up!", "No, thank you, I have already made other plans for the inauguration," and "No. I just can't get to Washington, after all." Please have each person in your party register and take the survey so we can get an accurate number.We need to know if 700 people sure will purchase tickets so that we can make the deposit on the space in downtown Washington with confidence. It can hold up to 1,500, and we have the option to grow the event to that capacity if ticket sales are strong.We have become timid about committing our sponsor's money in an event that might have lost its momentum without our knowing it, especially in such uncertain times. Asking you is our best way to know if your silence has been your polite and remarkable patience, or proof of your loss of interest.Like Barack said to us throughout the campaign, more and more frequently as the numbers coming to see him grew beyond anyone's wildest imagings, this ball was never about we, the organizers, it's about you, and it's for you if you want it. If you don't, that's fine. Personally, I can accept hearing that, but I can't as easily accept ending it all because we are worried the time and the opportunity are already behind us without having asked you if they are.We shall see what happens today, and in the next hours, and then we will know.For those wondering why nothing has been happening on the website, we decided spontaneously to communicate via our email lists rather than continue to promote a ball there that was at risk of not happening owing to fund-raising disappointments and their impact on the ticket prices that we could offer.As it stands, they would be a minimum of $175, possibly closer to $200, and we would try to offer a percentage of the total tickets available at the $100 level for those whose means are limited. As we had always intended with our "Joe-the-Plumber" Ticket Plan, we would ask everyone to stop and think before purchasing and ask themselves if they really needed that $100 ticket, or if they could leave it for someone who does, each according to his conscience, and the fiscal philosophy Barack Obama laid out to Sam Wurtzenbacher in Ohio.Thank you, everyone.http://www.grassrootsballdc2009.com....
Hello MYBO People,
The very first Grassroots Inaugural Ball 2009 -- originating right here in MYBO -- has a challenge for 40 people in our network of campaign volunteers.
We are trying to secure a venue in Washington that is convenient, on the Metro with space for more than 1000 people, and we are trying to do this for what is regarded as the inauguration that will be the most widely attended in our nation's history. Everybody wants to be there to witness this historic event and celebrate, and maybe nobody more so than those of us here on the MYBO listservs. Obama's Internet Army soldiers.
It's really, really hard to get space in Washington right now, and MYBO has done it. Almost.
So, The Challenge.
We are on the verge of signing a contract for a venue, and to do it we need 40 people to kick in $1,000 so that we can be ready with our check for the down payment before someone else beats us to it.
Your underwriting of the down payment not only assures us the space to hold our very own Grassroots Inaugural Ball 2009, it will cover $40,000 of our total budget. Think of yourselves as part of Barack's tax plan. That top 5% that will help to reduce ticket prices and make our ball more affordable for everyone--most especially for the 95% of MYBO who need a break after all the donating to the campaign! What else will you get?
You will receive:
The Electronic Republic is here, and it works. You betcha'!
What else, you ask?
The undying thanks and devotion of everyone who wants this ball to happen. You can also choose one of our sponsor gifts, once we figure out what they will be.
We need this as quickly as possible. Don't think it over. Reply right away to Russell Miller, our treasurer, at Russell@grassrootsballdc2009, and we go to contract to have a ball!
You don't have $1,000? That's okay.
If you have $500 to help us underwrite the ball, we can guarantee you:
And If you don't have five hundred dollars to get the ball rolling, don't worry. We'll be rolling out other sponsor levels, and tickets will be available shortly at a range of prices that make sense for every working American. (We revere the Constitution, but we're breaking the law of supply and demand.)
This ball is going to be for EVERYONE—or at least as many as the fire codes allow.
Jacqueline Ashton de Floris, Mary Ritter, Russell Miller
Members, Organizing Committee
PS: Money Where Our Mouth Is Department—All three of us are already in as sponsors. It's lonely out here, but we know it won't be for long. Join us!
PPS for shy folks: You can be anonymous sponsors if you like!
Dear MYBO volunteers, This is to let you know that a core organizing committee has formed and has been working round the clock since Friday to get our Grassroots Ball 2009 off the ground . We have chosen a URL for the event, the website is being developed and will be ready to go soon, we are negotiating with venues and are working to solicit sponsors and underwriters to help keep the ticket price as low as we can make it. This last is an urgent need, and anyone interested in sponsoring, purchasing advertising in the program, underwriting, or investing to help us raise the down payment on the venue should get in touch with one of us right away.
We need to rasie $40,000 before the end of next week to secure our venue big enough for a couple of thousand Obama-supporter volunteers to celebrate the fruits of our hard work, and, for many, finally meet face to face. That may sond like a lot, but remember, it was all our little donations that put Barack over the top!
