Any doubts that union leaders might have had about Mr. Obama dissolved several weeks ago when, in announcing a new Task Force on the Middle Class, he said: ''I do not view the labor movement as part of the problem. To me, it's part of the solution. You cannot have a strong middle class without a strong labor movement.'' — NYT, March 2The New York Times is of course taking a rather rosy view here — certainly a lot of people are not thrilled about the UAW givebacks, and it's still not really clear just how hard Obama will push on EFCA, but I think in general he's a bit more conscious of labor issues than he's sometimes given credit for.
« Older Deepleap is a word game.... | Can Detroit be saved? Its futu... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Now...
Back during the primaries when Jessie Jackson was caught on alive mic saving he wanted to castrate Obama it was a statement in reference to how Obama has been/was pretty non-committal towards issues dealing with people who are poor (as opposed to middle class). I know Jackson catches a lot of flack here, some of it well deserved, but I look at the work he did with MLK, and on his own afterwords (he was on the balcony when King was shot) and I cut him a lot of slack.
I totally understand why Jackson didn't make it out of the primaries when he ran, and if I was voting age at the time I prolly woud not have voted for him in the primary. But, there just is not enough national politicians actively engaged in this issue, Edwards talked a good talk this time around but in ways was a Johnny-come-lately (ha), and like Spitzer let his dick get in the way of what could have been a great policy career.
Poverty issues are not sexy enough for national politics or national media attention nowadays.
posted by edgeways at 12:10 AM on April 4 [1 favorite]