Be Smart Vote Obama '08: A little girl counting presidents all the way to down to our
44th, Barack Obama.
Barack Obama: Pre-war Iraq assesment: Obama explains the thought process that led to
his 2002 speech against the war in Iraq.
Obama addresses Hillary Clinton's experience on CNN: Obama took issue with the
percieved notion that somehow Senator Clinton was more prepared for the presidency than the other
candidates.
What Obama is About: A summary of his policiesBARACK OBAMA: CHANGE THE WORLD: Obama, the man to change the world for the better.
Obama, a leading contender for the Democratic presidential nomination, said the country
needs a president who will wake up every morning and deliberate how to push recovery in New Orleans
forward. He spoke late Thursday night to a warm crowd at the Superdome for the Essence Music
Festival.
"The role of the next president is to make sure that the rebuilding of New Orleans is at the top of the
national priority list," Obama said Thursday afternoon before his appearance at the festival. "Part of
the reason I think folks in Louisiana feel discouraged is that we have not heard this White House or
this president even mention it. He didn't mention it in the State of the Union address, and he hasn't
mentioned it since. When our president is not focused on the issue, it does not end up on the front page
of the papers."
"If you're willing to teach in a high-need subject like math or science or special
education, we'll pay you even more. If you're willing to take on more responsibilities like mentoring,
we'll pay you more," Obama said.
The Illinois senator said it's possible to "find new ways to increase pay that are developed with
teachers, not imposed on them and not based on some arbitrary test score."
Obama said he would only support a merit-pay approach after consulting with teachers.
"What I want to do is work with teachers," Obama said. "I'm not going to do it to you. I'm going to do
with you."
Linda Nelson, the president of the Iowa NEA chapter, said merit pay is an idea that isn't going
away.
"We need to be at the table. We need to be a part of that conversation, and that's exactly what Sen.
Obama said," Nelson said.
"I admire Bill Clinton, I think he did a lot of fine things as president and he's a terrific
political strategist," the Illinois senator said. "What we're more interested in is in looking forward,
not looking backward. I think the American people feel the same way. They are looking for a way to break
out of the harsh partisanship and the old arguments and solve problems."
"Change can't just be a slogan," Obama said. "Change has to mean that we're not doing the same old thing
that we've been doing."
Obama Myth Debunked
Some Edwards and Hillary supporters have been pressing the issue of Obama's
stance on coal-to-liquids. He previously backed legislation supporting this environmentally conversial
alternative fuel, however, due to pressure from environmental groups he decided to back off his support.
Obama no longers support CTL unless there is a way to harness this technology without harming the environment. At this point in time that seems highly unlikely and therefore we can conclude that his support for CTL is done. He has made his stance on this issue public about a month ago so this issue the Edwards/Hillary supporters keep bringing up is old news and no longer relevant.
With his statement Tuesday, Obama seemed to be making his choice clear: pledging to oppose
any plan to turn coal into liquid fuel unless it adhered to strict environmental safeguards.
"Senator Obama supports research into all technologies to help solve our climate change and energy
dependence problems, including shifting our energy use to renewable fuels and investing in technology
that could make coal a clean-burning source of energy," the e-mail said. "However, unless and until this
technology is perfected, Senator Obama will not support the development of any coal-to-liquid fuels
unless they emit at least 20% less life-cycle carbon than conventional fuels."
Obama's aides described the statement as a "clarification," distributed to correct what they said were
false media reports describing the senator's views on the issue.
And yeah that little girl was awesome. I found it on youtube and told the creator I would promote it on MyDD. I like how she runs down the presidents and then ends with Obama following her throwing up a peace sign. That was very creative.
Nice Work!!!
Disciplined, informative,easy to navigate.
For those who bitch. Disregard.
If they can do better. Do so.
Sweet piece lovingj- are you sure you're not a member of his staff? You should be.
Each one of these you do is better than before.
Edwards supporters, this Edwards supporter would like to respond. On c-t-l, Obama voted for the Tester Amendment, which all environmental groups opposed. So while his position is now better than it was a few months ago, when he introduced a dangerous c-t-l bill with Jim Bunning, his position is far from good. Moreover, his staff maintains that his position has been "consistent"--which is demonstrably untrue. Obama should at least admit that his position has changed.
But this is just part of a troubling record on the environment, which includes his vote for Bush's lobbyist-written Energy Bill in 2005, which both Clinton and Edwards opposed.
No, not yet, although if Obama's bill with Bunning had become law, it would have contributed to the destruction of the planet, so, you're pithy comeback ain't as clever as I'm sure you think.
I addressed this same area on another thread so I'll repost it here. The confusion, if there is one, on his position comes more from people expecting the same old politics where they expect if a politician comes out and talks positively about the needs of the Coal Industry and Coal workers that he will cave in to anything the Coal Industry wants. But this perception is due to how other politicians have acted in the past more than how Obama has. Here's what I wrote before:
Coal accounts for 50% of our nation's electricity. It employs thousands of workers, it is a major source of energy for China and India. The confusion about Obama's position comes looking at him through our normal political prism where being willing to talk about an issue really means championing it, where seeking to find consensus and creative solutions really means to capitulate. But that's not how he works. He stays true to his principals while exploring all avenues to accomplish his goals.
