Obama, in P-Tech Visit, Walks on Bones of Dead School And Pushed Out Students in P-Tech Visit

Robeson, which had a capacity of 1,000 students, Siegel said, found itself with 1,500 in 2005. "That's when we started having a lot of incidents, gang issues, things that didn't come into the building before that," Siegel said. "This is the story of all the schools that got closed down. We had the lowest dropout rates in the city, kids didn't leave, but it wasn't balanced. what it became was over 30 percent high-needs students, and no institution can survive that sudden change."... When P-Tech moved into the building, the two schools shared a cafeteria. Robeson students found themselves eating lunch at 2 p.m. The students lost access to parts of the building. The remaining Robeson students, Siegel said, are mostly "overage, unaccredited kids.".... Huffington Post

What better vision of neo-liberal Obama than his visit to a school loaded with resources co-located into the building of a school starved of resources to the point of being closed? Sometimes it is all about real estate.

One Sure Thing: Most Robeson Kids Not Wanted in P-Tech. Our film opens with Robeson kids protesting at the PEP with the cry: DOE Doesn't Care About Us. Amen.

Huffington Post (excerpts): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/25/obama-p-tech_n_4160548.html

Bloomberg's time as mayor have been defined by school turnover. While charter schools have received the most attention, Bloomberg created 654 new schools -- of which only 173 were charters -- and shuttered 164 schools for low academic performance. Many of them are small schools. (A recent Massachusetts Institute of Technology study of 101 such small schools found their students 7 percent more likely to attend college than peers in big public schools.) Many of the new schools have moved into buildings being vacated by doomed schools as they're phased out, a process city school officials call "co-location."

Bloomberg's drive to shut down big campuses generated raucous public hearings and school walkouts. De Blasio, who will likely succeed Bloomberg, called for a moratorium on closures and co-locations.
 
The school closings also are unpopular with some school communities. "The whole closing of schools is musical chairs," said Stefanie Siegel, who left Robeson in 2012 after teaching there for almost a quarter-century. "It does a lot of damage to community."

Robeson opened in the 1980s in partnership with Salomon Brothers, the Wall Street firm where Bloomberg started his career. As Siegel described it, the firm's promises were similar to IBM's for P-Tech.

But in 2002, Bloomberg and his schools chancellor Joel Klein started the small schools movement. Many big high schools were disbanded, and students who didn't attend the new schools shifted to the remaining big schools.

Robeson, which had a capacity of 1,000 students, Siegel said, found itself with 1,500 in 2005. "That's when we started having a lot of incidents, gang issues, things that didn't come into the building before that," Siegel said. "This is the story of all the schools that got closed down. We had the lowest dropout rates in the city, kids didn't leave, but it wasn't balanced. what it became was over 30 percent high-needs students, and no institution can survive that sudden change." A longtime basketball coach faced allegations of a long-term affair with a former student, and killed himself. A few abrupt changes of principals followed.

Scores dropped, and the city school governance panel -- whose members are mostly appointed by Bloomberg -- decided the school should be closed. A lawsuit filed by the United Federation of Teachers union stalled the closure for a year, allowing teachers and students fighting to save Robeson time to improve graduation rates.
But again in 2011, Robeson wound up on the city's closure list. “Roughly half of the kids who come to this school will graduate,” Deputy Chancellor John White -- who now oversees education in Louisiana -- said at a hearing, as reported by the GothamSchools blog. “Our goal is to change the outcome for kids.”
Lizabeth Cooper, a 2012 Robeson alumna who advocated for the school and now studies at the New York Conservatory for Dramatic Arts, said her school was full of energy until it was slated for closure.
"Everything that was, wasn't anymore," Cooper said. "If you yell at someone, the prettiest person in the world, 'You're ugly, you're ugly, you're ugly,' at some point they're going to think they're ugly. That's what the media did to my school -- they drained it, and they turned it into crap, and that's what my school became."
When P-Tech moved into the building, the two schools shared a cafeteria. Robeson students found themselves eating lunch at 2 p.m. The students lost access to parts of the building. The remaining Robeson students, Siegel said, are mostly "overage, unaccredited kids."
The Robeson students are "second-class citizens," said Justin Wedes, an Occupy Wall Street activist who worked with Robeson. "They're stuck on a sinking ship." From 5 to 15 students regularly attend, he said.

====
Co-Loco Stories

A proposed South Bronx co-location was also criticized at a hearing for being divisive. (DNAInfo)

Students say they don't want a co-location at embattled Long Island City High School. (DNAInfo)

LONG ISLAND CITY — Critics came out in full force Wednesday night to a public hearing on the city's plan to co-locate a new school at Long Island City High School — which they say will threaten the progress the struggling school has made recently.

Students rallied before the hearing, holding signs that read "Don't Slice or Dice LIC," and a bevy of students and elected officials testified in opposition to the plan, which the Department of Education's Panel for Educational Policy is set to vote on next Wednesday.

Opponents say the plan would threaten the progress the school has made recently, saying LIC has a new effective principal and is back on track after several years of struggling — and a co-location would only set them back.

"It's clear that the students don't want this change, the parents don't want this change, the teachers don't want this change, the elected officials don’t want this change," Assemblywoman Aravella Simotas said at Wednesday's hearing.

The DOE has proposed co-locating a new Career and Technical Education high school in the building at 14-30 Broadway, which would open in September of 2014.

The new school would share the space with LIC's students as well as with one site of P.S. 993 Queens, a District 75 special needs school that is also in the building.

The proposal would mean reducing enrollment at LIC High School over the course of four years beginning next September in order to make room for the new school, which would be phased in with a new grade each year.

LIC would lose 420-460 students by the 2017-2018 school year, according to the DOE, bringing its enrollment that year to just under 2,000 kids.

The DOE says the enrollment reduction would allow for the new school option in the building as well as to "provide an opportunity for LIC to concentrate on a smaller cohort of students," according to the Environmental Impact Statement for the proposal.

The city points to the struggling school's performance over the years, including overall "C" grades on its last three progress reports and decreasing enrollment numbers.

But critics of the plan say LIC drew fewer students in recent years in part because of a tumultuous period caused by the city's attempt to close the school in 2012. 

"The city wants to take apart Long Island City High School," Rachel Paster, head of the Community Education Council for District 30, said in her testimony Wednesday night.

"They’ve tried it before and it didn’t work. it kind of seems like payback," she said.