If you are a fundraiser or have experience as a volunteer doing fundraising for a charitable organization, have the time right now and want to take this on, please let us hear from you! We can help put together a team to assist you.
Once the website is up, we will put the word out so you can check it for information and the announce date for ticket sales. We can no longer accept any requests for reservations by email.
Please contact one of us if you are a volunteer field organizer for the campaign.
Thank you! Jacqueline Ashton de Floris, Mary Ritter and Russsell Miller
Members, Organizing Committee -- The Grassroots Inaugural Ball 2009
This is it!
We're coming down to the final stretch and Barack Obama needs your help now, more than ever before!
Please bring your cell phone, a charger and a few fun friends who care about change and join with thousands of your neighbors in the largest ever-attempted phone bank effort in New York state history. The Obama campaign is hosting several of these "mega call centers" all over New York, so invite your friends and family to make calls to voters in key battleground states and change America for years to come.
Visit http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/nylastcall to find a location near you.
www.barackobama.com
Saturday, 25th October 2008
Chicago, Illinois
Driving the Conversation:
http://www.politico.com/arena/
Although a lifelong Democrat who hasn’t wavered in his presidential vote since 1980, I have been unable to support Senator Barack Obama over the past two years. But after weighing the options in the closing months, I have decided to vote for the Obama-Biden ticket.
Political scientists tell us that VP choices don’t matter much, but for me, a tie among the heads of the two tickets means that the VP choice is determinative. And Senator Biden, whatever his flaws and limits, is clearly a much better choice than Governor Palin, at least at this point in their respective careers.
My choice was not easy because Senator Obama’s Iraq position has been, and in my eyes continues to be, extremely risky. Getting all American combat forces out of Iraq by April 2010, a position he has held while we were losing the war, during the comeback phase, and now while we are winning, is very imprudent and I continue to hope and pray that he rethinks it. More...
Whatever the wisdom or folly of the invasion of Iraq in the first place, whatever the huge flaws in the preparation and initial conduct of that operation, it is now America’s war and not just George Bush’s. Yet Senator Obama has never seemed willing to view it in these terms, insisting on viewing the issue as a partisan referendum on the incumbent administration. However, the likelihood of defeat in Iraq is now far less, even with something resembling Obama’s plan. This fact is of course one of the great ironies of the campaign. Because of the remarkable, historic success of the surge that John McCain supported and Barack Obama opposed, the latter’s unfortunate views on future Iraq policymaking are no longer quite so important or so disqualifying, for me at least. It is now possible that we can begin with Obama’s plan (not unlike what many Iraqi politicians currently espouse—though they are in many cases overconfident, and politically motivated, themselves) and after suitable modifications in the coming years wind up with Iraq as a semi-stable place.To put it differently, Iraq as an issue remains a net plus for McCain, but it no longer needs to be weighted as heavily in determining a presidential vote. Given my longstanding (and continued) admiration for the senator from Arizona, my inclinations would still be to vote for McCain were it not for two other issues: his fiscal plan, and his overall philosophy towards foreign policy. On fiscal matters, while McCain was formerly in the Warren Rudman/George HW Bush camp of moderate and prudent Republican fiscal policy, he has changed. He has recently chosen the more prevalent Republican philosophy of cutting taxes across the board without offering any plausible way to mitigate the harm to the federal deficit that will inevitably result. His tax cuts approach $300 billion a year in magnitude; his efforts to cut waste and abuse from pork barrel spending might net $20 billion. Obama is no Paul Tsongas or Ross Perot, but on this issue he is at least somewhat better, at a time when our country’s long-term fiscal health is in serious peril due largely to pandering politicians.On foreign policy, beyond the issue of Iraq, the clearest way to see the difference in the two tickets is by focusing on Joe Biden—and the fact that increasingly, Barack Obama seems to listen to his VP choice in this key area of the latter’s expertise. (Sarah Palin’s instincts on foreign policy, by contrast, are somewhat evocative of the hardline thinking of many first-term advisors to President Bush. In addition, they are underdeveloped and unlikely to be of major import.) Biden by contrast is a net plus, and a significant one.I disagree with Biden’s current views on Iraq, but admire his earlier work on that issue—for example, his thorough Congressional hearings back in the summer of 2002 on what it would take to stabilize the country after the overthrow of Saddam, as well as the very federalism plan for Iraq that Senator McCain has been criticizing of late. That plan, advocating a division of Iraq into three largely autonomous entities as in postwar Bosnia, may no longer be needed given the miracle of the surge and related developments in Iraq. But back in 2006 when Biden pushed federalism hardest, Iraq was on the verge of disaster and it was the responsible action of an opposition-party senator to look for constructive policy alternatives. So Biden’s overall Iraq record is pretty good in my eyes.Moving on to other issues, McCain and Obama are in agreement on the importance of Afghanistan and the need to send more U.S. forces there. But