Obama: economic uncertainty demands leader with constant principles

[FrenchieCat]

“In this time of economic anxiety and uncertainty, what this country needs most is a President who says what he means and means what he says; a president who won’t just do what’s right when the politics are easy, but when the politics are hard; a President who’s not just in it to win it; but in it for you,” Obama said in a speech delivered at Furman University in Greenville.

“This is exactly the kind of politics we can’t afford right now,” Obama said. “Not when the stakes are this high. Not when the economy is this fragile. Not when so many banks are foreclosing on people’s dreams. We can’t afford a President whose positions change with the politics of the moment, we need a President who knows that being ready on day one means getting it right from day one.”
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/01/obama_economic_unceertainty_de.html

[maddiejoan]

1. He's really starting to come off badly.

[babylonsister]

4. Pffft! nt

[maddiejoan]

10. Sorry

It must hurt you.

I feel your pain.

[MethuenProgressive]

42. So Obama's endorsing Hillary? Wait, he'll flip flop soon...

And endorse Ronnie Reagan...

[avaistheone1]

2. Over 30 top economists endorse John Edwards for president

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4177894





More Than 30 Leading Economists Endorse John Edwards For President


Economists pick Edwards because he will fight for sustained growth, full employment and an end to poverty

Chapel Hill, North Carolina – Today, the John Edwards for President campaign announced that more than 30 leading U.S. economists have endorsed John Edwards for president. "Economists for John Edwards" includes such notable scholars as James K. Galbraith from the University of Texas at Austin; Deirdre McCloskey from the University of Illinois at Chicago; Thomas Palley, founder of the Economics for Democratic & Open Societies Project; Clyde Prestowitz, president of the Economic Strategies Institute; Harley Shaiken from the University of California, Berkeley; and Edward Wolff from New York University.

"I'm proud to endorse John Edwards and his campaign to build One America.," said James Galbraith, the Lloyd M. Bentsen, Jr. Chair in Government/Business Relations at the LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas at Austin. "Edwards understands that in order for America to prosper, our economy needs to reward work as well as wealth – and he's proposed detailed and comprehensive policies to address the growing income gap, the health care crisis, job loss and the other critical social issues facing our nation."

"I am honored to have earned the support of this distinguished group of economists," said Senator Edwards. "Today, families across the country are working harder than ever, but struggling to make ends meet. To help middle-class families get ahead, we need a president who will fight for universal health care, smarter trade policies and a new energy economy."

In their endorsement of Edwards, the "Economists for Edwards" signed on to the following statement:

"As professional economists, we support John Edwards for President of the United States in 2008 because we believe that John Edwards has best demonstrated the capacity and the policies to be the next president of the United States.

"We support John Edwards because we believe his campaign is the single best expression of progressive political values in American politics today.

"We support John Edwards because we believe that as president he will best wage the hard fight that lies ahead for the principles and programs we endorse.

"We support John Edwards because as economists, we seek effective public policy aimed at sustained growth, full employment, an end to poverty, and progress toward solving the major social and environmental problems associated with health care, education, trade, taxation and climate change.

"John Edwards' approach to these issues has been uniquely serious, honest, and far-reaching. We urge all Americans – and particularly the Democratic voters of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina - to join us in supporting John Edwards for president."

A complete list of the members of "Economists for Edwards" is included below.

Economists for Edwards
Note that institutional affiliations are for identification purposes only.

Gar Alperovitz
Lionel R. Bauman Professor of Political Economy
University of Maryland-College Park

Lourdes Beneria
Professor of City and Regional Planning
Cornell University

Michael A. Bernstein
Provost
Tulane University

Martha Campbell
Associate Professor, Economics
SUNY Potsdam

Manuel Castells
Chair Professor of Communication Technology and Society
University of Southern California, and
Distinguished Visiting Professor of Science and Technology
MIT

Jane D'Arista
Former staff economist
U.S. House of Representatives

William Darity, Jr.
Arts & Sciences Professor of Public Policy Studies
Professor of African and Africa-American Studies and Economics
Duke University

Paul Davidson
Editor, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics
Bernard Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis
The New School University

Gerald Epstein
Professor of Economics
University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Susan F. Feiner
Director of Women's Studies
Professor of Economics
University of Southern Maine