Paster said LIC offers a number of important opportunities to the diverse Queens neighborhood it serves, including 26 Advanced Placement classes, advanced Regents courses, plus special programs and extracurricular activities.

"To try and co-locate a school that would reduce those offerings is absurd," Paster said.

Obama Forced To Reign From US Senate

Republican investigators, Fox News an Rush Limbaugh are charging that Barack Obama is being forced to resign from the US Senate this Sunday. "This is an unexpected November Surprise," said a spokesman. "Too bad we weren't aware of this before Election Day, as exposing him even a few days before, would have won the election for McCain." Republicans are calling for a special prosecutor to investigate and Ken Starr has been contacted.

Election Whoopee

For The Wave: Politically Unstable (column)

Election Whoopee
by Norman Scott

There's a lot to be said about the election. I know people are thinking about the race issue. Since so many people are touching on this issue with more eloquence, I'll leave that to others. I am thinking about other issues. A smart guy in charge (Clinton was too but seemed to have other things on his - er - mind.) A connection to the young people that reminds me of the way we felt in 1960 seeing the glorious John F. Kennedy replace Eisenhower. (We used to race home after school to see his press conferences.) An activated army who got involved in politics. Expect to see a new, inspired generation of people who hopefully won't get fooled again.

I haven't cared all that much about the politics as usual for quite a while, having voted 3rd party in all but one or two elections over the last 25 years. Yet last Sunday I got up early and drove to Allentown, PA to spend a few hours working for Obama. Witnessing the massive ground game as people from New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and other places poured into a basement Obama headquarters on the outskirts of town made it worth it. And made me feel just a little less dread about losing PA, which I felt was the key (stone) state. It did turn out that way (along with the Buckeye state and about 30 others.) And hanging with like-minded people, whom I had to look for under rocks in Rockaway. Some of the awful letters in The Wave didn’t help. Thank goodness for the good sense to endorse Obama.

The conversations I engaged in with people who came up with so many irrational reasons to vote against Obama had been discouraging. The emails came in daily disparaging Obama for being the next Hitler and looking to set up a police state and being a terrorist Manchurian candidate. His "associations." Remember how he was going to paint the White House black?

They always made sure to disavow that race was an issue. Yet they were so over the top on a candidate whose policies were not so far off John Kerry and Al Gore and Bill Clinton. Very talented, but a fairly traditional politician. An impeccable personal history. Exceedingly bright. Amazingly disciplined. Self-controlled. Calm. And logical and orderly in his thinking. Did I say exceedingly bright?

Growing up poor, both black and white, married to a working class gal. Both had used their smarts to rise to the top of society. How could all this not only be ignored, but be disparaged?

Some element of racism, latent or not, had to be in operation. I can just imagine what they were thinking as they saw people dancing in the streets in Harlem last night. Will they secede from like half the nation did when another candidate from Illinois was elected 7 score and 8 years ago?

I purposely watched Fox last night, which had done its share in scaring people. Suddenly commentators were talking about how Obama was really a centrist and was surrounding himself with Clinton era advisers. I mean Warren Buffet the terrorist? Duh!

Will Obama turn out to be a great president or a failure? An FDR or a Herbert Hoover, who had an even lower approval rating than W?

It could go either way. When you think of great presidents, they seem to emerge only in times of crisis. Think there are just a few lurking?

FDR ran for president with a very different agenda than he ended up enacting due to desperate times. He showed the kind of flexibility that was needed. Policies that had a major impact for generations.

The problem I have had with Republicans is that they are driven by a narrow ideology that has helped put us into this mess. Like if you breathe government action, you are a socialist. But when it takes forms of socialism to bail out millionaires, why go right ahead. It was this sort of thinking that led to handing over billions to banks that should have had the requirement to be used as loans to free up credit but instead is being held onto by banks to buy other banks. One day soon we will have only 3 or 4 banks in this country.

The only thing I have to fear is fear of Obama's dependence on the same old, same old Clinton people, who come out of places like Goldman Saks when we need some truly radical thinking. Bill Ayres, where are you when we need you?

It is worth hearing from the left on the election. Here is George Schmidt, who is based in Chicago, posting on ICE-mail, where some vituperative attacks on Obama have taken place by both the right and left.

One of the strangest things to watch the past couple of months was how the "left" deployed towards the finish line on Obama. We've reported, early and often, that he was one of the most brilliant politicians ever to come out of Chicago. Now everyone knows that who has been paying attention. What happened yesterday in places like Pasco County, Florida (where I spent some time long long ago living and working out at a gym in New Port Ritchey) and Southwest Ohio was simple:

Chicago precinct work linked to the Internet.

Once you have a very very very good candidate (and Obama was one of the best bourgeoise candidates we've ever seen come out of Chicago politics; Harold Washington was another), a lot of the job is what is called "the ground game." After the AFT convention, I was miffed (that Obama snubbed both AFT and NEA) and worried (that the snub would leave huge parts of white America without the infantry for the ground game the final weeks before the election).

Now it's back to work.

Most of us here think the world is a happier place this morning because of what those of us who voted in the USA did yesterday. A large number of our neighbors went down to Grant Park last night and haven't been seen since. As someone said, this is the world's biggest (Chicago style) block party.

To have helped smash white supremacy on the level it existed in the USA in one lifetime has been a wonderful moment. And we have, indeed, helped smash it with what has been done the past year, culminating in the past week.

I have three sons, one of whom is 19 and in college, and the other of whom are seven and four. All three, at their levels, understood that something very important was happening yesterday (and leading up to yesterday).

As to what's going to happen next (especially for K-12 education)?

The one thing we've learned from Barack Obama over the years (remember: some of us have known him since he was in the Illinois Senate) is that you can't predict the next policy thrust -- only that it will have been very carefully thought out and very well planned (example: the last six weeks of the campaign organization, from TV ads to precinct work across the entire country, from suburban Indiana to the vastness of Montana).

It's worth savoring today. Our children are very happy. Coming from a time when my father's best friends (all brave men who had fought to defeat Nazism on the ground in France, Belgium, Germany and Austria) referred to Jackie Robinson as "Black Jack" and use to cheer the Dodgers with a cheer of "Run N_____ Run!" I'm very glad my own sons are coming of age in a different world. My Mom and Dad were among the few people in Linden, New Jersey who explained to us why we shouldn't use the "N" word back in the 1950s, while also explaining that the people we knew who did use it were good people (and brave; these were men who had "served" in combat in World War II) but limited.

