Expect more endorsements coming to Obama now that he has a majority of the pledged delegates, especially from the so-called Pelosi Club (if they have the guts to stand up to angry Hillary and her neo-McCarthyite sexism squad, that is). The first post-pledged delegate majority superdelegate is Rep. Joe Courtney of Connecticut.
Today the United Mine Workers union, who are very strong in Appalachian coal-country, endorsed Obama after a unanimous vote, saying:
Senator Obama shares the values of UMWA members and our families. He understands and will fight for the needs our members have today and the hopes our members have for a secure future for themselves and their families.
You don't get more white and working clas than that. It is too bad they didn't endorse until after the last Appalachian state went to Hillary. Oh well. The United Mine Workers were the second to last previously pro-Edwards union to go to Obama, now only one remains: the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners.
Look at those latte-sippers.
Update: Mississippi Democratic Party chairman Wayne Dowdy has endorsed Obama.
It is only the morning still, but Obama has already picked up three superdelegates, one of which used to support Hillary, and a union endorsement.
First, New Jersey Rep. Donald Payne who had previously supported Hillary switched his support to Obama today.
Next, Oregon Rep. Peter DeFazio, previously unpledged, has endorsed Obama, releasing this statement:
Senator Obama has proven he is able to energize young Americans, independents, and even moderate Republicans to support his candidacy. I believe he represents our best hope of winning in November, and puts the needs and priorities of hard working Americans ahead of the powerful special interests that have been extraordinarily favored by the Bush-Cheney administration.
Third, we have union leader and superdelegate John Gage, whose union, the American Federation of Government Employees, also endorsed Obama today.
At this point ABC notes that Obama has overtaken Hillary in superdelegates, but their numbers are quite a bit different than all other news outlets, and I hold them in pretty low regard, so I'm going to say they are full of crap. However there are only a handful standing between Obama and Hillary, and the tipping point will likely come within the next week.
And did John Edwards vote for Obama and is he going to endorse...? You be the judge. (I'm voting for yes)
A fourth superdelegate for Obama today, this one coming from California DNC member Ed Espinoza, who released this statement:
I am endorsing Barack Obama today because throughout this process I have seen him show a judgment and character that we need in our next president. From day one he opposed the Iraq war and has a plan to end the war in a responsible way and bring our sons and daughters home. He has shown he has the character to lead our great nation, from his choice to spend his career serving people in the poorest communities in Chicago to his commitment to speaking truth to the American people, even when it isn’t politically convenient to do so. To unify the country at this time in our history we need a president who has these qualities, and that is why I am proud to endorse him today. My good friend Bill Richardson, who backed Obama some weeks ago, knows what it takes to lead and I trust his judgment in this decision as well. I look forward to working with this great movement to bring victory in November.
Obama has received the endorsements of four more superdelegates this afternoon bringing his daily total to 8, to Hillary's -1.
His latest four are congresswoman Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, New Mexico add-on Laurie Weahkee, South Carolina party vice chair Wilber Lee Jeffcoat, and California DNC member Vernon Watkins.
Not good news for Hillary.
He received a 9th for the day, DNC member Joe Johnson from Virginia!
According to the AP Obama is only .5 delegates under Hillary now, essentially tied.
And this is fun, Rasmussen is no longer going to do national polls between Obama and Hillary for the Democratic primary because inn their view "it is over". Nice. =)
Vintage Hillary. The funny thing is that this is perhaps the only time I can recall watching her speak in front of a group of people and not come off as fake as hell. I really believe her for once.
