AP NewsBreak: New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson to drop out of Democratic presidential race
By NEDRA PICKLER Associated Press Writer
MERRIMACK, N.H. (AP) -- New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson ended his campaign for the presidency Wednesday after twin fourth-place finishes that showed his impressive credentials could not compete with his rivals' star power.
Richardson planned to announce the decision Thursday, according to two people close to the governor with knowledge of the decision. They spoke on a condition of anonymity in advance of the governor's announcement.
Richardson's campaign would not comment on the governor's decision, reached after a meeting with his top advisers Wednesday in New Mexico.
Richardson had one of the most wide-ranging resumes of any candidate ever to run for the presidency, bringing experience from his time in Congress, President Clinton's Cabinet, in the New Mexico Statehouse as well as his unique role as a freelance diplomat. As a Hispanic, he added to the unprecedented diversity in the Democratic field that also included a black man and a woman.
But Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama dominated the spotlight in the campaign, and Richardson was never able to become a top-tier contender. He accused his rivals of failing to commit to bring troops home from Iraq soon enough.
He portrayed his campaign as a job application for president, and ran clever ads that showed a bored interviewer unimpressed with his dazzling resume. The commercials helped fuel his move to double-digit support in some early state polls, and advisers argued he was poised to move past former vice presidential nominee John Edwards for the role of third-place challenger.
But he was not able to build the momentum and came in a distant fourth place in Iowa and New Hampshire. Richardson didn't get quite 5 percent in the New Hampshire primary Tuesday and came in with just 2 percent in the Iowa caucus last week.
Edwards congratulated Richardson, saying he had run a good race.
"He was a very good candidate, a serious candidate ... I congratulate him. He ought to be proud of what he's done," Edwards said in Columbia, S.C. He pledged anew to remain a candidate himself, and said Richardson's decision means Democrats in South Carolina will get to choose on Jan. 26 from three candidates who are running vigorous campaigns.
"What's happened is, over time the race is becoming more focused. I think that's good for democracy. I think this thing's going on for a long time," Edwards said. "I assume the other two are. I know I am. I'm in it for the long haul."
Richardson was born 60 years ago in Pasadena, Calif., after his American father sent his Mexican mother there to give birth and erase any doubts that his son would be a U.S. citizen. His father was an international banker from Boston, and Richardson spent his childhood in Mexico City before being sent to boarding school in Massachusetts, where he was a standout baseball player.
After graduating from Tufts University in 1971 with a master's degree in international affairs, Richardson worked first as a congressional aide and then for the State Department. He was a staffer for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when he decided to leave Washington in 1978 to launch a political career.
Richardson settled in New Mexico partly because of the state's large Hispanic population, and he won election to the House. Richardson is a master negotiator, and put his diplomatic skills to work to rescue Americans held hostage abroad. He earned a reputation for a mix of patience, toughness and cultural sensitivity that served him well on mercy missions from North Korea to Cuba to Sudan.
President Clinton recruited Richardson to become U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, then secretary of Energy two years later.
He was easily elected to two terms as governor but will be forced from office by term limits in 2010. His closest advisers hope that even if his presidential campaign didn't bring him many votes, it built his reputation so that he'll one day be able to add even more to his resume.
---
Associated Press writer Scott Lindlaw in Columbia, S.C., contributed to this report.
AP Newsbreak: NY Mayor Bloomberg begins effort to consider independent bid for president
By SARA KUGLER Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK (AP) -- New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has quietly been polling and conducting a highly sophisticated voter analysis in all 50 states as he decides whether to launch an independent presidential bid, associates said Wednesday.
The exhaustive data collection started months ago, and when the review begins shortly, it will provide the data-obsessed billionaire businessman with the information he will use to decide whether to make a third-party run for the White House.
The scope of the research, details of which were revealed to The Associated Press, demonstrates how seriously Bloomberg is considering running for president despite his almost-daily denials that he isn't entering the race. The extensive coast-to-coast research effort shows that Bloomberg is willing to dig deep into his wallet simply to gauge his chances of winning and lining up the proper support network.
"They want a hard-headed sense of their chances," said Doug Schoen, who spearheaded Bloomberg's voter database efforts, known as microtargeting, for his two mayoral campaigns.
Bloomberg's spokesman Stu Loeser declined to comment.