James K. Galbraith
Lloyd M. Bentsen, Jr. Chair in Government/Business Relations
LBJ School of Public Affairs
The University of Texas at Austin, and
Senior Scholar, Levy Economics Institute

Richard Garrett
Associate Professor of Economics
Division of Accounting and Business Management
Marymount Manhattan College

Mary King
Professor of Economics
Portland State University

Jan Kregel
Visiting Distinguished Research Professor of Economics
The University of Missouri - Kansas City

Peter Hans Matthews
Department of Economics
Middlebury College
Middlebury, Vermont 05753

Deirdre McCloskey
Professor of Economics
University of Illinois at Chicago

Richard McIntyre
Honors Program Director and Professor of Economics
University of Rhode Island.

Thomas Michl
Professor of Economics
Colgate University

David Miller
Assistant Professor of Economics
University of California, San Diego (UCSD)

John Miller
Professor of Economics
Wheaton College

Tracy Mott
Professor of Economics
University of Colorado at Boulder

Thomas Palley
Founder
Economics for Democratic & Open Societies Project

Dimitri Papadimitriou
President
Levy Economics Institute
Bard College

Chip Poirot
Associate Professor of Economics
Department of Social Sciences
Shawnee State University

Robert Pollin
Professor of Economics and Director,
Political Economy Research Institute (PERI)
University of Massachusetts-Amherst

Robert Prasch
Associate Professor of Economics
Middlebury College

Clyde Prestowitz
President
Economic Strategies Institute

Bruce Roberts
Professor of Economics
University of Southern Maine

J. Barkley Rosser
Professor of Economics
James Madison University

Harley Shaiken
Class of 1930 Professor
Graduate School of Education and Department of Geography
University of California, Berkeley

Nina Shapiro
Professor and Chair
Department of Economics and Finance,
Saint Peter's College

Edward Wolff
Professor of Economics
New York University

Martin Wolfson
Professor of Economics and Policy Studies
University of Notre Dame

L. Randall Wray
Research Director
Center for Full Employment and Price Stability
Department of Economics
University of Missouri-Kansas City, and
Senior Scholar, Levy Economics Institute



http://www.johnedwards.com/news/press-releases/20080102... /




With thanks for lisainmilo for orginally posting this at DU.

[babylonsister]

8. Good. May the best person win. FWIW, I love Elizabeth. nt

[babylonsister]

3. Principles? Sheesh! I adore him for even mentioning principles! No one

else has convinced me. And he's right; the stakes are so damned high. I really believe in this man.

[cooolandrew]

14. Especially when he turned down high paid jobs to do organising he puts people first in that respect.

[BenDavid]

5. Obama has lost his way. No Obama what you need is a person

that knows the economic situation from top to bottom and understands how proposing something just for the sake of proposing is bad because you have no idea if this will be of benefit to those you want to help more or cause more hardships for them.....I am sure that HRC when she proposes an economic plan is thought through from top to bottom and the benefit will be those that really need it...I would venture to say that with Robert Rueben on board with his support and Gene Sperling her economic plan will benefit all those you claim to want to help....

I would take a clinton economic plan over one you draw up anytime......

[babylonsister]

16. BenDavid, here's a brainfart: on the economy: tell me about how you hate this:

Obamas Stimulus package is head of the class A- (Edwards B-, Clinton C-+, repugs all fail)

Edited on Wed Jan-23-08 11:13 AM by Bleachers7
Once again, Obama is the leader.

<snip>
Barack Obama: A-minus. I criticized his previous tax plan, but Obama is at the head of the class with an intelligently designed, $120 billion stimulus plan. He would speed a $250 tax credit to most workers, followed by another $250, triggered automatically, if the economy continues on its sour path. Obama would direct a similar rebate to low- and middle-income seniors, who are also apt to spend and could get checks quickly. One demerit: Obama omits any increase in food stamp benefits, which Moody's estimates would have the greatest bang for the buck, $1.73 for every dollar spent.

John Edwards: B-minus. Edwards gets points for handing in his paper early -- in December, he issued a $25 billion stimulus proposal (plus $75 billion more if needed), including important help to states to avoid cutting Medicaid rolls. But like Hillary Clinton (see below), he would spend too much money on programs -- investing in "green collar" jobs, for instance -- with too long a lag time to make them an effective stimulus. Edwards's grade goes down because he also hasn't explained how the $75 billion would be spent.

