Clinton friend, Reich, backs Obama

Richardson and Reich are true Americans because they stood up and spoke their minds even though they face certain assault from the Clinton loyalists.

They both know what’s best for the USA!

de-awm!

Good for him.

Ouch. That's gotta hurt.

Do you think he will still get invited to their dinner parties?

That's a sound endorsement with clear reasoning from someone who clearly knows both campaigns very well.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Definitely a sound choice.

Reich had better look carefully around every corner for James Carville.

Add Reich to two other Democratic elder statesmen, former Sens. Sam Nunn of Georgia and David Boren of Oklahoma who endorsed Obama yesterday. A good day.

So he just did it for revenge?

Obama's and Clinton's policies are basically similar. Try again.

I don't know what conscience Reich is talking about. I thought he had one.

I listen to what Obama says, and he sounds great. Then I look at what he does, go read the legislation he talks about, and lose (almost) all hope.

For example, Obama says he supports legislation that would give "all Americans access to the same health coverage as he and members of Congress have". But the legislation actually says "except for the way 'we' (meaning everyone but federal employees) are rated" (sigh). His (non-reform) skeletal health plan also says "health insurers will have to JUSTIFY charging large premium differences". Translated that means they will have to justify financially disciminating against sick people, and I find that analogous to saying that he would make the KKK "justify" financial discrimination against people because of the color of their skin.

Robert Reich should know that "Health care IS the economy, Stupid" ...and that waiting until the end of four more years to fix it will mean hundreds of thousands more innocent Americans will die, and trillions more of our health care dollars will be allowed to be diverted by an amoral middleman while Obama fiddles. Reich also knows that covering all kids first is one big political smoke screen full of health insurance industry welfare pork, at our and our kids' expense. Here in Illinois we pay $1750 to the health insurance industry per child while it delivers $600 worth of medical care in return. Such a deal for insurers (not so much for us or our kids), and those same insurers will use everything on our children's medical records to discriminate against them the second they turn adult and have to switch coverage.

I could go on about how Obama must be very glad now that he made one speech before he was in office against invading Iraq, then didn't do or say anything more about it as long as he thought it politically expedient to keep quiet, and voted to continue funding the occupation every chance he's had. He must think more people are more concerned about Iraq than health care, because he's speaking out forcefully again against our presence there even while providing himself political cover to weasel out of removing our troops "if the situation on the ground changes" (sigh).

I could also go on about how his environmental positions show him to be sold out, sold out, sold out to moneyed interests (at the the expense of the environment), but I don't have time now. Oh all right, I will anyway. He thinks burning coal and sequestering the carbon toxins underground is a good idea. I live in Illinois where Future Gen was supposed to be built, and we just had an earthquake. He supports corn-based ethanol even though he knows it uses more energy to produce than it saves, plus uses a gallon of water for every gallon of ethanol produced. Methylcellulose-based ethanol is efficient, but Obama comes from a corn-producing state, so he won't tell the truth on that either. He thinks nuclear energy is a "clean" alternative, and that polluting industries that have lots of money should be able to purchase the right to continue polluting. (www.grist.org) Should I go on?

He seems to think building a tremendous machine for bringing in online donations is a substitute for real campaign finance reform.

Is Hillary better? NO. Is McCain worse? YES. But let's not go pinning false hopes on a great talker who refuses to walk his own talk. We need people like Robert Reich to stand up and help explain a few things to the people, instead of helping slick politicians pull more wool over our eyes.

I think Robert Reich has as much right to his opinion as Jan, Spoon, Pwdrskir or I do. It's funny that some people have to second guess anyone who has a different opinion than their own (Richardson, Reich, Casey, Springsteen, Oprah...the list goes on).

Of course, if you don't like Obama's position, you should feel free to speak out against it (spoon just provided an excellent example of just that). Personally I think that Obama is a step in the right direction (though far from perfect) and I worry that many of us who identify ourselves as Democrats are way too quick to reject anything that is less than perfect as we define it. Given that a large percentage of American's are against some form of "universal healthcare" I think that anyone who expects a completely un-compromised plan is living in a fantasy land. Of course that doesn't mean we should point out the faults we see in any policy...that's what these boards are for. Thank you spoon for doing that.

"Given that a large percentage of Americans are against some form of universal healthcare"...

I don't think most reliable polls show that to be true, but the most important part of that statement is the vacuum of moral leadership that it indicates.

Plus, I can't tell you how much it hurts me to have to say what I said, because it hurts a LOT.

How I wish I could be more hopeful, but I was almost giddy thinking of the possibilities seven (long) years ago when we gave Democrats full control in our state (Obama's home state).