Schoen says he is not working for Bloomberg now, but he is part of the mayor's inner circle and makes a convincing and well-researched case in his new book, "Declaring Independence," about how a third-party candidate such as Bloomberg could run for president and upset the election this year.
Schoen was widely recognized for his microtargeting work in Bloomberg's first campaign. It was considered a groundbreaking concept in 2001 to gather and use information on individual voters, rather than voting blocs, to tailor and tweak the campaign message, advertisements and overall theme.
The Bloomberg database being created nationally would also be used in those same ways if he were to run, Schoen said. But for now, it will serve as the basis of gauging potential support for a bid.
Using the microtargeting model, research firms working for Bloomberg are gathering comprehensive information on voters throughout the country, such has who owns a home, has children in college, where they vacation, type of car or computer and past political support. All the puzzle pieces will then be arranged to create a picture of each individual.
Most of the data already exists in commercial databases that the multibillionaire Bloomberg can simply purchase. It will then be analyzed to determine how each voter fits into several categories: "strong supporter," "persuadable supporter," or "potential volunteer."
Bloomberg's public denials of any interest in running are getting weaker; he typically says only that he is "not a candidate."
On Monday, he participated in a bipartisan summit in Oklahoma that only fueled speculation about his interest in seeking the presidency.
William Cunningham, who worked on Bloomberg's mayoral campaigns and was communications director during his first term, said it makes sense that Bloomberg - who founded the financial information company, Bloomberg LP - would gather voter information in this way.
"The mayor has both built a business and managed the city by using data and analyzing it, so it would seem to me that any other venture he gets involved in, he'd be analyzing and collecting data," he said.
For Bloomberg's campaigns in 2001 and 2005, he spent more than $155 million, and in both cases, poured millions into the development of his voter database.
The work that Schoen did in 2001 came as Republicans were also developing a similar concept, known nationally during the 2004 presidential election as "Voter Vault."
Now, mictrotargeting has now become a crucial tool for political campaigns.
The obstacles to a third-party victory are enormous, but Schoen argues they are not insurmountable.
Previous independent bids such as those by George Wallace, John Anderson and H. Ross Perot faced problems of money, organization and ballot access that someone like Bloomberg could more easily overcome.
The 65-year-old mayor already has the money - Fortune magazine estimates his worth in the neighborhood of $11.5 billion, and others have speculated it could be double that.
Next comes organization, and Bloomberg operatives believe they could recruit a million volunteers within a month of launching a campaign, aided by information gleaned from the voter database.
A major task for the volunteer force would be doing the ground work to get him on the ballot - a tricky process that differs wildly by state.
The first deadline to get on a state ballot is May 12 in Texas, and petitioners can only begin collecting signatures after the state's March 4 major party primary.
So far, the surprise outcomes of the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary have added urgency and strength to the Bloomberg operation, Schoen said.
"The uncertainty in the nominating process on both sides makes it more likely that Mike Bloomberg will explore a candidacy," he said.
Clinton Donor Tied To Mexican Drug Trade Mon, 01/07/2008 - 11:53 — Judicial Watch Blog An influential Democratic donor who has given Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign the federal limit and has been indicted for illegally practicing law, had his offices raided by authorities who say he launders money for Mexican drug cartels.
Renowned in ritzy Corpus Christi circles, Mauricio Celis has for years been one of Texas’ most generous Democratic donors, but the millionaire businessman has been the center of an ongoing criminal investigation that involves his deep-rooted ties to Mexico’s lucrative drug-smuggling industry.
In a pair of unrelated legal encounters, Celis was indicted by a Nueces County grand jury in October for the unauthorized practice of law, a felony in Texas. Celis is licensed to practice law in his native Mexico but does not possess a license in any U.S. state. He was also charged with impersonating a sheriff’s deputy to silence a woman he sexually assaulted.
State authorities say that Celis is linked to the Mexican drug trade and a search warrant to raid his lavish law office accuses him of money laundering for several cartels. Authorities have already searched a U.S. Treasury database and border crossing data to determine that Celis went to Mexico frequently after withdrawing huge sums of cash.
State prosecutors also obtained a document from a local bank showing a joint account belonging to Celis and a Mexican police officer well known for trafficking narcotics. It has been well documented that many police departments throughout Mexico are infested with corrupt officers and supervisors who openly accept bribes and help smuggle drugs north of the border.
Regardless of Celis’ shady business escapades, Democrats have gladly accepted his hefty donations through the years. In fact, Celis is among the party’s most generous donors and fundraisers, cutting hefty checks and raising more than $100,000 at a single event in early 2007.