neither has the broader region truly figured out. Biden goes much further than either, and he is convincing. His plan for working with Pakistan on matters such as education policy, economic development, and the security of the country’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas is the most promising way to improve our position in regard to both Pakistan and Afghanistan. It can strengthen Pakistan’s own economy and polity, and also improve security along the Afghan-Pak border. On Iran, Biden’s experience in working with allies and marshaling sanctions to punish extremist behavior is the best policy instinct I’ve heard in this campaign. It is considerably more sound than either Obama’s inherent belief in diplomacy or McCain’s instinctive belief in peace through strength and the threat of military force. On Russia, both presidential tickets are too quick to see near-term Georgian and Ukrainian membership in NATO as the right response to Russian bullying. But McCain’s preference for pursuing this option quickly, and his additional desire to boot Russia out of the G8, risk making things worse rather than better. On North Korea, neither side has a sufficiently visionary approach that would for example try to incentive Pyongyang to reform as Vietnam has done over the years. But again, Biden’s general preference for a combination of hard-nosed diplomacy with intelligent use of economic sticks and carrots constitutes the best ingoing philosophy of any of the four individuals on the two tickets. The purportedly negative advertising of the McCain-Palin campaign has not been a major factor in my decision-making. While there has been too much talk of Obama’s past political associations, I have personally heard even more advertisements from Obama-Biden that are unfair to McCain-Palin. The contention that McCain wants to keep spending $10 billion a month in Iraq indefinitely is wrong. The contention that McCain’s health plan, which some serious economists support as a way to introduce cost discipline into our escalating medical system, will cost seniors nearly $1 trillion based on a supposedly analytical study by a strongly left-leaning think tank, is also of dubious merit. On this as well as other matters, I have not found Obama-Biden transformative as politicians. But it has to be acknowledged that they are doing a pretty good job with old-fashioned politics.Overall I still find both tickets relatively strong, and all four candidates appealing. If McCain-Palin win, I will not awake on November 5 terribly afraid for the future of the country or the world. But on balance, thanks largely to ole Joe Biden of Delaware, I will return to my roots and vote Democratic on election day.
I am proud to endorse Senator John McCain for president of the United States. I support him for reasons of economic policy, foreign policy, and because of his likely judicial appointments. On economic policy, Senator Barack Obama is pledged to repeat Herbert Hoover’s mistake of raising taxes and reducing free trade in response to a stock market downturn.This will turn a recession into a depression the severity of which we have not seen since at least the days of Jimmy Carter’s misery index. Obama needs to do nothing for taxes to go up. He can just wait for the Bush tax cuts to expire as they are scheduled to do and as they surely will do if he is elected. Senator McCain, on the other hand, will fight to keep us from repeating the economic policy of the Hoover and Carter Administrations. More...
He knows, as John F. Kennedy knew, that “a rising tide lifts all boats” and that tax cuts not tax increases are the right way to keep the economy going. Senator Obama claims he is offering tax cuts to all Americans including the millions and millions of Americans who in fact pay no income tax. What Senator Obama is offering is not a tax cut – it is welfare. It will be paid for by tax increases on small businesses as the Bush tax cuts automatically expire. Americans have been riveted for the last month by the crash of the stock market and the loss of trillions of dollars of social wealth. The stock market is going down in direct relation to Obama’s poll numbers going up. It will drop a lot more if he wins and pursues the policies he has pledged to pursue.
Not so terribly long ago, the phone rang in my office. It was Barack Obama. For more than a decade, Obama was my colleague at the University of Chicago Law School. He is also a friend. But since his election to the Senate, he does not exactly call every day.On this occasion, he had an important topic to discuss: the controversy over President George W. Bush's warrantless surveillance of international telephone calls between Americans and suspected terrorists. I had written a short essay suggesting that the surveillance might be lawful. Before taking a public position, Obama wanted to talk the problem through. More...
In the space of about 20 minutes, he and I investigated the legal details. He asked me to explore all sorts of issues: the President's power as commander-in-chief, the Constitution's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the Authorization for Use of Military Force and more.
Obama wanted to consider the best possible defence of what Bush had done. To every argument I made, he listened and offered a counter-argument. After the issue had been exhausted, Obama said that he thought the programme was illegal, but now had a better understanding of both sides. He thanked me for my time.
This was a pretty amazing conversation, not only because of Obama's mastery of the legal details, but also because many prominent Democratic leaders had already blasted the Bush initiative as blatantly illegal. He did not want to take a public position until he had listened to, and explored, what might be said on the other side. He took the law exceedingly seriously, and he wanted to get the statutory and constitutional provisions right.