Today, even in the most segregated parts of the USA (and Chicago has some of the most intensely segregated parts of the USA) that Jackie Robinson era racism is simply out of fashion. And given what things look like now, it's unlikely it will make a comeback, despite all the exertions of Sarah Palin and those mobs she luridly fired up at the most base level.

George N. Schmidt
Editor, Substance

www.substancenews.net

Election Yin and Yang

Just back from the gym. Ran into a UFT retiree. "Explain to me how the union could support a candidate who is against voting by secret ballot?" Huh? "What are you talking about? Where did you hear this?"

I know what's coming. Some kind of Obama trashing (the same thing happened last week with a retired fireman - why are they coming to me?)

"I was told by someone that he wants to take away the secret ballot." I begin turn 5 shades of green. "I don't want to talk about anything else. I just wanted to ask that question." "But McCain and Republicans view unions as enemies of big business."

I then started to explain that this position supports union attempts to organize.

"I don't want to get into it. But cry the beloved country." Oy!

Brilliant. Why get the real facts when all you need is an excuse to continue to bash Obama? My instinct is there's heavy racism acting here. The vehemence goes way beyond normal dislike of candidates. Like would this same conversation have taken place over Kerry or Gore given the same exact positions?

I also spoke to the gal who is having the Obama election night open house. She is from Canada and rethinking things if McCain wins. Or maybe just drink her way through tomorrow evening. Or the next 4 years.

On the other hand there's this from Five Thirty Eight's 3am polls:

Barack Obama's position has become somewhat stronger since our update this afternoon. We now have him with a 5.8 point lead in the national popular vote, and winning the election 96.3 percent of the time. Earlier today, those figures were 5.4 and 93.7, respectively.

I continue to find a hair's worth of tightening on balance in the state-by-state polls -- even as Obama's position in the national trackers seems to be roughly as strong as it has ever been. This, ironically, is the exact reverse of the position we saw earlier in the week, when the national polls seemed to be tightening even as the state polls weren't.

However, Obama's win percentage has ticked upward again for a couple of reasons. Firstly, he's gotten some relatively good numbers out of Pennsylvania since our last update, with PPP and Zogby giving him leads of 8 and 14 points, respectively, and Rasmussen showing his lead expanding to 6 points after having been at 4 before. (The Zogby poll is probably an outlier, but may serve to balance out outliers like Strategic Vision on the other side).

Secondly, McCain's clock has simply run out. While there is arguable evidence of a small tightening, there is no evidence of a dramatic tightening of the sort he would need to make Tuesday night interesting.

Related to this is the fact that there are now very, very few true undecideds left in this race.

MORE

Working for Obama in Allentown

I've always been a reluctant Obama supporter because his policies seem center or even right of center to me. But from what I can tell, I really like the guy and feel he will be a good president to the extent anyone can be a good president given these times. So I've become more involved as time has gone by. But not in the sense of actually working in the campaign. Until yesterday.

I'm not one of those people who think this election is a cinch. Far from it. I always expected McCain to win. And still think the Republicans will find a way to squeeze this out. Frankly, the numbers I hear scare me. Weren't Kerry and Gore ahead at this point too?

If it's close, I am giving the state to McCain. Bradley effect and all that stuff. Turnout? Young people? I'm still not convinced. Did they make sure to register in the same place they live or at the school they go to or like my recent college grad cousin who is from DC, went to school upstate and now lives here in the city, did she take care of business to make sure she can vote? Besides, she works late and, you know, lines, etc. Beside, people think it's a slam dunk for Obama and we know how that turns out.

We were out at in wine country on the east end of Long Island and a debate broke out between a lone Obama supporter and a group of McPalins in the parking lot. I had to jump into the fray, but I hear way too much of this stuff from too many people I know. I think I saw one Obama sign in my entire neighborhood with about 50 more McPalin signs. And we are 5 minutes from Brooklyn.

I believe Pennsylvania is the key to this entire election and McCain was derided for throwing so many resources into the state. I thought he was smart to do so and he has made some progress with polls showing a narrowing.

When I got that Move.on email saying I was needed in Allentown, PA, I headed over there on Sunday. If Obama loses PA by one vote, it won' t be my fault.

There were many cars streaming into the Obama HQ. They came from Jersey and lots from New York. All ages. Mostly white. While waiting on the bathroom line I found it interesting how confident they were despite the fact that most of the people who live near them (except the Manhattan and Park Slope people) were McCain people. I felt dread.

But I perked up from the enormous outpouring of people and the impressive way we were organized and trained. We were sent out in pairs. My partner was a young man from Manhattan by way of DC, having grown up in Virginia. He did some canvassing back home recently. "I don't think Obama will win Virginia," he said. Jeez. And he is running even in North Carolina, if not being behind. And Ohio? As the Fearless Forecaster on WFAN often says: A LOSS.

Did you get the idea I am a major pessimist?

The guy in charge is a lawyer from Long Island who has been there for a month. He grew up in Rockaway and wasn't surprised when I told him about some of the sentiments of all too many people.

But I perked up as more people kept showing up all day. And what a smooth operation. They have shifted from convincing people to vote Obama, to canvassing for Obama supporters to a Get Out The Vote operation. That was our job yesterday. To go to targeted addresses of people who said they were for Obama and to leave a door knob flyer as a reminder. We were not knocking on doors but if we saw someone we were to ask if they needed a ride to the polls on Tuesday.

Our trainer said that they can track every single person who did not vote by 6PM and they will call them to remind them. And do it again at 7PM. Impressive. I lost a few butterflies on hearing that. About 2.

We went out to an area that seemed to be the Allentown version of low income housing. Two story garden apartments. Mostly Hispanic, based on the names. Having taught in east Williamsburg, there was some similarity. Will they actually go out and vote? The 2 butterflies are back.

Look. PA is within margin of error. Hillary beat Obama badly. Florida and North Carolina and Virginia - it is really possible for McCain. More than possible. I would go back to Allentown on election day if I didn't have this robotic training thing I'm involved in. If things look worse tonight I may blow it off and head on back. Or at the very least start calling people from here. (The Obama organization even makes provision for that.) I don't much believe it does all that much good but doing nothing makes those

A neighbor is throwing an election night open house. I'm going with plenty of good stuff to drink. We will really know a lot by 8PM. At that point I expect to be drinking. Heavily.