January 12, 2008 Obama Giving Clinton a Race in Her Backyard
By SAM ROBERTS With Senator Barack Obama vowing to challenge Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on her home turf, the Democratic presidential primary in New York on Feb. 5 is shaping up as the state’s most competitive since 1992, when Bill Clinton took up a rival’s mantra of change to all but cinch the nomination.
Mrs. Clinton was re-elected a little more than a year ago by better than two to one. Before the Iowa caucuses, she had so dominated opinion polls and endorsements by elected officials and powerful unions that many considered her home state impregnable to political interlopers.
But if Mr. Obama wins the South Carolina primary in two weeks, he could develop enough grass-roots support among young people, liberals and black voters in New York to pose a serious threat to her claim to the state’s rich delegate lode, allies of both candidates say.
“The expectation is that Hillary should win in New York,” said Assemblyman Adam Clayton Powell IV of Harlem, an Obama supporter. “As you know, expectations don’t always translate into votes, and so we’re going to fight in New York.”
While Mrs. Clinton’s supporters say they are certain she will win the state and, with it, the bulk of its 281 delegates, they acknowledge that to keep Mr. Obama from running even a close second, she may have to invest more precious time and money here. Twenty-one other states, including New Jersey and Connecticut, also hold primaries on Feb. 5.
“Clearly they’re going to make a humongous effort to make sure that doesn’t happen,” said State Senator Bill Perkins of Harlem, an Obama supporter.
“We’re not taking anything for granted,” said Blake Zeff, the Clinton campaign’s communications director in New York. Representative Charles B. Rangel of Harlem, one of Mrs. Clinton’s earliest supporters, predicted that she would do “extremely well — after all, she’s our ‘favorite daughter.’ She’s better known and she’s earned the right to our support.”
But, Mr. Rangel acknowledged, “Obama’s electric campaign will stimulate a big turnout.”
“Even though there’s no question in my mind that Hillary can do a better job, we’re dealing with a lot of emotion and racial pride, and he’s proven himself to be a credible candidate already,” Mr. Rangel said.
Measured by volunteers, phone banks, offices and other tangible signs statewide, the Clinton campaign appears better organized. She has the support of many members of Congress and the Legislature, as well as the backing of unions that are adept at turning out voters, including those representing teachers, building service workers and municipal employees.
Mr. Obama has been endorsed by a number of black elected officials in Harlem, southeast Queens and central Brooklyn, all bastions of Democratic voters. And in a particularly revealing gauge of his organizational strength, Mr. Obama is the only Democrat other than Mrs. Clinton to have full delegate slates in each of the state’s 29 Congressional districts, suggesting he may be competitive in areas outside New York City.
In the 2004 primary, nearly half the Democrats who voted were in New York City. Manhattan alone accounted for nearly one in five.
Even before his victory in Iowa, Mr. Obama had an impressive fund-raising record in New York, receiving significant support from Wall Street, the entertainment industry and lawyers. Through Sept. 30, he reported raising more from New York donors than any other Democrat except Mrs. Clinton and was not far behind former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani.
Mrs. Clinton reported raising more than $18 million in all from New Yorkers, compared to Mr. Obama’s nearly $8 million, but a large chunk of Mrs. Clinton’s fund-raising is reserved for the general election. New York contributors who donated for the primaries gave $13 million to Mrs. Clinton through Sept. 30 and $7 million to Mr. Obama.
Mr. Obama’s victory in Iowa and his second-place finish in New Hampshire have put a number of black leaders in the awkward position of opposing a black candidate for president.
Many black elected officials in New York have already endorsed Mrs. Clinton, but they may find that their followers, who constitute as much as 25 percent of New York’s primary electorate, are flocking to Mr. Obama if he wins South Carolina, political analysts said.
A few prominent black leaders remain on the fence. Among those leaders is the Rev. Al Sharpton. On Friday, in one sign of how vigorously he is being courted, Bill Clinton called into Mr. Sharpton’s nationally syndicated radio talk show to explain his use of the phrase “fairy tale” in a critique of the Obama campaign this week. The description angered many blacks, but Mr. Clinton said he was referring only to Mr. Obama’s position on Iraq, not his candidacy.
Neither campaign has made firm decisions yet about television advertising and public appearances in the state, which has 5.3 million enrolled Democrats.