The Bush administration found this out in this very area of coal. I found an interesting detail of this from the recent Washington Post article "Coal Fuels A Debate Over Obama":
On 2004 campaign visits to the region (Southern Illinois), Obama stuck up for the coal industry by criticizing pollution rules proposed by President Bush that Obama said unfairly favored Western coal and rallying behind workers who had lost their health benefits in mine bankruptcies.
After his election, Obama's commitment to the region was quickly tested. On the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, he found himself the deciding vote on Bush's "Clear Skies" initiative to replace rules for coal-fired power plants with a system of pollution credits, which environmentalists attacked as a risky loosening of limits.
The Bush administration targeted Obama, banking on his rhetoric about thinking outside party lines and his concern for Downstate Illinois. But in the end, he held firm in opposition, saying the bill would worsen pollution while not helping the Illinois coal industry as much as claimed. The bill died in committee on a tie vote. Reaction was swift.
"All of [his] dialogue and rhetoric during the campaign had been pro-coal, and we saw this as a pro-coal initiative," Carbondale Mayor Brad Cole (R) said.
Three months later, Obama saw an opportunity to win back goodwill. He attached a provision to the 2005 energy bill for $85 million over five years to test using Illinois coal to produce transportation fuel.
What Bush and the Carbondale Mayor did not get was Obama stays consistent to his positions. He is a solid environmentalist and is not going to sacrifice his commitment to improving our environment. He is also committed to the people of the region and sympathetic to what the Coal Industry represents in terms of jobs in the area. But instead of sacrificing one for the other or playing them off against each other, he looks to satisfy both without compromising his ideals. He stayed firm to his environmental stance while at the same time delivered to the Industry, and thus to the people, helping to save their jobs while at the same time pushing the Industry toward research which could be pro-environment.
Now the same people are crying once more, that in doing this they thought he was really pro-Coal and now he's slipping away again by demanding that CTL technology have 20% lower CO2 emissions than petroleum-based fuels. If he was going to cave environmentally, he would have passed Bush's dirty Clear Skies Initiative in the first place. He's not pro-Coal, in fact he's pro-Renewables, but he is pro-Coal worker and if there's a way to be that and lower our CO2 emissions, and reduce our dependance on foreign oil, then that is what he's going to do.
I agree, but in some of the schools in Chicago, they need it. Teachers are in the old mode of doing things, alot don't care or give a damn. I agree, they should have a rate increase, because they are critical in forming young minds, but go to some impoverished areas with 20 yr old books dated, no computers, etc. It is pathetic. Drop out rates are climbing at a higher rate. This is a double edge sword, and with the supreme court ruling, poor kids, or just that one bright kid who would benefit going to a "white" school that is more academically accelerated, will now never get a chance.
We all care about our children and their futures. I am just pointing out that merit pay does not fly with the teacher's unions. The NEA has 3.2 Million members. Other teacher's unions are smaller, but add them up and you get a huge, powerful entity. Their endorsements will weigh heavily, if/when they give it. Unless I am misreading the union's strong opposition to merit pay I don't think Obama can get that endorsement. That will then go to either Clinton or Edwards (probably Clinton.)
It need to fly. My best friend's mother was a teacher, then a principle in one of the Chicago inner city schools. Do you know how many times she had to reach in her purse, pull out her CC, and buy the basics? That is uncalled for, and totally unacceptable. But the tax monies are not divided evenly for poor, improverished areas, it is not. And let us not talk about teachers. For every 5 good teacher, their is one totally uncaring. I remember my friend's mom, who retired, but still taught sub, was talking to a "white woman" who was a teacher, lived in the suburbs, and totally did not give a damn if those kids learned or NOT. Just passed them along. You know what my girlfriend's mom said? "You better want to teach these kids, because you may never know, one of them may end up at your dinner table, dating your daughter or son?" Yep, she went there. So, this shit about merit pay? They need it, totally need it, especially in the poor areas where they truly could care LESS.
I know Obama is favor of the concept of incentive pay to try to encourage good teachers to teach in the inner city schools rather than flock just to the suburbs. Is this part of the concept of Merit pay?
The idea is noble: You pay a teacher more for quantifiable results, like test scores. The problem is that in states where this was tried (it is a common Republican demand) like Texas it was fraught with problems of favoritism and political opportunism. You also have the problem that you reward teachers in wealthy neighborhoods for high scores, even though the kids already come better prepared. But, if you reward based on performance improvement (say, from a C to an A) you penalize teachers who teach at schools with already excellent performance and you open the system up to major politicking. A principal asks his/her teachers to "make sure" all kids get A's and teachers are tempted to cheat on standardized tests to avoid the school falling below a certain merit level so they themselves don't lose merit pay or the school is not downgraded out of a merit position.