Dear Bubbe And Zaidy

This article appeared in The Wave
http://www.rockawave.com/news/2008/1024/columnists/050.html

It's My Turn
By Howie Greene

Howie Greene is the consummate New Yorker. Born and raised in Brooklyn and at one time a resident of Beach 117 Street, Greene knows New York. He was part of the management team for The Godfather of Soul, James Brown, traveling the world with him.

He was also an executive Producer for Sirius Satellite Radio, working on their Talk & Comedy channels. Greene spent two years working on cruise ships and has literally "sailed the seven seas."

He's been involved in New York politics for decades and at one time had aspirations of being a professional bowler, actually obtaining his PBA card.

Greene lived in Rockaway Beach in the early 90s when he was the morning show host on the old WDRE-FM in Long Island.

I've been thinking a lot lately about my Uncle Milty. It usually happens this time of year around the High Holidays. He was the one who made sure I carried on the family tradition of going to shul, admitting my sins and asking for forgiveness before G-D. My father, being a Holocaust survivor, abandoned his religion way before I was born. So it was left to the uncle.

This year, however, my wife had to drag me to Yom Kippur services. Why? Well, maybe it's because I've seen the people I respected the most, all of the bubbes and zaidies who put up with bigotry, racism, religious zealotry and Nazis, abandon the basic tenets of what it means to be a Jew.

With all due respect to Sarah Silverman, I do not see this as a laughing matter. It is impossible for me to justify how "my people" will not vote for Barack Obama because he has a funny name, or, worse, to paraphrase Jackie Mason, is a "fancy schvartze."

Have you become so comfortable, Bubbe and Zaidy down in your South Florida condo communities, that you have completely forgotten from whence you came? Even though, on these, the holiest of holy days on the Jewish calendar we promise our redeemer that we will never forget? That we will be tolerant, and righteous and KIND?

My Uncle Milt was once turned down for a job at Con Edison, the New York area utility. It was the late 1930s, his father had just passed away, and it was up to him to support his immigrant mother and his younger brother and sister. He dropped out of high school. There were jobs at Con Ed. The interviewer asked him if his last name, Grosswirth, was German? Uncle Milty said, "It's Jewish." The interviewer insisted it was German … my uncle, however, did not relent. The interviewer told him that Con Ed would not hire Jews, so please say he was German. Well, my uncle never got the Con Ed gig. All of you, my dear Bubbes and Zaidies, have family stories like these. When did you forget? How did you forget?

Some of you won't vote for Barack because of his name. Okay. Did you know that Barack is the Muslim equivalent of Baruch … Hebrew for Blessed? The beginning of EVERY blessing to G-D we ever utter. Some of you have said you'd vote for him if he changed his name to Barry. WHAT? When did we forget as a people, our being persecuted for our names? How many times did your name exclude you from employment, club membership or staying at a hotel? Surely my family wasn't the only one asked to display our "horns" by ignorant Southerners back in the 1960s. Surely my family wasn't the only one that was told to go find a "jew hotel." At what moment did you forget this, Bubbe and Zaidy?

Not voting for Senator Obama because you are afraid is an insult. It's an insult to those who were murdered because of our names and our religion. It's an insult to those of us who came after you. To vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin simply because they are not Barack Obama is not only a shondeh, it is quite simply, ignorant.

McCain/Palin have come to South Florida to scare you. To drop the name of the Holocaust on your laps. They've intimated that Obama consorts with terrorists. That he is not a friend of Israel. But here is the record:

Gov. Palin belongs to a church that believes Jerusalem is the launching pad for the Rapture. Gov. Palin sat idly by in this church while leaders of Jews for Jesus proclaimed that Israel was getting what it deserved because they refused to acknowledge Jesus as the messiah. Gov. Palin is not a friend to our people.

Sen. McCain, for all of his "straight talk," has advisers on his campaign staff that have records as lobbyists for Saddam Hussein and Saudi Arabia.

And, the most heinous is that these two Americans who claim to put "Country First" have spent the past two weeks whipping up crowds into frenzy with hatred for Obama. Didn't those hate-filled rallies with cries to do harm to Obama remind you of anything, Bubbe and Zaidy? Have you finally forgotten the Nazi rallies in the 1930s that were used to whip up crowds into similar frenzies while blaming the Jews of Europe for all of its economic ills?

Surely, Bubbe and Zaidy, you recall the days of McCarthyism, where scores of Jews were blacklisted from ever working again in this nation because they went to a meeting or a party that happened to have a Socialist or Communist as a guest. And Jewish lives and livelihoods were wiped out because of our names or loose, quite loose, associations.

That is why your refusal to vote for Barack Obama because of his race and name is so perplexing and disturbing. When did we become the very people who threatened our existence?

Bubbe and Zaidy … listen to me. You owe this to us. You gave us eight years of George Bush. Okay, maybe it was an accident. But, you had your Franklin Delano Roosevelt whom you no doubt still revere. Barack Obama is OUR FDR! Let us have our chance to have the America I thought you always wanted for us.

I don't know how my Uncle Milty would have voted. He's gone now. But, I DO know he would not have dismissed Barack Obama because of his name, race or out of unsubstantiated fear!

Look, if you want to vote for McCain/ Palin because you think they would be a better team, then go vote. But, if you are voting for them because they are not a fancy schvartze with a scary name, then PLEASE, on Election Day, stay home, for us. Or better yet, find a good mah jongg or pinochle game and leave the future to your little bubbelehs.

Did Obama Bomb the World Trade Center?

Ed Notes News has learned that Barack Obama once walked past the World Trade Center, clearly an indication he was part of the terrorist plot. Sarah Palin is expected to make this charge at upcoming appearances. ENN has obtained an advanced copy of Palin's remarks, to be delivered at a meeting of a group of loyalists who will be wearing their newly laundered sheets for this special occasion.

“There is a lot of interest, I guess, in what I read and what I’ve read lately. Well, I was reading my copy of today’s Education Notes and I was interested to read about Barack’s strolls around Manhattan before the World Trade Center bombing.

“I get to bring this up not to pick a fight, but it was there in Education Notes, so we are gonna talk about it. Turns out one of Barack’s earliest visits when he came to New York, according to Education Notes, and they are hardly ever wrong, was walk past the WTC, where he was observed looking up for some 30 seconds."

Background: here and here.

Ed Note: We're betting that polls will show a majority of Americans who come across this parody will believe that Obama is really a member of bin Laden's organization. Or do they believe that already?

Unions stress over racism in the ranks

DENVER — Racial prejudice is being cited among senior union leaders to explain Sen. Barack Obama’s difficulty in winning over support from white rank-and-file members.