Their ranks could be swollen by last-minute registration efforts. Unregistered New Yorkers had until Friday to enroll in order to be eligible to vote Feb. 5.
The New York City Board of Elections said more than 13,000 forms had been filed in the last week alone. In New Hampshire, Mr. Obama fared better among first-time primary voters.
On primary day, 232 of New York’s 281 convention delegates will be in play, 151 of them elected by Congressional district and allotted in proportion to the candidate’s total. Some delegate slots are reserved for public officials and party leaders, and others are assigned by party officials. Representative Anthony D. Weiner, a Clinton supporter who represents parts of Brooklyn and Queens, said the campaign dynamics have energized the Clinton camp, too.
“It’s now clear that her home state is going to play an important role in making her president,” he said. “People are more excited about that than concerned.”
He said he had not discerned any shift to Mr. Obama among Clinton supporters.
At least one has shifted the other way. Neil Barsky, a Manhattan hedge-fund manager who raised money last year for Mr. Obama, said he now favored Mrs. Clinton. “I believe Hillary, while potentially less of a transformational candidate, would make an excellent president and is our best chance of winning,” he said.
New York’s presidential primaries have usually been held too late to make much difference, although in June 1972 George S. McGovern’s near sweep in New York virtually sealed his nomination.
Two other New York primaries were pivotal, though.
In April 1988, Michael S. Dukakis won a bruising primary campaign in New York over Al Gore and Jesse Jackson, who polled an impressive 37 percent.
In April 1992, New York Democrats squelched the presidential aspirations of Paul E. Tsongas and Edmund G. Brown Jr., who had run as an anti-establishment candidate, and all but virtually sealed Bill Clinton’s presidential nomination.
In his victory speech, Mr. Clinton declared, “Tonight, every person who voted in the Democratic primary voted for change.”
Reporting was contributed by Diane Cardwell, Patrick Healy, Aron Pilhofer and Raymond Hernandez.
Celebrities make donations to presidential hopefuls BY FREDERIC J. FROMMER The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — The nation’s capital may be Hollywood for ugly people, but Hollywood celebrities are still attracted to Washington politicians. A host of movie stars, directors, writers, producers and singers have contributed to presidential hopefuls for the 2008 election, with many making donations to competing candidates, an Associated Press review of campaign records has found. Actor Michael Douglas, for example, has contributed to fi ve current and former Democratic presidential candidates. As of Sept. 30, the latest reports available, he had donated the maximum $4,600 — $2,300 for the primary campaign and $2,300 for the general election — to Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama, Bill Richardson and Chris Dodd, and $1,500 to Dennis Kucinich. As in past elections, the overwhelming majority of celebrity donors contributed to Democrats, who are far more popular in the entertainment world than Republicans. The movie, television and recording industries gave $33.1 million to federal candidates and parties in 2004, with much of that coming from Hollywood, according to the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics. Those industries were more generous in 2000, contributing $38.6 to federal candidates and parties, the center found. In both election cycles, Democrats got the majority of the money 69 percent in 2004 and 64 percent in 2000. Another serial donor in the current election is Paul Newman, who gave the maximum contribution to Obama, Clinton, and Dodd, and $2,300 to Richardson. Some donors have spread the wealth around but have decided to back one candidate. Barbra Streisand gave $2,300 each to Clinton, John Edwards and Obama, and $1,000 to Dodd, but recently endorsed Clinton for president. “Madame President of the United States — it’s an extraordinary thought,” Streisand said in her endorsement statement. Steven Spielberg and Rob Reiner are two other celebrities who donated to multiple presidential candidates — four apiece — before settling on Clinton. Reiner also shot a spoof video for Clinton’s Web site. Actress Mary Steenburgen gave money to both Edwards and Clinton, but has backed Clinton, a friend for three decades, from the get-go. Steenburgen, a native of Newport, Ark., met the Clintons when Bill Clinton was in his first term as governor of Arkansas. “She’s been one of my best friends for 30 years,” Steenburgen said in a telephone interview with the AP. Steenburgen is one of several actors from the HBO comedy series “Curb Your Enthusiasm” to make donations. The show’s star and creator, Larry David, donated to both Obama and Edwards, but is supporting Obama, said Laura Streicher, David’s assistant and an associate producer on the show. Cast