[Here is a look at the Colombia free trade deal that Bill (and Mark Penn) has been pimping himself out for, which Obama opposes, and which Hillary says she opposes, but she is also surrounded by people who are paid to support it, and she has shown she is okay with that, and she supported NAFTA in the past, and then lied about it repeatedly, so it is hard to say. Please also note that when the Colombian military breeched Ecuador's territorial sovereignty by crossing its border, Hillary responded in typical, hawkish, pro-Colombia/anti-Chavez, free market fundamentalist, just like Bush fashion:
Hugo Chavez's order yesterday to send ten battalions to the Colombian border is unwarranted and dangerous. The Colombian state has every right to defend itself against drug trafficking terrorist organizations that have kidnapped innocent civilians, including American citizens. By praising and supporting the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, Chavez is openly siding with terrorists that threaten Colombian democracy and the peace and security of the region. Rather than criticizing Colombia's actions in combating terrorist groups in the border regions, Venezuela and Ecuador should work with their neighbor to ensure that their territories no longer serve as safe havens for terrorist groups. After reviewing this situation, I am hopeful that the government of Ecuador will determine that its interests lie in closer cooperation with Colombia on this issue. Hugo Chavez must call a halt to this provocative action. As president, I will work with our partners in the region and the OAS to support democracy, promote an end to conflict, and to press Chavez to change course.
And all this because Venezuelan President Chavez bolstered border security on his side of the border. This completely one-sided, Manichean vision of the world is exactly what has cost us so dearly in foreign relations since Bush took office, and her response putting the blame solely on Chavez, accusing him of being in bed with terrorists, while painting Colombia as a model ally in the war on terror is a perfect example of Bush-style politics, as is her insistence on calling Chavez a dictator. That brand of rhetoric is unbelievably counter productive in foreign affairs, not to mention reckless and irresponsible. And now let's take a look at who these Colombian heroes of democracy are:]
If we had been born in Colombia, we would probably be dead.
That's right. As members of our respective labor unions, the fight for higher wages, better working conditions, and a secure pension could have cost us our lives.
Thirty nine trade unionists were murdered in Colombia in 2007, and they are being killed at a rate of over one per week this year.
Of the more than 2,500 murders in that nation since 1986, only 68 cases -- around 3 percent -- have resulted in convictions. However, many of these criminals were convicted in absentia -- meaning they may still be at large and continuing to terrorize workers.
Yet inexplicably, President Bush and some Members of Congress want to reward Colombia with a free trade agreement.
Not on our watch. The right to organize and bargain collectively is essential to human freedom. We believe passage of the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) would greatly diminish our nation's reputation as a leader in the fight to end human rights abuses worldwide.
Despite President Alvaro Uribe's claim that the Colombian government has cleaned up its act, signs of trouble continue to persist.
Colombia's chief federal prosecutor's office has a backlog of over 1,300 cases of murders, threats, and intimidation involving trade unionists.
Last month, the Colombian government removed a highly respected member of a three-judge panel tasked with reducing this backlog.
And Colombian intelligence officials have been linked to the paramilitaries known for carrying out these assassinations.
Are these the actions of a 'courageous ally in South America' or of a government that has something to hide?
Historic violence against trade unionists is just one of many problems with the Colombia FTA. Like the Peru FTA, an agreement we strongly opposed, the Colombia proposal is based on the flawed NAFTA-CAFTA model which led to the outsourcing of millions of high-paying American jobs and virtually eliminated the U.S. manufacturing industry.
This comes at a time when we are in recession. The economy lost 80,000 jobs in March, the third consecutive month of rising unemployment. And the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program -- a safety net for displaced workers -- remains essentially dysfunctional. Passage of the Colombia FTA would add insult to injury for American workers.
President Bush and his allies in Congress have also been claiming that the Colombia FTA is a matter of national security. We couldn't agree more.
Let's review the facts. It has already been established that Colombia is the most dangerous place in the world to be a union member. But that is just the tip of the iceberg. Violence against Afro-Colombians is rampant. The Washington Post recently reported that Colombian troops are killing farmers and passing their bodies off as rebels. And three of our nation's military contractors remain hostage there.
We believe defeating the Colombia FTA, not passing it, is in the best interest of our national security.
We commend both major Democratic presidential candidates for opposing this agreement -- a testament to the will of the American people. Their interests -- not business groups or conservative think tanks -- should dictate our trade agenda.
President Bush's unprecedented decision to unilaterally submit the Colombia FTA is a slap in the face to Democratic leaders and constitutes a retreat from the bipartisan pact on trade agreed to last year -- something we were skeptical of from the outset given the President's record.