The Hill

Candidates for Sale - Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss

Updated: Aug. 20, 8am

See Obama do the same old, same old "corporations before the rest of us."
Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone on donors to McCain and Obama.
Guess what? They're the same.
A scary must read.

Guess who owns America no matter who wins?

Jose Vilson has some on the money comments at his blog.

"It’s not enough to just vote. We need to organize in our communities and educate in whatever capacity possible. Because if our own elected officials won’t look out for our interests, we’ll need to fend for self."

You see. It's all about one way accountability. The business and government community (one and the same) blames schools, teachers, students but expect to escape any real scrutiny while attacking those who want full funding of education as liberal big spenders.

Check out this from Susan Ohanian on corporate accountability. Or the lack thereof. Susan comments: "Teachers, start fighting back. Pass on this commentary."

Teachers and schools are being held accountable. It's time to start holding corporations accountable, too. We must demand that they contribute to the health and well-being of the country by paying their fair share.

Accountability Meets the Corporate Achievement Gap

By Peter Campbell

from the blog Transforming Education, Aug. 15, 2008.


The Associated Press ran a story on August 12, 2008, citing a report from the Government Accountability Office that revealed that two-thirds of U.S. corporations paid no federal income taxes between 1998 and 2005. About 25 percent of the U.S. corporations not paying corporate taxes were considered large corporations, meaning they had at least $250 million in assets or $50 million in receipts. And, according to the report, about 68 percent of foreign companies doing business in the U.S. avoided corporate taxes altogether over the same period.

How ironic in the age of No Child Left Behind that the GAO - the Government Accountability Office - would be the one that would point out corporate America's lack of accountability when it came time to paying the bills in this country.

In his amazing book Class and Schools, Richard Rothstein wrote:

All told, adding the price of health, early childhood, after-school, and summer programs, (the) down payment on closing the achievement gap would probably increase the annual cost of education, for children who attend schools where at least 40% of the enrolled children have low incomes, by about $12,500 per pupil, over and above the $8,000 already being spent. In total, this means about a $156 billion added annual national cost to provide these programs to low-income children.

These are 2003 - 2004 data, and they're probably not completely accurate. But these numbers at least give you an idea of what it might take to actually close the educational achievement gap. They give you the sense that closing the educational achievement gap might actually be something that could be done.

But before we can close the educational achievement gap, we must first close the Corporate Achievement Gap.

Read the entire piece at Peter Campbell's blog.

Still Campaign '08

Maybe I was wrong. It is not campaign '12 but still campaign '08.

I am on the mailing list for some reason of a North Carolina Democratic party organization in which the entire newsletter focuses on atacking Obama and pushing Clinton with the hope that they can get enough delegates to switch votes in Denver.

Read this and see if you think Obama has a chance.

Do I think the Clinton machine has drummed up much of this? Hell yes. They never give up.

I posted links to one blog - with comments to give you a flavor at Norms Notes.

Fred over at Prea Prez also has some interesting thoughts.

Hillary Clinton is caught on video telling supporters she wouldn’t oppose her name being placed in nomination in Denver.

Her key adviser Howard Wolfson suggests that if the creepy (”my wife’s cancer was in remission”) philandering John Edwards had not been in the race in Iowa, Clinton would have won the nomination.

Billary appears to have bullied their way into speaking two nights at the convention. Will you be watching? I’m hoping the Cubbies are on at the same time.

Does Hillary Clinton still have dreams of grabbing the nomination? Or is she working to sabotage Obama’s campaign, hoping he loses so she can run in four years?

Campaign 2012: Pro-Clinton Group Runs Anti-Obama Ad

More on the Clinton undermining of Obama so McCain can win. Told ya so.
(And for anyone who doesn't think the Clintons aren't behind this no matter how much Hillary campaigns for Obama, there's a bridge to nowhere in Alaska I have to sell you.) And remind me of where Randi Weingarten and the UFT/AFT stands on this issue.

Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Newsmax

A group of Hillary Clinton supporters has bought an ad in an influential Washington, D.C. publication warning against turning the Democratic convention in Denver into what they call a “coronation” of Barack Obama.

The ad states: “If Democratic processes and principles are not respected, then the party will have a much bigger problem – a genuine revolt of more than 18 million voters.”

Another pro-Clinton group, 18 Million Voices, is organizing a march on that day in Denver “and nationwide to support Sen. Clinton and advocate for women’s rights worldwide,” according to its Web site.

Some of the Denver Group’s goals are at odds with those of the Democratic Party, The Hill newspaper reports. It wants an open convention, with Hillary’s name placed in nomination, as well as a genuine roll call vote with Clinton as a legitimate candidate instead of what it calls a “coronation” of Barack Obama.

Clinton backers in Denver will hold signs reading, “Denounce Nobama’s Coronation,” according to the Denver Post.

Read more

Thanks to FL

And leave it to Leo

to hand his lede on the Chicago AFT convention at Edwize over to Hillary. The AFT may have finally endorsed Obama, but to Leo what’s most important is that Hillary spoke to them.

Comments on UFT VP Leo Casey, Obama and the AFT.
Fred Klonsky at PREA Prez.

Clinton Campaign Declares McCain the Winner: Obama to Withdraw

Modified after discovering the ENN Reporter was suffering from a hangover.

Ed Notes News is reporting that Barack Obama is considering withdrawing from the presidential race upon hearing Hillary Clinton political consultant Harold Ickes declare Obama flat out has no chance of winning against John McCain and that the only chance the Democrats have is to choose Hillary Clinton as the nominee.

Obama understands that these criticisms from Clinton are sending a signal to Democrats: Don't waste your money and time on Obama since he can't get elected.

The final straw for Obama occurred when Ickes dropped the dreaded "McGovern" bomb. If Obama suffers a McGovern-like disaster that would also take him out of the running as a viable candidate in 2012 (losing by a little would not be good enough to accomplish that.)

So his strategists have decided to get out now, figuring the Republicans want Hillary as the candidate all along and that she might have the better chance of pulling a McGovern disaster than he, which would make him the 2012 candidate, while giving him time to win over all the demographics that have opposed him. The nation will be better prepared to accept a black man as a candidate in '12, especially after 4 more disastrous years of Republican rule.

Clinton strategists are reportedly rethinking the question and have decided there is a better strategy to make Hillary president. Keep Obama in the race, graciuously agree to make him the presidential nominee, browbeat-er- even more graciously accept the vice-presidential nomination, unite the party, beat McCain, wait for shit to happen.