members Cheryl Hines, Jeff Garlin and Paul Dooley all contributed to Obama. Another actress supporting Clinton is Fran Drescher, former star of the TV show “The Nanny,” who contributed $2,300 to the campaign. In an e-mail, Drescher told the AP that she considers Clinton “the best man for the job!” “I also think that having Bill Clinton is a plus,” she said. “He is one of the greatest statesmen of our time, and I believe that he — as first man — will be a most effective diplomat. Now let’s get a little estrogen in the White House — couldn’t hurt!” Hollywood had a long romance with Bill Clinton when he was in the White House, but Obama has also benefited from the star treatment, most noticeably from a highprofile endorsement from Oprah Winfrey, who has donated $2,300 to his campaign. Dennis Haysbert, who played a fictional black president on the show “24,” is trying to elect a real one, donating $2,300 to Obama. Other black celebrity donors to Obama include Will Smith, Chris Rock, Sidney Poitier and Bradford Marsalis, each of whom donated $4,600, and Jamie Foxx, Eddie Murphy, Isaiah Washington, Tyra Banks, Morgan Freeman, Halle Berry, Angela Bassett, Forest Whitaker, and Hill Harper, each of whom gave $2,300. Harper, who plays Dr. Sheldon Hawkes on the TV show “CSI: NY,” has known Obama for 17 years, since they attended Harvard Law School together. “I know what kind of man he is, I know how intelligent he is,” Harper told the AP in a telephone interview. “He’d be the greatest leader for this country.” But Obama’s star quality transcends race. Other celebrities who have contributed to him include George Clooney, Ed Norton, Jennifer Aniston, Zach Braff, John Cleese, Leonard Nimoy and Brooke Shields ($2,300 each); and Harry Connick Jr. ($4,600). Singer Jackson Browne has contributed to Obama, but has campaigned for Edwards along with Bonnie Raitt; the two singers are co-founders of Musicians United For Safe Energy, a group that opposes the spread of nuclear power. Raitt has donated $2,300 apiece to Edwards and Kucinich. Another Edwards supporter, “Desperate Housewives” star James Denton, donated $4,600 to Edwards and has hosted a fundraiser for the former North Carolina senator. The three Democratic front-runners don’t have a lock on celebrity support. Actor Sean Penn, who contributed to both Edwards and Kucinich, endorsed the latter. And Republican presidential candidates got a few donations as well: singer Pat Boone donated to Mitt Romney and former candidate Sam Brownback, producer Jerry Bruckheimer contributed to John McCain, and Rudy Giuliani got money from Kelsey Grammer, Adam Sandler and Ben Stein.
It's election season here in the U.S. and some people are surprised that I don't care too much.
Oh, I vote and I have my opinions but I don't get too excited either way. My feelings were articulated very well by Ben Stein last Sunday on the CBS Sunday Morning Show I highly recommend this show each week I refer to it as the "good news show For those who don't know, Ben Stein played the teacher in the movie "Ferris Beuller's Day Off" but he has quite an interesting political history.
Here is his commentary...
Well, it's the New Year, and we've had the Iowa caucuses. Congratulations Governor Huckabee. Congratulations Senator Obama. And congratulations to all of the men and women who worked so hard in the Hawkeye State.
But, I have some bad news. Every single Presidential candidate is promising that he or she will make our lives better if we elect him or her to the White House. He or she will give us change, offer us hope, make our breath sweeter, make us more prosperous, more productive, happier, better educated, and healthier if we cast our votes for him or her. It's a fun show but inside The White House, there is no Santa Claus.
Presidents simply cannot change much for most of us. For the huge majority of Americans, how much we earn, how healthy we are, how well our kids are educated-is up to us, not the federal government.
No government program will make us middle class or rich if we don't get educated in some way and work hard. No government program will make us healthy if we eat too much or smoke or don't get exercise.
No one in the White House will make our kids put down the video games and do their homework. The government cannot provide a lavish retirement for us if we don't save and invest well.
Oh, and all of that money the candidates promise to spend? That's YOUR money, not their money they're spending.
In the free society, what we are and who we are depends on us, except for the very most poor among us-where the government can indeed make a difference.
But for the huge bulk of us, no matter what any Republican or any Democrat promises, it's up to the people in our house, not The White House.
Barack can talk about "real change" but the only meaningful change comes from within. Huckabee can talk about being holier than we were, but that has to start with us.
Politicians really cannot change much unless they start or stop wars.