Hillary Clinton: C-plus. Clinton, too, raised the issue early, then turned in a faulty first draft with a $70 billion stimulus plan that didn't provide much immediate stimulation. It included a $25 billion increase in the program to help low-income Americans with heating costs -- an excessive amount (the current program is under $3 billion) that probably wouldn't kick in until next winter. Even worse was her housing plan, including a five-year freeze on subprime mortgage rates that could produce higher interest rates and reduce liquidity.

<snip>

And the pukes:
John McCain: D-plus. The senator should have his plan sent back with "Did you read this assignment?" scrawled in red ink. There's a respectable argument that stimulus isn't needed, wouldn't be effective and could be counterproductive. But the normally straight-talking McCain doesn't make it. Instead, he proposes permanent tax cuts -- cutting corporate rates, increasing investment breaks, eliminating the alternative minimum tax -- masquerading as a stimulus plan.

Mitt Romney: D. Romney's plan is way too big ($233 billion) and badly constructed (most of the stimulus goes to business breaks, his individual tax credits don't go to those who need them most, and his huge, long-term tax cuts would harm growth if not paid for). You don't have to be a Harvard Business School grad to understand that encouraging savings is not stimulative.

Mike Huckabee: D-minus. Huckabee understands economic anxiety better than economic principles. The only way his sketchy proposal could stimulate the economy is by scaring Americans into consuming now, before his Fair Tax takes effect.

Rudy Giuliani: Incomplete. :rofl: His position is too internally contradictory to grade. The former New York mayor told ABC's George Stephanopolous that "permanent reductions have a bigger impact in stimulating an economy," then said of the Bush plan, which has no permanent cuts, "If it stays where it is, it's a good idea."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

[MilesColtrane]

6. Sounds exactly like Bush in this respect.

Don't get me wrong.

I know that Obama would be infinitely better than the brain damaged Cheney puppet in the WH now.
I'll vote for him with no qualms if he's the nominee.

However, this statement struck me as just so Bushesque that I had to comment.

When taken with his recent words about Reagan, it just leaves me with a nasty, acidic taste in the mouth.

[Hobarticus]

11. Zactly my first take...

[rodeodance]

13. Obama is Channeling Bush--WHOW

[babylonsister]

19. You lie and disappoint me. But you know that. nt

[rodeodance]

21. No lie and please do NOT accuse me that. Have you not heard Bush say I mean

what I say and say what I mean?

[babylonsister]

23. OK. Provide a link between * and Obama. Then we'll talk. nt

[rodeodance]

27. You can do your own research. Good night

[babylonsister]

29. That's what I figured, always. nt

[rodeodance]

22. Will you tell the 3 posters above me that they lie also???

[babylonsister]

18. Don't get me wrong, but you are ignorant, even being on DU.

Learn it. Try to find the truth, if you are capable. Search for the truth.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4179638&mesg_id=4179853

[MilesColtrane]

24. Sorry babs..

but Juniors' rhetoric for the past seven years has always been about how steadfast he's been. He's the 'decider' don't you know.
He's made the point that he's not going to be swayed by popular opinion.

"Hard work bein' "the decider".

I don't want to hear that noise from our side.

I'd rather hear someone disavowing the craptaculer attempt to garner the specious swing voters and lay it on the line!

[babylonsister]

28. Then you missed the link I provided. Who do you support, big guy?

Who or what do you want to hear? Truth? Rhetoric? Bill Clinton?? I don't.

[MilesColtrane]

31. I support John Edwards...

...in the interest of full disclosure.

To get back to Obama, again, I'll pull the lever for your guy when it comes down to it.


But, this kind of pandering will not be ignored until then.

[babylonsister]

33. Good luck with Edwards. And as far as pandering, I'm not

privy to what you think you know about that and Obama. Clue me in one day.
Bedtime for Bonzo here. Bon soir.

[MilesColtrane]

35. As far as Obama pandering: res ipsa loquitur

As far as your being a nice sounding board for my noisy ass: Thank you.

You are...

So fine so young
Tell me I'm the only one

[sandnsea]

7. That's right

Hillary keeps making it personal, he needs to keep taking it back to the people. Excellent!!