That RFK Thing: Piling on Hillary -Updated

This blog has been pretty rough on Hillary Clinton, but this flack over her RFK assassination issue is a case of piling on. How can any of us who lived through 1968 forget any of it, especially since we were so young at the time? That it's exactly 40 years later with so many similarities is so freaky. I don't think she was making a bad point.

I am not an outright Obama supporter and think some of his stuff is pretty conservative, but I will probably vote for him, as opposed to some more left Green party or even Nader.

Let's not forget that Hillary has about 50% of the Democratic Party support. And, no, I do not think she should drop out. Why not take it to the convention? Lincoln won on the 4th ballot and I don't think he led on any of the first three, running 4th initially.
Will all this help McCain? Maybe, maybe not. I'm for the most democracy we can have.
Now, if only the Hillary support network led by the UFT would allow a bit of democracy to shine so Obama supporters get to say their piece.

Oh, and let's not neglect to mention the shameful performance of Unity Caucus lapdogs New Action Caucus, where some of their members furtively pass around anti-Hillary literature but remain silent at Executive Board and Delegate Assembly meetings.

Study Shows 97% UFT'ers Are From Appalachia

EDN News reports that a recent study of demographics in the UFT show that 97% of the members of the UFT hail from Appalachia, thus explaining the total lack of Obama supporters in the NYC union.

Typical birthplace of most UFT'ers

Zero Obama Supporters in the UFT

UPDATE: Fred Klonsky slaps Leo Casey.

One of the most remarkable, almost a miracle one might say, undercurrents in this Hillary-Barack battle where the entire Democratic Party has split down the middle, has taken place in the United Federation of Teachers where 200,000 members support Hillary Clinton – unanimously.

Even more remarkable has been the reversal of what is happening nationally: 90% of black voters support Obama, yet not one single black Obama supporter has emerged in the UFT.
Nationally, Clinton gets the older, blue collar and less educated vote while Obama gets the younger, white collar, college educated vote.

Not in the UFT, which everyone would agree is not only white collar and college educated, but has had a massive influx of young teachers. Again, not one Obama supporter amongst these demographics has been spotted.

Likened to the way Hasidim vote en masse in elections, the membership has followed the lead of Randi Weingarten in one of the most remarkable operations in political history.

If they start behind...

...they are going to stay behind.

Does Obama "get it" that closing the achievement gap will take a lot more than threats and punishments of schools, teachers and children.

Obama video on education at the Educator Roundtable.

If We hadn't Talked to Vietnam....

....John McCain would still be at the Hanoi Hilton.

Also read Thomas Friedman in today's NY Times on Obama and the Jews. An excerpt:

"Pssst. Have you heard? I have. I heard that Barack Obama once said there has to be “an end” to the Israeli “occupation” of the West Bank “that began in 1967.” Yikes!

Pssst. Have you heard? I have. I heard that Barack Obama said that not only must Israel be secure, but that any peace agreement “must establish Palestine as a homeland for the Palestinian people.” Yikes!

Pssst. Have you heard? I have. I heard that Barack Obama once said “the establishment of the state of Palestine is long overdue. The Palestinian people deserve it.” Yikes! Yikes! Yikes!

Those are the kind of rumors one can hear circulating among American Jews these days about whether Barack Obama harbors secret pro-Palestinian leanings. I confess: All of the above phrases are accurate. I did not make them up.

There’s just one thing: None of them were uttered by Barack Obama. They are all direct quotes from President George W. Bush in the last two years. Mr. Bush, long hailed as a true friend of Israel, said all those things.

...Personally, as an American Jew, I don’t vote for president on the basis of who will be the strongest supporter of Israel. I vote for who will make America strongest.

Also, David Brooks' nuanced interview with Obama on Lebanon after the Bush appeasement attack.

What Will the Tough Liberals in the UFT Do?

With a UFT Delegate Assembly coming up this week, it will be interesting to watch how Randi plays the Obama/Clinton issue, if she does so at all - we don't see how she can ignore it.

In his post (reprinted below) to ICE-mail, Sean Ahern challenges the Tough Liberals in the UFT's controlling Unity Caucus and makes the important connection between the "Tough Liberal" world of 68/72 and 08/12.

First let me try to put some of the stuff in historical context. Though I lived through all of it, Richard Kahlenberg's "Tough Liberal" bio of Al Shanker has allowed me to make many connections between the current Obama/Clinton battle with the past.

One of the striking aspects is Kahlenberg's attack on McGovernites, Jimmy Carter, the new left, the old left, and just about any progressive forces – the New Democrats. As I read the book it seemed in some ways like a campaign statement for the Clintons. I won't get into the education stuff here, but the Clintons are the epitome of the candidate TL's are looking for. No wonder the book is funded by the likes of Eli Broad and the New Century Foundation, among other backers of BloomKlein.

A book praising Al Shanker backed by the very attackers of teachers and unions? No surprise in these quarters where we have been howling about collaboration for years. It provides some philosophical underpinning of the utter betrayal so many teachers in NYC feel over the actions of their union. But you'll have to wait for our review of the book for more details when it appears in the New Politics summer edition.

Kahlenberg raises issues surrounding race time and again in terms of critiques of affirmative action. Of course, Shanker was not a racist (and I believe that) as his credentials as an activist in the Civil Rights movement are trotted out time and again, as is his relationship to Martin Luther King. But the net effect of Tough Liberal actions were and are often severe racial divisions. The parallels between '08 and '68 are astounding. Perhaps they see Obama as a recipient of some kind of affirmative action while Hillary has worked her way up the ranks. You know. The good ole' merit system, which in their world Obama appears to have skipped. (Does a wife of a president count as affirmative action?)

What irony in the replay of 40 years ago when the '68 convention, which followed the first lesser known UFT strike in Ocean-Hill Brownsville that spring and then was followed by the famous strike later that fall, an event that caused so many rifts in the Black/Jewish relationship, though Gerald Podair points out in his "The Strike That Changed New York" there were many already existing fault lines.

Similar fault lines also existed between the white– "hard working" as Hillary recently put it– working class which Tough Liberals are courting so assiduously and the pointy headed intellectual (Obama supporters today?) over the Vietnam War. Remember the attacks by NYC construction workers on peace marchers? Or the police assault on Columbia students in '68? The white working class vs. college students replayed today. Jeez. My choice to be a history major is reaffirmed every day in the fascination replay of events.