Instead of proving to the rest of the country what Democrats can do if elected, Illinois Democrats have almost totally forsaken the good of we the people in favor of selling us out to the welfare of the corporate few, and I'm afraid Obama is another one just like the rest...except with much better speeches and acting abilities. I sat and watched him help them gut real honest-to-goodness Health Care Justice Act reform while he was in the Senate here (by changing one word from "shall" to "may").

I also saw him refuse to give any support whatsoever to a real honest-to-goodness progressive Democrat (with his words only...that's all we were asking, to let us say "Barack Obama supports David Gill for U.S. Congress"). Gill is an E.R. physician, as smart and hard-working as they come, against the Invasion of Iraq from the start, very pro-environment (for real, not fake according to moneyed interests), and universal health care (done right which would save us hundreds of billions of $ and tens of thousands of lives each year, not wrong which would cost us even more). David Gill is absolutely incorruptable....a true liberal in the spirit of Paul Wellstone, not a neo-liberal in the spirit of a Clinton or Obama. We need Gill and about 500 more just like him representing us honestly in Washington, but apparently Barack didn't think so. (Sighhhhh.)

I WANT to believe. If I would just quit researching the issues in depth, I could. Both Obama and Clinton are better than McCain, but none of them is as good as we deserve. I honestly hope I'm wrong.

I forgot to mention the difference between talk and walk on balanced trade agreements. Obama did get caught mistruthing about NAFTA, but then Clinton has her own ghosts in the closet on the issue too.

If Democrats want to deliberately mislead us while Republicans just honestly don't have a clue, which is the lesser of the two evils? And all I know about are the issues I've bothered to learn anything about at all. What about the rest?

Thanks for an interesting discussion here, everyone.

Thank you spoon. I want to clarify my comment on universal healthcare. I believe most Americans want it. I remember a poll showing it somewhere around 62% in favor 32% opposed (I can't find the exact numbers). But 32% of the country is still a lot of people against it. And if I remember right, the support gets a lot softer when you apply conditions like doctor choice, waiting lists, etc. The point I was trying to make was that we are most likely going to end up with some kind of compromises.

Thanks again for all the information...I will absolutely look up David Gill and hope to hear more about him in the future.

Obama has nothing but the charisma that the sheeple of this country eat right up and i do not blame them at all !! How many times has this man actually talked about the Constitution!? and im not even going to get started on Hitllary or Mcvain!!
Its a crying shame that so many college students are going to vote for him, you would think that people who are going to college would be so much more intelligent and would vote for Ron Paul but most kids would rather get drunk than think about the real things that matter, ironic isnt it!? and besides the media has done too good of a job distracting everyone!!
this entire election has now turned into a giant circus fool of BAFFOONS with no real meaning!! the last thing we need is some one who doesnt truly know what they are doing running this damned country but i guess almost anyone else would be better than Bush!!


==
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=ron+paul
==

Sigh.

I'm sighing too, but in a pleasant way. President Obama, we're waiting for you.

A smart man once said, "When ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise". Sigh.

First, apologies to JanforGore, a misunderstanding before. Ski season is over and I’m a bit grumpy.

Reich, having his inside knowledge about the Clintons and one of the staunchest Clintoians, speaks volumes to the fact that Obama should be the candidate.

Obama speaks to our aspirations, it’s what people look for in leaders. I believe he will be President for ALL of us, not just some. Hillary is too divisive to bring the country together.

Bush/Clinton/Bush/?Clinton? – is this a monarchy or a democracy?

“There are basically two types of people. People who accomplish things, and people who claim to have accomplished things. The first group is less crowded.” -Mark Twain

Briefly, the topic I thought concerned Robert Reich being a close friend of the Clinton's as well as being a member of President Clinton's cabinet and despite the friendship and the appointment relationship choosing to support Obama over his long-time friend, Hillary. I submit that with vocal and strident friends such as Robert Reich abandoning you at a critical time, perhaps a few enemies wouldn't hurt.
Secondarily, it took two very contentious voting cycles and eight years in office for the American people to finally learn that GWB was in deed and in fact one of the worst people to have been elected to the presidency. My inordinate concern is that once again we're about to elect someone like Obama who we really know very little about. Will it take us another two cycles and eight years to learn that what we didn't know truly hurt us again?

If Richardson is Judas what does that make Reich?

Way to be Spoon. You've given me something to think about and in a lot of ways it mirrors my own feelings and reservations about this election.