This is the Barack Obama I have known for nearly 15 years -- a careful and even-handed analyst of law and policy, unusually attentive to multiple points of view.
The University of Chicago Law School is by far the most conservative of the great American law schools. It helped to provide the academic foundations for many positions of the Reagan administration.But at the University of Chicago, Obama is liked and admired by Republicans and Democrats alike.
Some of the local Reagan enthusiasts are Obama supporters. Why? It doesn't hurt that he's a great guy, with a personal touch and a lot of warmth. It certainly helps that he is exceptionally able.But niceness and ability are only part of the story. Obama also has a genuinely independent mind, he's a terrific listener and he goes wherever reason takes him.
Those of us who have long known Obama are impressed and not a little amazed by his rhetorical skills. Who could have expected that our colleague, a teacher of law, is also able to inspire large crowds?The Obama we know is no rhetorician; he shines not because he can move people, but because of his problem-solving abilities, his pragmatism, his creativity and his attention to detail.
In recent months, his speaking talents, and the immense enthusiasm that frequently surrounds him, have led skeptics to wonder whether there is substance behind the plea for "change" - whether the soaring phrases might disguise a kind of emptiness and vagueness. But nothing could be further from the truth. He is most comfortable in the domain of policy and detail.
I do not deny that skeptics are raising legitimate questions. After all, Obama has served in the Senate for a short period (less than four years) and he has little managerial experience. Is he really equipped to lead the most powerful nation in the world?
Obama speaks of "change", but will he be able to produce large-scale changes in a short time? An independent issue is that all the enthusiasm might serve to insulate him from criticisms and challenges on the part of his own advisers -- and, in view of his relative youth, criticisms and challenges are exactly what he requires.
Fortunately, the candidate's campaign proposals offer strong and encouraging clues about how he would govern; what makes them distinctive is that they borrow sensible ideas from all sides.
He is strongly committed to helping the disadvantaged, but his University of Chicago background shows; he appreciates the virtues and power of free markets. In this sense, he is not only focused on details but is also a uniter, both by inclination and on principle.
Transparency and accountability matter greatly to him; they are a defining feature of his proposals. With respect to the mortgage crisis, credit cards and the broader debate over credit markets, Obama insists on disclosure, so that consumers will know exactly what they are getting.
Expect transparency to be a central theme in any Obama administration, as a check on government and the private sector alike. It is highly revealing that Obama worked with Republican (and conservative) Tom Coburn to produce legislation creating a publicly searchable database of all federal spending.Obama's healthcare plan places a premium on cutting costs and on making care affordable, without requiring adults to purchase health insurance. (He would require mandatory coverage only for children.) Republican legislators are unlikely to support a mandatory approach, and his plan can be understood, in part, as a recognition of political realities.
But it is also a reflection of his keen interest in freedom of choice. He seeks universal coverage not through unenforceable mandates but through giving people good options.
It should not be surprising that in terms of helping low-income workers, Obama has long been enthusiastic about the Earned Income Tax Credit -- an approach, pioneered by Republicans, that supplements wages but does not threaten to throw people out of work.
Obama's policies show his independence of mind, but he does not try to steer between the poles (or the polls). "Triangulation" has no appeal for him. Both internationally and domestically, he is willing to think big and to be bold. He publicly opposed the war in Iraq at a time when opposition was unpopular.He favors high-level meetings with some of the world's worst dictators. He would rethink the embargo against Cuba.
He proposes a large research budget for climate change. He wants to hold an unprecedented national auction for the right to emit greenhouse gases (giving credit, in the process, to Republicans for pioneering incentive-based approaches to environmental problems). He has offered an ambitious plan for promoting technological innovation, calling for a national broadband policy, embracing network neutrality, and proposing a reform of the patent system.
His campaign has spoken of moving toward "iPod Government" -- an effort to rethink public services and national regulations in ways that will make things far simpler and more user-friendly.
These are points about policies and substance. As president, Obama would set a genuinely new tone in US politics. He refuses to demonize his political opponents; deep in his heart, I believe, he doesn't even think of them as opponents. It would be surprising not to find Republicans and independents prominent in his administration.
Obama speaks enthusiastically about Doris Kearns Goodwin's description of Lincoln's "Team of Rivals." His enthusiasm for such a team is entirely characteristic. Obama wants to know what ideas are likely to work, not whether a Democrat or a Republican is responsible for them. Recall the most memorable passage from his keynote address at the 2004 Democratic Convention: "We coach Little League [baseball] in the blue [Democratic-voting] states, and, yes, we've got some gay friends in the red states. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq, and there are patriots who supported the war in Iraq."