The NEA will in no way HAVE to agree that merit pay is good, in fact, they are vehemently opposed to it. Their union endorsement will be a very important one. Obama may be able to win, but he most likely will have to do it without the endorsement of the teacher's unions.
You know what, talk to parents, right now they don't give a shit about a teacher's union endorsement, in fact they want to know if these bogus teachers are going to be REPLACED.
The teacher's union is on a slippery slope. They can not continue to demand excellerated pay, and the drop out rate in this country is continuing to go up and not down. They can endorse Clinton, Edwards, or whomever, but their time is becoming limited, and parents are totally FED UP. Yes, there are many variables about children, their environment, relationships with parents, etc. But, these non-caring teachers in these poor areas who only care about a pay check...you betcha' they need merit pay, immediately.
I like the fact that Obama is saying what he believes despite the fact that its not political expedient. I wish more democrats had some balls when it came to the NEA.
Let us not forget the NEA is a union and not an unbiased party when it comes to education.
My mother put in 30 years of teaching at the elementary level. She was teach of year twice in the district, received more parent request than other teachers, and her students consistenly scored highest on state exams. Yet, she was paid $10,000 less than most of her peer with master degrees, many of whom left school each day along with the kids and didn't put in half the effort my mother did. She indeed was entitled to merit pay even though she never complained one bit. Trust me, there are plenty of excellent teachers out there that have NO problem with merit pay. It's idea whose time has arrived.
Of course, with Obama the salesman the idea becomes easier to stomach--it could be that way across an entire range of issues if you'd people give him a chance.
Yet another reason the democratic party is in shambles, because our policies get dictated to us by special interests. Only Obama is the only one willing to take on these people. Our loyalty should not be to Unions, but to children. And I know that there are thousands of great teachers out there that agree.
The Democratic party is made up of special interests. It is simple reality. If we are going to combat the special interests that are a big part of the Democratic party, then there is not much left. Blowing up the party at this point is probably not the right approach. It just goes to illustrate why Obama is having a hard time attracting rank-and-file Democrats. They are interested in someone going to bat for them, not propose stuff that they have opposed for decades. Whatever the merits of merit pay, the teacher's unions oppose it and so does a majority of teachers. So, you are alienating a major constituency. Do that too many times, and at the end of the day he ends up with too few constituency to put enough votes for the nomination together.
actually if you get into the conversation takin place in the NEA and other teacher unions... they are pretty supportive of Obama's merit pay system, because it is ran through or in consultation with the unions - it empowers the unions like the teacher retirement system was suppose to do in several states. You are right that merit pay does play broadly but in these conferences it does - there is a reason if you watch Obama's NEA speech the folks were on their feet for him.
That's right. we all want Mrs. panda bear to come and tell us what we want to hear only to turn around and break all the panda bear promises when elected. what a great way to make people believe in their country.
Last night I watched a movie of the Dixie Chicks "shut up and sing". It was about the treatment they received following a statement made oversees in one of their concert just as the Iraq war started. It was unbelievable the public outrage at them for speaking against Bush and the war. If you get a chance to see it you'd be amazed. I couldn't help but think that that was the same kind of sentiment Barack Obama faced when he was speaking out against the war.
It's hard to remember the feelings back then, because many people now are against the war and recognize it for the mistake it is. He was a brave and bold man to take such a public stand when most of the country wanted to literally kill anyone who spoke out against the war. The Dixie Chicks received death threats and was visible concerned for their safety while performing their concerts.
Kudos to those who stood brave and strong for what they believed and not cower in the face of opposition. Go Obama!
That is an amazing article and one that naysayers who are bent on demonizing Barack Obama do not want to read. I wonder what bebe thinks of this article. I would really be interested , but she might not read it. It's five whole pages worth of Barack Obama , himself, debunking what she and others , thinks is going through his mind. Totally excellent article though. I absolutely loved it.
site are firmly entrenched in their candidate camp of choice so I am doubtful that any diary posted on this site is going to be changing any minds. However, I definitely agree that erasing misconceptions about Obama's candidacy is of utmost importance in terms of the influence his supporters have in the blogosphere.
That is my goal with the videos I produce as well as the diaries that I, along with others (i.e. icebergslim, psericks, etc.), write on this site.
Hey I have read that article and it is such a beautiful piece,it brought teras to my eyes.Hey your post leaves an impression that I have been demonizing,this might not be your intention though.I will never demonize Obama because I absolutely love him and he makes me very proud.If i wasn't voting for Hillary,I will be firmly with obama.Indeed I am with both of them even though I am voting for hillary lol that doesn't make sense.
Not to be a nitpicker or anything but is it your intention to leave out the spaces between punctuation marks? Kind of hard to read sometimes. Hope that remark does not go over bad with you because it is not intended as an insult or anything.
jeromearmstrong Our Polarized and Money-Driven Congress: Created Over 25 Years By Republicans (and Quickly Imitated by Democrats http://bit.ly/ewXlXI #bblue
50 Comments