Nice Video

I have a great deal of respect for Robert Reich. Because I live in Indiana and actually have a say in the nomination this time, I've chosen not to support either HRC or Obama, but wait and listen to each. I always thought they would both make good presidents.
When I read what Robert Reich wrote yesterday I agreed completely. He tipped the scale for me. I made my first donation of the election year to Obama and joined his campaign.
Literally as I was making my online donation, the doorbell rang. It was an Obama volunteer canvasing. I talked with her and she said she had never been involved with politics before. She was inspired by Obama and wanted to get out and do something meaningful.
This is what Barak Obama does for our country. He inspires people, he makes them believe in our country and believe that we can make a change for the better.

As an historian I always implore people that the government is ours, we control it, as Lincoln said so well ours is a government 'of the people, by the people, for the people'". When I say this people just shrug and say 'no, we have no control'. Barak Obama inspires people to believe again. To believe that they can again have a government in which they matter. In a democracy is there anything more important than that ideal?

craigers...great post, thank you. I live in Virginia and saw the same thing here (not what you'd call a blue state). We do have control and not only can we get the candidate we want (for me Obama) but we can continue to make our voices heard after the election to make sure that we get the policies we want as well. Knowing of course that this is a large country with many different people who believe many different things. But I have faith that the right leader can bring us together and find ways to move forward. It might be imperfect and it will take time, but I believe it can happen.

Thanks again for your post.

We all need to be paying much closer attention than we are, or we will never get the representation we deserve. We mustn't allow ourselves go gaga falling for fake but great-sounding platitudes that lack real honest-to-goodness public policies to back them up.

I hear what candidates say then look at what they do, and realize how much they depend (to a LARGE extent) upon us being too busy to do any real homework checking up to find out whether or not they are speaking with forked tongues. None of the top three Presidential candidates passes this test.

Just this morning on C-SPAN I heard Obama say that by the end of his first term as President (that would be five years from now at the earliest), he will make sure that every American who "deserves" health care will have it. Those are the exact words he used. I'd like to know what human being he thinks does NOT "deserve" health care, and if he has any problems at all with the hundreds of thousands of innocent lives that will be lost, or the trillions of dollars that will be wasted in the meantime while he fiddles. I have to conclude apparently not.

Watching so many people fall for so much smoke and mirrors makes me think we the people are SO screwed. Maybe we even deserve what we get (or more correctly, what we won't get because we so willingly accept and so whole-heartedly support so much less). I thought we the people had the will to do what needs to be done, and all we lacked was the leadership. But it's looking more like what we lack is the will to demand of our leadership what needs to be done.

2 jokes, authors unknown

How many Republicans does it take to change a light bulb? Answer: None...because there is absolutely nothing wrong with the light bulb. In fact it is burning brighter and brighter each day.

How many Democrats does it take to change a light bulb? Answer: Everybody knows Democrats won't change anything!

OK, 3 (and sometimes I like to think I'm a feminist whether I am or not)

How many feminists does it take to change a light bulb? The answer is, "That's not funny".

I wish, some of the time, that I maintained the same sort of idealism that I had way back when the Ivy was just planted on some of our A-class universities. That is, when people assert that Obama fosters a sense of hope about our future as well as kindling a desire to become a partner in a participatory democracy, I wonder. By the same token GWB has engendered such antipathy for government that anyone that seems even remotely genuine might well be considered a virtual penultimate and joyful alternative choice when no one else seems even remotely viable. In other words, it's not Obama and his credentials and his advisor's policies, rather that he's the only one that stands as a positive contrast to everyone currently available.

Audacity of False Hope, or Audacity of Hype?

Obama knows and shows how hungry we all are for real representation, for a REAL change. It would be SO much better if that's what Obama represented in deed (reality), not just word. If the devil wasn't in his details, I would be the biggest Barrack-star Obamaniac going.

Obama gives the best speeches by FAR. I wouldn't be so cynical about him if I hadn't bothered to research his stance on issues that really (really) matter to me (us). The trouble is that he is exactly the same as Clinton on most issues, indistinguishably better on Iraq and worse on health care, but all three candidates are knowingly misleading us, and apparently we are falling for it. (Follow the money.) Obama is the best politician of the three, but I want the best representation. I disagree that he is a positive contrast to everyone currently available in any meaningful way except his acting and speech-making abilities.

I think that's why Ralph is running, not because he wants to but because he has to, given what's (not) left of the Left. I wish Obama would embrace Ralph (along with Ralph's philosophy), and offer him head of EPA. If Gore had embraced Ralph, he would be President today and the world would be a much better place. Ralph is not acting as a spoiler but rather a savior trying to help us bring them back to the progressive side of the table for REAL (not small) "change". Ralph is really (not pretend) real. Listen to what he says, not what others say about him. Then look at what he does and has done, not what he says. It's really (truly) impressive.

A real hero should have real courage, and we the people's leader should represent people first and profits second. Obama, Clinton and McCain are willing to sacrifice morality for money, and that's not the kind of leadership we deserve.