In his book The Audacity of Hope, he asks for a politics that accepts "the possibility that the other side might sometimes have a point". Remarking that ordinary Americans "don't always understand the arguments between right and left, conservative and liberal", Obama wants politicians "to catch up with them,"
After he received an email from a pro-life doctor, Obama recalls how he softened his website's harsh rhetoric on abortion, writing: "[T]hat night, before I went to bed, I said a prayer of my own -- that I might extend the same presumption of good faith to others that the doctor had extended to me."
In short, Obama's own approach is insistently charitable. He assumes decency and good faith on the part of those who disagree with him. And he wants to hear what they have to say. Both in substance and in tone, Obama questions the conventional political distinctions between "the left" and "the right". To the extent that he is attracting support from Republicans and independents, it is largely for this reason.
From knowing Obama for many years, I have no doubts about his ability to lead. He knows a great deal, and he is a quick learner. Even better, he knows what he does not know, and there is no question that he would assemble an accomplished, experienced team of advisers. His brilliant administration of his own campaign provides helpful evidence here.
To be sure, there is some fragility to the public fervor that envelops him. Crowds and cults can be fickle, and if some of his decisions disappoint, or turn out badly, his support will diminish. Some people think it might even collapse.
My own concern involves the importance of internal debate. The greatest American presidents (above all Lincoln and Roosevelt) benefited from robust dialogue and from advisers who avoided saying, "how wonderful you are," and were willing to say: "Mr President, your thinking about this is all wrong."
Because Obama himself is exceptionally able, and because so many people are so impressed with him, his advisers might be too deferential, too unwilling to question. There is a real risk here.
But I believe that his humility, and his intense desire to seek out dissenting views, will prove crucial safeguards.
In the 2000 campaign, Bush proclaimed himself a "uniter, not a divider", only to turn out to be the most divisive President in memory. Because of his own certainty, and his lack of curiosity about what others might think, Bush polarized the nation. Many of his most ambitious plans went nowhere as a result.
As president, Barack Obama would be a genuine uniter. If he proves able to achieve great things, for his nation and for the world, it will be above all for that reason.
Monday, 13th October 2008
Hofstra University is pleased to be the site of the October 15, 2008 presidential debate, produced by the Commission on Presidential Debates.
Visit Educate '08 for a detailed event schedule on lectures, exhibits, symposia, events, town hall meetings, debate watch events, entertainment and other initiatives; as well as photos and videos of past events, a look at Hofstra's history of presidential conferences, and other resources.
Submit your debate watch sites to us by emailing educate08@hofstra.edu and we'll post them on our DebateWatch site and send you five (5) free official "debate '08" buttons!DebateWatch is a voter education program of the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). DebateWatch brings citizens like you together to watch the televised debates, talk about what you learned, and, if you choose to, share your reactions with the CPD.For more DebateWatch information from the Commission on Presidential Debates, click here.
The Michael O. Leavitt Center for Politics and Public Service at Southern Utah University is have a huge debate party; 50 to 100 students will attend! The debate will be shown at 9 p.m. (EST) on a projection screen and a student forum willl be held after the debate.
http://ny.barackobama.com/NYlastcall
Posted today at OpEdNews! Albright, Clarke, 200 Diplomats Laud Obama's Willingness to Talk Directly to Adversaries Without Preconditions
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Albright-Clarke-others-c-by-press-release-from-081002-322.html
This came from a EURWEB Press Release; my commentary/additions should be clear, and if publicized and printed out, should go far in knocking down the arguments by Republicans that our candidate is somehow "inexperienced," and that he should not be talking with hostile or problematic heads of state, without preconditions.
I welcome your comments and insights. They are read very carefully, and passed on to Obama's staff.
Truly,
Stephen Fox, Contributing Editor New Mexico Sun NewsFounder, New Millennium Fine Art
ASAP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2VFRt5W4FM
Spread the word!
.
- Dubbi (Dov Frishberg, Group Coordinator, ZAHAL Veterans for Obama)
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/www.raphaelholomanfranklinsupportObama08.com/2008/07
The Obama campaign just issued this statement on President Bush's address...
"While Senator Obama believed that the Administration’s initial proposal was flawed and unacceptable to the American taxpayer, he was heartened tonight that the President seemed to be moving in the direction of the principles that Senator Obama outlined over the last week, including limits on CEO pay, independent oversight, and taxpayer protection. He was also encouraged that the President suggested strengthening an outdated regulatory structure that led to this crisis, something that Senator Obama specifically proposed last March,” said Obama-Biden spokesman Bill Burton.