A major focus of Kahlenberg is on foreign policy. Tough Liberals preferred Nixon over any Democrat not aligned with them. Shanker was perfectly aligned with Ronald Reagan in that area despite his attacks on labor. The number of Shankerites that became neo cons is worth noting (Linda Chavez is a prime example.)

Thus, what we are seeing today in Tough Liberal Clinton's battle against what they perceive as New Democrat Obama. Again it often comes down to foreign policy. Enough damage has been done that the undercurrent I get from much of the Jewish community is that they will never vote Obama. Hillary will bomb Iran to smithereens while Obama might engage in a dialogue.
Who do they want? A Lyndon Johnson type candidate who will do non-threatening civil rights stuff while bombing the gooks/Arabs into oblivion.

Education? That takes 2nd place to wars and bailouts in the TL world. After all, their main focus is to keep any hint of socialism out. Tough Liberals will do with whatever piece of pie they are given to work with. Thus, ed reform means improving teacher quality by eliminating seniority and union rules and investing in peace corps, missionary teachers and staff development. But never in class size reduction.

So watch Unity Caucus and their supporters in New Action continue to sit and squirm - there must be some people, especially African-Americans who are not comfortable with what's going on. What Randi says at the Delegate Assembly this Weds. should be interesting. Since she reads the blogs, she will tread very carefully knowing full well her words and nuances will be out there.

This is something Weingarten is very good at and how she says it will be an indication of the way the Clinton campaign will begin attempts at reconciliation – with the 2012 conept in mind if Obama shoud have a McGovern-like disaster. (I know the paid pundits are discounting this, but I am not as anything can happen in politics.)

I'm betting on a strong statement from Randi about how all the union's resources will be out there for the Democratic nominee no matter who he - oops - is. After all, an AFT Pres. must play the proper political role. But if Obama loses in November, Hill in '12 begins.


Will the "Tough" Liberals sit out an Obama candidacy in 2008 like they did McGovern in 1972?
by Sean Ahern

Don't let the Unity Caucus slink quietly back into the woodwork until 2012. I think some of them will have to be brought into the campaign against McBush kicking and screaming. The Shankerites sat out the McGovern campaign in '72 and ended up with Gerald Ford as President in '75. Ford told the city "Drop Dead" during the fiscal crisis and 20,000 teachers were laid off. Ford was followed by Carter who sounds alot better now than he did in the 70's.

A McCain victory gives Clinton and the 'Tough" liberals another shot in 2012 or so they think. Sitting out the Obama candidacy, at least unofficially, makes sense from their view. I think the 'tough' liberals at 52 B'way will need some 'tough' love, like a proverbial slap for their own good, to awaken them to the greater danger. As for those who prefer Nader or McKinney, or some other party, I say more power to you and the people you bring out, as long as you are bringing people into the fight against McBush in one way or another. The Obama camp is the main contingent as far as I see and that where I will be, but there is plenty of room in a movement for different candidates and different platforms provided the focus is positive and not fratricidal . The polls make it pretty clear, if the people's vote is counted , the Republican control of the executive branch will end.

It's a very dangerous gamble to bet that the Republic will survive four more years of McBush and the neo cons. It is a very dangerous thing to 'triangulate' with or embrace facists, white supremacists, right wing evangelicals, Likud fanatics thinking that you can control them for your own ends. The German ruling class thought they could use the Nazis against the Communists. The Republican oligarchs have made a similar pact to hold onto to power and prolong the Empire by embracing a very hard core right wing which they continue to believe they can control. It is dangerous for any citizen in a democratic republic to dawdle and fret over the unsatisfactory programs of both Clinton and Obama while our basic rights and the rule of law are being eliminated by the Executive Branch under Republican control.

The race baiting used by the Clinton campaign was a 'coming attractions' for the Republican campaign (assuming Obama is the Democratic candidate) but Hillary and Bill haven't told the Republicans anything new here. All Hillary accomplished was to disqualify herself. The Republicans will go further into attack mode because they have far more to loose than Hillary and Bill.The Clintons just took a page from an old playbook of the Republicans, who took it from the Dixicrats before them. (And this from the candidate endorsed by the AFT leadership, whose members are charged with educating children of color in many of the country's largest urban school systems?)

What may we expect from the Republican executive during the campaign season? An attack on Iran following some new phony Tonkin incident? A domestic terror attack just prior to election day? Hackable voting machines (no question mark here, they are already in place!), on top of the racial disenfranchisement that has already gone on, and who knows what additional schemes are in the pipeline to keep the Republicans in office. There are too many skeletons, too many crimes. The neo cons will do anything to escape the prison cells they so richly deserve and politicians only care about winning. It's a deadly mix.

The threat to freedom is real. We all have to come together, sound the alarms and stop McBush from setting the world on fire. Whether you are for the Democrat Obama, the Independent Nader, the Green McKinney, or any other candidate who opposes the current regime, get out there and agitate, organize, picket, vote. If you are a Unity Caucus member or a supporter of Clinton you can't afford to sit this one out. The world as you know it won't be there after four more years of Republican control of the executive branch.

Peace,
Sean Ahern
Sean, a former NYC transit worker, teaches high school in Manhattan.

More Obama from Fiorillo, Schmidt and Others

Some follow-up debate on Hillary in '12 and Obama from ICE-mail:

UPDATED THREADS AS THEY COME IN:
LAST UPDATE: SUNDAY, May 11, 10:30 PM

Michael Fiorillo, Chapter leader, writes (also posted on the ICE blog):
Hello All,

While it's impossible to underestimate the Clinton's compulsive will to power - which has a hint of the pathological to it - I find the idea of Hillary destroying Obama'a chances of defeating McCain, so that she can be a viable candidate in 2012, a bit of a stretch.

She already has a immovable bedrock core of people who intensely dislike her, for reasons valid and invalid, and a determined campaign to destroy Obama would send her negatives among Democrats and Independents off the charts. It's not that she, and certainly Bill, aren't capable of doing such a thing; it's that I think they are still sufficiently reality-based to see that it would likely forever poison the well against them. An honest cost-benefit analysis on their part would show that it would have only a remote chance of succeeding, while hampering their marketability as spokespersons for neoliberal trade policies, which seems to have been Bill's bread and butter in recent years.

As for Obama, appealing as he is on many levels, don't expect his election alone to successfully push forward a progressive, let alone radical agenda.