[rodeodance]

9. Go gawd--NOW is lifting from BUSH speeches: "who says what he means and means what he says;"!!

[sandnsea]

38. Oh brother, that's women's empowerment lingo

Every woman who has had any kind of assertiveness training learns that on day one.

[rodeodance]

12. "At least 5 times, the former state senator went on the record as having pushed the wrong button."

yup---not switching with the political winds!

Forum Name General Discussion: Primaries
Topic subject "At least 5 times, the former state senator went on the record as having pushed the wrong button."
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4178177#4179201
4179201, "At least 5 times, the former state senator went on the record as having pushed the wrong button."
Posted by rodeodance on Wed Jan-23-08 11:35 PM



http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-obamavotes24jan24,0,4956975,full.story?coll=la-home-center

Obama says he bungled some Illinois votes

Charles Rex Arbogast / Associated Press
Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., pauses as he campaigns in Dillion, S.C., Wednesday.
At least 5 times, the former state senator went on the record as having pushed the wrong button.
By Peter Wallsten, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
5:08 PM PST, January 23, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Barack Obama angered fellow Democrats in the Illinois Senate when he voted to strip millions of dollars from a child welfare office on Chicago's West Side. But Obama had a ready explanation: He goofed.

"I was not aware that I had voted no," he said that day in June 2002, a
That misfire was not an isolated case for the young former civil-rights attorney first elected to the state Senate in 1996. At least five times during his eight years in state office, Obama cast a vote and then said he had hit the wrong button, according to transcripts of the proceedings.

The rules allow Illinois lawmakers to clear up a mishap if they suffered from a momentary case of stumbly fingers or a lapse in attention.

But some lawmakers say the unusual practice also offers a relatively painless way to placate both sides of a difficult issue. Even if a lawmaker admits an error, the actual vote stands and the official record merely shows the senator's "intent."

[FrenchieCat]

17. at least he didn't set back health care reform 20 years!

[rodeodance]

20. What do mean by that comment?

[ThatPoetGuy]

26. Not yet, anyway.

Except in the rhetorical battles. His rhetoric has already convinced lots of DUers that universal health care is a bad thing.

[cooolandrew]

15. Virtually everything the candidates say are corny. They said change every election since US began.

[ThatPoetGuy]

25. Stay the course.

Edwards and Hillary are flip-floppers.

Obama is the new Bush!

[babylonsister]

30. I still don't know who you support; I only know who you dislike, which says a

whole lot about you. :think:

[ThatPoetGuy]

32. I support Edwards, first.

And then I'll take Hillary over Obama.

To me, the most important issues are health care, labor, and LGBT. Edwards and Hillary are both way ahead of Obama, in my book. I'll be very happy with Edwards, pretty happy with Hillary, and I'll be despondent if we get Obama.

It's the issues that matter to me, not the candidates. And Obama is the worst on the issues.

Every week Obama says things that harm the causes I'm passionate about. When he attacks universal health care, he harms people I love. When he tries to stifle the ability of labor unions to get heard in the media, he harms people I love. When he refuses to condemn churches that go out and tell teenagers that their homosexuality is evil, then he harms people I love.

So yeah, you've picked up that I dislike Obama. I feel about him the same way I'd feel about someone who announced his intention to beat my brother with a baseball bat.

I've watched my friends and family get hurt by seven years of the Bush administration. Now here we have a guy who is promising to be almost as bad, on every issue that affects me and my family.

And it sickens me that the one Democratic candidate who promises to bring suffering and despair to American families is the one who talks about "Hope."

[babylonsister]

34. Thank you for sharing. I will get back to you, but not tonight. nt

[OHdem10]

36. Said just like Bush. Who is advising Obama??????

We have a Moral Leader with Certainty now.

[FrenchieCat]

39. desperate much? Bush actually "owns" words?

Considering how he speaks, who would have thunk it! :wow:

[Bluebear]

37. "a President who says what he means and means what he says" - ack sounds like Bush!

Yikes.

[muyojoe]

40. HE SOUNDS LIKE BUSH TO ME TO

We need someone who will make up a rounded cabinet. They will let their qualified cabinet of intelligent people argue it out, and then the president will decide. No one can be steadfast all the time about everything, the world and situations change. I realize that being too easily swayed is bad, but being too steadfast is no better. We've had 7 years of that so far.

[jackson_dem]

41. Present.