Americans Oppose Bailouts, Favor Obama to Handle Market Crisis
By Matthew Benjamin
Sept. 24 (Bloomberg) -- Americans oppose government rescues of ailing financial companies by a decisive margin, and blame Wall Street and President George W. Bush for the credit crisis.
By a margin of 55 percent to 31 percent, Americans say it's not the government's responsibility to bail out private companies with taxpayer dollars, even if their collapse could damage the economy, according to the latest Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll.
Poll respondents say Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama would do a better job handling the financial crisis than Republican John McCain, by a margin of 45 percent to 33 percent. Almost half of voters say the Democrat has better ideas to strengthen the economy than his Republican opponent.
Six weeks before the presidential election, almost 80 percent of Americans say the U.S. is going in the wrong direction, the biggest percentage since the poll began asking that question in 1991.
After market chaos this month drove Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. into bankruptcy and prompted federal takeovers of American International Group Inc., Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, most survey respondents said financial companies shouldn't expect taxpayers to rush to the rescue.
``Why should we help companies that can't help themselves?'' Tara Rook, 36, a Republican voter in Medford, New Jersey, asked in a follow-up interview. ``The government is getting way too involved with private companies.''
No Bailouts
Almost two out of three people surveyed also oppose government loans to help automakers. Congress is set to vote on a bill this month that includes $25 billion in low-interest loans to General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC to develop more fuel-efficient vehicles.
In spite of opposition to government intervention in the private sector, Congress is likely to pass legislation to let the Treasury buy distressed assets from troubled financial institutions. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson says a $700 billion rescue plan is needed to revive credit markets.
Public resistance to bailouts, however, may strengthen the position of lawmakers who want to put significant conditions on the plan, such as limiting executive pay at participating companies, and letting bankruptcy judges modify mortgages for struggling borrowers.
Caveats, Conditions
``While there are misgivings and concerns, ultimately the Congress will go along -- not simply with the bailout plan, but also with insisting on some add-ons, some caveats and some conditions which the White House will ultimately have to accept,'' said Kenneth Duberstein, former chief of staff to President Ronald Reagan.
A poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, asking a different question, found that Americans, by 57-30 percent, favored government action to save financial companies.
The Pew poll told respondents that the government is ``potentially investing billions to try and keep financial institutions and markets secure'' and asked whether that's the right thing to do. The Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll asked whether ``the government should use taxpayers' dollars to rescue ailing private financial firms whose collapse could have adverse effects on the economy and market, or is it not the government's responsibility to bail out private companies with taxpayers' dollars?''
Lax Regulation
More than 60 percent respondents to the Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll say lack of regulation is partly responsible for the financial and housing crises, while 24 percent say that wasn't the problem.
Asked who is to blame for the collapse of financial institutions like Lehman Brothers and AIG, nearly a third of Americans blame the firms themselves. One-quarter say the Bush administration is primarily responsible. Only 11 percent point fingers at Congress.
``I blame Wall Street,'' said Cindy Crick, of Flower Mound, Texas. ``The salaries are ridiculous, the bonuses are ridiculous,'' the 52-year-old paralegal and Republican voter said. ``It's greed, and it makes them willing to bend the rules.''
On the Wrong Track
Americans are extremely pessimistic about the state of the nation. Eight in 10 people say the country is seriously off on the wrong track. Concern about the country's direction crosses party lines, shared by 83 percent of political independents, 90 percent of Democrats and 60 percent of Republicans.
Eight in 10 respondents say the economy is doing badly, and more than half say it's doing very badly. Seven in 10 of those with annual incomes above $100,000 say the economy's in bad shape, along with almost nine in 10 of those earning between $40,000 and $100,000, and eight in 10 of those making less than $40,000.
The Sept. 19-22 poll of 1,428 adults nationwide had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
Half of those interviewed say they feel less financially secure now than they did six months ago -- four times the number who say they feel more secure.
`Everything's More Expensive'
Gasoline prices are the biggest source of anxiety for Dave Masemer in Nashville, Tennessee. The 52-year-old meat buyer says high fuel costs hurt business for him and his customers. ``Everything's more expensive, gas has jumped $3 a gallon, it affects everything,'' Masemer, a Democratic voter, said.
The average price for a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline is $3.73, according to AAA. That's down from a peak of $4.11 in mid-July, but 92 cents higher than a year ago.
Among economic issues in the presidential campaign, respondents most often cited rising gasoline prices and stronger regulation of financial institutions as their most important concerns. More than one-fifth of Americans picked each of those issues. Only 7 percent say taxes are the top issue.