Please keep in mind that since his election to the senate, he has:

- campaigned for Lieberman against Ned Lamont in Connecticut.
- voted for all funding for war in Iraq.
- voted to renew the Patriot Act.
- voted for the 2005 bankruptcy bill that was virtually written by the banks and credit card companies.
- voted to limit the ability to file class action lawsuits. Hillary voted against this bill.
- supported merit pay for teachers and the expansion of charter schools

I raise these points not to imply that we should refuse to work and vote for him. I voted for him in the primary with - considering the political history of the past 35+ years - a fair degree of enthusiasm; I'll do so again in November if given the chance.

However, don't think that a lot will happen unless he is pushed hard from, I hesitate to say it, the left. Wall Street, and especially Hedgistan, is investing heavily in Obama's campaign, no doubt seeing it as venture capital investment to establish an equity stake in a possible Obama administration. Unless there is a surge of activism on many fronts, these people will continue to set the terms of debate. As teachers, we've borne some of this, as Wall Street, corporate and foundation money has flooded into education, buying research and policies that undermine public education and teacher's unions in the "marketplace of ideas."

Fortunately, there's evidence that perhaps the tectonic plates are shifting somewhat. The May First ILWU strike explicitly protesting the war in Iraq on the West Coast docks was a profound event, underreported as it was. UAW members have been on strike against American Axle since February, fighting a two-tier wage system. There have been protests on Wall Street against the predatory nature of the credit system. Here in NYC, we may be seeing some cracks appearing in BloomKlein's PR fortress.

By all means, let drive a stake through the Clinton's hearts - politically speaking, of course - and vote for Obama in November. Let's not just leave it up to him after that.

Best,
Michael Fiorillo

George Schmidt responds
5/11/08

I didn't say that Barack Obama was even a New Deal liberal. He's a University of Chicago neo-liberal, and part of the fan club of Richard M. Daley's version of "school reform." We've already reported that. And will continue to do so.

Obama is not a socialist, nor is he even a New Deal Democrat. If you read his policies closely, he is to the right of Richard M. Nixon on some things, and standing with Nixon's policies on others. If you want to know the environment he works in, read the blog of his colleagues Gary Becker (University of Chicago economics theologian) and Richard Posner (most prolific judge on the Seventh U.S. Circuit).

He has never distanced himself from Richard M. Daley on corporate "school reform" or the use of biased "standardized" tests for a "bottom line" on "school reform."

Fact is, his roots are closer to the working class in Chicago -- both his work and his in-laws -- than any candidate we've had since Bill Richardson or Dennis Kucinich. Michelle Obama comes from a union family, and until they slowly became millionaires, both Obamas were counting coupons every weekend.

I'll take him as President of the United States because at this point we're going to trash some white supremacy on the way to realizing all the class issues that have been covered up.

George N. Schmidt
Editor, Substance
www.substancenews.net

My 2-cents on Hill in '12 is that they have just about gone as far as they can and will begin to pull back to mend fences. The last comment about Obama's inability to win white working class votes may have been the last straw. The question I raise is "What is good for the Clintons?" (Have we not seen how the UFT operates under the same mantra - what is good for the leadership is more important than benefitting the members?) And that answer is an Obama loss, the bigger the better. The damage may have been done to Obama, so now they can begin to mend fences. And they are very good at that, though they may have lost the black community forever. Except in the UFT's Unity Caucus and New Action where people will sacrifice integrity for whatever they get.

Back to Norm:
I want to reiterate this point:
90% of African Americans have voted for Obama. Is there not one African American member of Unity caucus that supports Obama? A statistical impossibility.
Not a peep out of Unity or New Action or any caucus for that matter about the total support for Hillary. ICE-mail at least has been vetting the pro and anti Obama debate and the nuances of both candidates. The Unity machine has shut out all debate. On all issues.
That is part of the unhealthy death pall that surrounds this union.

Back to Michael:
Hello George and Everyone,

Though aware of Obama's U of Chi provenance, I neglected to mention it in my post. However, if anything it validates my argument and adds new levels of paradox to the situation. In terms of economics alone, his U of Chicago connections should send a chill down the spine of anyone seeking a more just and fair world.

Your post seems to imply that vitually the only reason to vote for Obama is as an attack on white supremacy, a morally and strategically necessary thing. However, even here there are complications and reasons for critical distance:

In the chanting that "Race Doesn't Matter" at Obama events, and in the explicit and implicit messages of the campaign, there is more than little suggestion of naivete and ideological pacification. Naivete can be forgiven; the realities of class and race in the US will take care of that for those who have the intellectuall honesty to be conscious. But willful pacification of America's "original sin" cannot be excused.

In a recent posting on Doug Henwood's indispensable Left Business Observer (www.
leftbusinessobserver.com), Adolph Reed is quoted, in regard to Obama's "post-racial" discourse, that with Obama there is a danger that

"...inequality could lose whatever vestigial connotation it has as a species of injustice
and be fully consolidated as the marker, on the bottom that is, of those losers who
who failed to do what the market requires of them or as a sign of their essential
inferiority."

Is an Obama presidency going to thrust the nation forward to new era of equality and justice, or will it be an excuse to "move on" and get "closure?"

As I said, I'm going to vote for the man; I'd sooner vote for hope than fear. But my personal hope is that his election will result in an citizenry aroused by increased democratic expectations on many fronts, and that it will force him and his handlers to respond righteously.

Best,
Michaell Fiorillo

From a retired African-American teacher:

Norm: I've read and criticized everything I can find on the flap over Hillary's speaks for itself statement on the so-called "white working class." Your piece on the permanent damage to Hillary's credibility with the Democrats' hard-core constituency in the Black communities and their voters is right on the money. And it is reasonable to assume that Hillary is deliberately disparaging of Obama to weaken him vis-a-vis the Republican front-runner, McCain. In this regard, Hillary has issued a brutal call for the white race to rally to support her opportunist campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, as if such white genies can be manipulated by her or any other politico once let out of the bottle. All this shit hinges on the fictitious assertion that Barack Obama is too "elite" to connect to such "hard working white people," despite the fact that Obama, grounded in his own working class roots, has been getting a remarkable degree of support from working people of all ethnic groups, against the Clintons' usually disguised white race call-out in state campaign after state campaign.

So Norm, keep on pushin'.
Critically yours,
C

Anonymous:
As delegates left last month's assembly and got outside the door, many took off their Hilary buttons immediately. White and black.