For most of us, what the politicians say is just side show barking.
When the circus leaves town, we have to get back to the basics: work, save, and teach your children well. And enjoy the political show, but know that it's just show business, not real business
Shadow, where did you get this article. It is beyond excellent and with absolute truth. But why is it that most people fall for the BS that comes from the mouths of politicians? I guess that most have fallen victim to the rhetoric of fear tactics and that we can't think for ourselves. Perhaps we have become a society of greed and want and being oblivious to the important things in life that will shape our world. Or perhaps is it just the media that just portrays us that way and we believe it?
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
E.J. Dionne Attention must be paid to white working class E.J. Dionne is a nationally syndicated columnist.
This is a good time to put in a word for the white working class. For days, the Democratic campaign for president was mired in a discussion, started by Hillary Clinton, about Martin Luther King’s role in winning civil rights laws. There was also much talk of the crucial part women played in the New Hampshire primary. Clinton and Barack Obama were both so concerned about the racial detour that during the debate in Las Vegas, they sounded like penitent schoolchildren apologizing for a playground brawl. Still, there will be inexorable pressure on both candidates to use identity politics for their own purposes. Gender solidarity was important to Clinton’s campaign-saving victory in New Hampshire, and it could help her again. African-American support will be valuable to Obama, especially in the Democrats’ South Carolina primary on Jan. 26. But the long term is another matter. To build a majority this fall and make history, either of these candidates will need a lot of help from a group that has its own reasons to be discontented: the white working class. “Working class” seems an antique term, but it still exists, more now in the service industries than in manufacturing. Demographers often use education levels as a surrogate for class position, and the last three decades have not been kind to Americans who are not college graduates. For white male high school grads, average wages stood at $18.44 an hour in 1979. They dropped to $16.06 an hour in 1995. There was then a brief upturn — wages for such men hit $17.49 in 2002 — but by 2006, their earnings had fallen to $17.31 an hour. (These numbers are in constant 2006 dollars.) White female high school graduates have gained ground, but their wages have recently stagnated too. In 1979, such women earned $11.75 an hour. Their wages peaked at $13.42 in 2003, but dropped to $13.08 in 2006. Similar patterns, at somewhat higher wage levels, are visible over the years for men and women who attended college but didn’t graduate. Family incomes fared a bit better than these numbers would suggest, but for a reason. “To the extent that white working-class incomes went up, it was because women were working more weeks per year and more hours per week,” said Jared Bernstein, a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute who helped me assemble all of these figures. The need to boost household incomes through more work by both men and women adds stress on families whose breadwinners enjoy little job flexibility. When Bernstein spoke with me on Thursday, he was working at home, anticipating that he might have to pick his children up from school early because of a snowstorm. It’s not a freedom all workers have. “If I were a cashier at a department store, I probably couldn’t do that,” he said. Both Clinton and Obama know all this. So does John Edwards, who deserves credit for pushing his competitors to address class issues and whose policies — and “son of a mill worker” speeches — are aimed directly at working-class voters. A little-noticed part of Clinton’s stump speech demands that more “respect” be given to Americans who will not attend college. “More young people do not go to college than do,” she says. “In fact, it’s close to 60 percent that do not. What are we doing for those 60 percent hardworking, motivated young Americans? I don’t think we’re paying enough attention to them.” She’s got that right. Obama knows that Clinton has had an edge on him so far among white workingclass Democrats, and he has long preached that social reform transcends race and ethnicity. “These days, what ails workingclass and middle-class blacks and Latinos is not fundamentally different from what ails their white counterparts,” he wrote in “The Audacity of Hope,” his 2006 book. “And what would help minority workers are the same things that would help white workers.” But these themes have been garbled, obscured and distorted by the recent distractions. “We’re not going to win on identity politics,” said Rep. Artur Davis, an African-American Democrat from Alabama whose words should be chiseled on the walls of both campaigns’ headquarters. “The Republican Party is sitting there salivating at the prospects of a battle between white females and blacks.” And the white working class, male and female alike, will wonder what stake they have in the fight. Dr. King, who said that black and white workers were “equally oppressed,” and had “mutual aspirations for a fairer share,” would not have it this way.
The more education you have the less physical work you do and the more money you make.....hence the need for more people to perform those "other" jobs.....non-political jobs.....
To all those young folks "I dont work this hard so you dont have to. I work this hard so you will learn to work this hard."
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Logged