To contact the reporter on this story: Matthew Benjamin in Washington at mbenjamin2@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: September 23, 2008 17:01 EDT
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aYK_5_fV5D4M&refer=politics
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/gGg42R
See if this sounds familiar:
There is a gathering threat to the safety of the United States. We must take immediate action. Congress must quickly grant the President and the Secretary what they want and also give them full and unfettered authority to execute the plan.
Welcome to Economic Shock and Awe (or as some have dubbed it, according to Paul Krugman, "the Authorization for Use of Financial Force").
Even the amount of taxpayer money being bandied about -- $1 trillion -- is similar. Think you got your money's worth for the Iraq war? Congratulations -- you're about to buy another pricey debacle.
We've seen how negligent the Bush administration is with our money -- flushing billions on wasteful, mismanaged Iraq reconstruction and Katrina recovery projects.
Now the same folks who brought us those no-bid, profit-guaranteed, crony-friendly, war-and-disaster-profiteering boondoggles want us to hand them control of a $700 billion Wall Street slush fund -- with no strings attached. How dumb -- or frightened -- do they think we are?
This is, as Matt Yglesias calls it, "a crisis point for American liberalism." The battle lines are already clear: Paulson and Bush and the Republican Party want a license to reward the worst actors in the financial industry and do nothing for American families suffering the consequences.
Remember a few years ago when lawmaker after lawmaker -- mostly Democrats, but a few Republicans -- said of Iraq, "If I'd known then what I know now, I'd have voted differently."
Well, this time at least some lawmakers -- mostly Democrats, but a few Republicans -- are not being so easily bamboozled. Congressional Democrats, led by Chris Dodd in the Senate and Barney Frank in the House, have put forth proposals doing away with the Paulson's demand for unprecedented authoritarian power and adding a requirement that the government do more to help troubled borrowers refinance their mortgages.
The Treasury appears willing to bend on those elements but sticking points remain, including efforts to limit the pay of executives and Dodd's proposal that taxpayers get a share of the profits if the bad debt being bought rises in value.
Let's hope Democratic resolve holds up against the inevitable charges by the Bush administration that demands for oversight, limits on executive compensation, profit sharing for taxpayers, and aid for struggling homeowners will lead to an economic Armageddon.
There is no question that the need to address this crisis is urgent and that the issues involved are complex. But urgency and complexity cannot be allowed to become excuses for lawmakers, the media, and the public to throw up their hands and allow themselves to be bull-rushed into disastrous public policy.
Over the past 30 years, Americans have been bombarded with sermons evangelizing for the free market religion of the Right, and the supposed correlation between unregulated markets and progress. In the process, the American people have been demoted from citizens to consumers, and sold a bill of goods (rather than a Bill of Rights) about how the almighty market was the essential foundation of democracy.
In the course of selling us on buying, the market-worshippers shredded the modern social contract, the hard-fought consensus that had emerged since the New Deal, which ordered our political priorities, and expressed both our communal concern for the most vulnerable members of society and our disapproval of huge inequalities. We were now supposed to believe that all could be left up to the soulless, self-correcting calculus of supply and demand. Government involvement was an anachronism, regulatory oversight an impediment.
The last few weeks have demolished that notion. In the battle over the proper role of government, the forces of the Right, the high priests of the church of the Free Market -- including Bush, Paulson, and the Masters of Wall Street -- have suffered a monumental defeat. So why are we allowing them to dictate the terms of their surrender?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/the-bailout-plan-welcome_b_128450.html
McCain Loses His Head
By George F. Will
Under the pressure of the financial crisis, one presidential candidate is behaving like a flustered rookie playing in a league too high. It is not Barack Obama.
Channeling his inner Queen of Hearts, John McCain furiously, and apparently without even looking around at facts, said Chris Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, should be decapitated. This childish reflex provoked the Wall Street Journal to editorialize that "McCain untethered" -- disconnected from knowledge and principle -- had made a "false and deeply unfair" attack on Cox that was "unpresidential" and demonstrated that McCain "doesn't understand what's happening on Wall Street any better than Barack Obama does."
To read the Journal's details about the depths of McCain's shallowness on the subject of Cox's chairmanship, see "McCain's Scapegoat" (Sept. 19, Page A22). Then consider McCain's characteristic accusation that Cox "has betrayed the public's trust."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/22/AR2008092202583.html
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ec3dfdba-896e-11dd-8371-0000779fd18c.html
Democrats, Paulson Work on Rescue; Republicans Object (Update1)
By James Rowley and Alison Vekshin
Sept. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Members of President George W. Bush's own party are voicing their opposition to his financial rescue plan even as Democratic leaders narrow their differences with the administration.
Congressional leaders said the $700 billion measure is needed to calm market turmoil and they hope to complete talks and pass the measure as soon as this week. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson agreed with Democratic demands that Congress can create an oversight structure, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank said.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, in testimony prepared for delivery today to the Senate Banking Committee, warned lawmakers today that failure to pass the rescue plan to take over troubled assets from financial firms may have ``very serious consequences for our financial markets and for our economy.''
Accord between Democrats and the Bush administration came as Alabama Senator Richard Shelby, the top Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, said the proposal is ``neither workable nor comprehensive, despite its enormous price tag.'' Another Republican senator, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, said Paulson's plan ``could make matters worse by socializing an entire sector of the U.S. economy.''
House Republicans
Leaders of the Republican Study Committee, a group of more than 100 self-described conservative House members, have also criticized the administration's response to the crisis, with Texas Representative Jeb Hensarling calling it ``bailout mania.'' Vice President Dick Cheney is meeting with members of the group this morning, White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.
Members of both parties are rallying around one proposed change to the Treasury plan: limiting the compensation of executives in companies that take part in the government program to buy troubled assets.
Florida Senator Mel Martinez, a former member of President Bush's Cabinet, said Republicans and Democrats alike support ``some element'' of such a restriction.
Republican presidential candidate John McCain also endorsed the idea of limiting pay for executives of rescued firms, saying taxpayers shouldn't foot the bill for ``golden parachutes'' for officers of companies that have crumbled in the financial crisis.
McCain's Position
``The senior executives of any firm that is bailed out by Treasury should not be making more than the highest-paid government official,'' McCain said while campaigning in Scranton, Pennsylvania. The president, who makes $400,000 a year, is the highest-paid person in the federal government.
Paulson has opposed pay limits, saying ``punitive'' terms would only discourage companies from selling their debt to the Treasury.
Alternatives drafted by Frank and Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd would give the Treasury secretary the power to prevent payment of bonuses if executives took excessive risk or if they were predicated on earnings targets that weren't met.
The House proposal would ban severance pay for executives as long as the government held an equity stake in the company.
``If we have bought your assets or we've bought into you, no golden parachutes while we are the owner,'' Frank said.
Democratic Support
Democratic leaders support letting Treasury use the debt- purchasing authority while Congress writes oversight rules, Frank said in a Bloomberg Television interview yesterday.
The Bush administration is seeking to buy as much as $700 billion in devalued assets from financial firms to prevent a lending freeze. The proposal, sent to Congress on Sept. 20, would prevent courts from reviewing the Treasury's actions while raising the nation's debt ceiling.
Bush will touch on the crisis and the impact on the global economy in his address today at the opening session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, according to an administration preview of the speech. Speaking to reporters before his address, he said he has assured world leaders that the U.S. will act quickly to stem the crisis in its financial markets.
Many lawmakers of both parties have said quick action is necessary to avoid a nationwide freeze in lending.
``We are convinced that inaction could be disastrous,'' said Utah Republican Robert Bennett.
Some of the Democratic proposals met opposition from industry groups. The Mortgage Bankers Association said it would oppose a provision to empower bankruptcy judges to ease terms of mortgages owed by bankrupt homeowners.
Bankruptcy Provision
The bankruptcy provision is ``one of the things that we'll see how hard they fight,'' Frank said. ``It's something we care about.''
Last night Frank withdrew his earlier assertion that Paulson had agreed that the U.S. will get equity in companies that receive government aid.
``I overstated'' the level of agreement on equity, Frank said. Still, he said, ``we've gotten closer to where we think it ought to be.''
While Democratic leaders worked to forge a consensus with the Bush administration, some rank-and-file party lawmakers said the Treasury was asking too much for Congress to approve such a large rescue plan with so little time to review its details.
At a closed-door meeting of all House Democrats last night, Frank faced questions from lawmakers who said afterwards that they are concerned about the short time frame offered to them to sign on to the rescue plan, as well as the extensive powers Paulson is requesting.
`Papal Authorities'
``Paulson cannot be given the powers he asked for,'' said Representative Anna Eshoo, a California Democrat and one of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's closest confidantes in the House. ``This is omnipotence. We're talking papal authorities here.''
Representative Gene Green, a Texas Democrat, said the meeting was ``tense,'' with many lawmakers expressing anxiety over having to digest the far-reaching proposal and move it through Congress in just a few days.
``Nobody's happy to have something laid on their lap that is this major, in this short an amount of time,'' Green said. Nevertheless, he said, lawmakers are fully aware of the gravity of the impact of no action on financial markets and many are likely to eventually support it.
To contact the reporters on this story: James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.netAlison Vekshin in Washington at avekshin@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: September 23, 2008 09:51 EDT
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=atlphjpCQUuQ&refer=politics