We urge House leadership to use all the tools in its arsenal to ensure this agreement's demise.
Chairman Mike Michaud (D-ME) and Rep. Phil Hare (D-IL) are both members of the House Trade Working Group.
[I only wish more people cared about the costs of free trade abroad, which have been plainly visible for decades, instead of only caring about it when it hurt Americans in the pocketbooks. Pretty pathetic. And we wonder why the rest of the world hates us?]
Today in Oregon Obama received the endorsement of 26 state elected officials: Congressman Earl Blumenauer, State Treasurer Randall Edwards, Superintendent of Public Instruction Susan Castillo, Senate President Pro Tem Margaret Carter, Sen. Alan Bates, Sen. Floyd Prozanski, Sen. Ben Westlund, House Speaker Jeff Merkley, House Speaker Pro Tempore Diane Rosenbaum, Rep. Jeff Barker, Rep. Phil Barnhart, Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, Rep. Peter Buckley, Rep. Ben Cannon, Rep. Brian Clem, Rep. Chris Edwards, Rep. Dave Edwards, Rep. Larry Galizio, Rep. Paul Holvey, Rep. Betty Kimp, Rep. Tina Kotek, Rep. Mary Nolan, Rep. Tobias Read, Rep. Mike Schaufler, Rep. Chip Shields, and Rep. Brad Witt.
In addition to the mass endorsement, independent state senator Avel Gordly pledged to change her party affiliation from independent to Democrat after meeting Obama at a campaign rally:
He said to me, I need the help of independents like yourself, and I told him then, he could count on my support. And, let me tell you why: Barack Obama is a unifier.
In other endorsement news the Pennsylvania chapter of the National Union of Hospital and Health Care Employees, a local labor affiliate of one of Hillary's biggest supporters (AFSCME) broke ranks and backed Obama today.
Today MoveOn.org members overwhelmingly voted in favor of endorsing Barack Obama for the Democratic primary! The final tally was 70.4% to 29.6% (a 66% threshold was set for the official endorsement). The turnout blew away the turnout from a similar measure in the 2004 Democratic primary, where no one was able to meet the mere 50% threshold. Anyway, read up all about it here
Update: Obama also gained endorsements from two big labor unions previously supporting Edwards, the California SEIU and the Transport Workers Union (big in NYC especially). Also significant, this makes it all that more likely that if/when Edwards endorses a candidate, that candidate will be Barack Obama, hopefully all but sealing the nomination!
Update #2: Add the LA Times to that list. Another show of westside love.
Oh, and Hillary also got a super special big endorsement today (well, yesterday):
Yesterday a crazy, yet telling, thing happened. Ann Coulter (yes, THE Ann Coulter, this isn’t a play on names) pretty much endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. In an interview on Fox News (of course), she said that if it was a race between her and John McCain (and it will be McCain, still not sure about her), she would not only vote for Hillary, she would actively campaign for Hillary. Why you ask? Here are the highlights:
♥ She thinks Hillary is more conservative than McCain
♥ She thinks that Hillary would be stronger (more hawkish) on the war on terror
♥ She points out that McCain led the fight against torture in the Senate, while Hillary has avoided ruling torture out in all cases and has stayed on the sidelines
♥ Both Hillary and McCain supported the war from the beginning
♥ She doesn’t think Hillary will really pull troops out of Iraq anytime soon (basically the same thing that was pointed out in the debate last night, how Hillary won’t commit to a timeline, and that could lead to an indefinite commitment)
♥ She points out that at the SOTU, when Bush said “the surge is working and the terrorists are on the run” (even though it isn’t and they aren’t), Hillary enthusiastically jumped to her feet and clapped, while Obama, Kennedy and others didn’t move a muscle
♥ And later on, according to Ann, “at least the Clintons know when they’ve been caught [shamelessly] lying”
♥ Ann also said later that Hillary lies less than McCain, which I’m uncertain about, because I know she has lied and distorted the truth quite a bit in this campaign, along with Bill, but I haven’t been following the “Straight Talk Express” a whole lot, so I can’t confirm or deny it…but my gut feeling is that McCain is a more honest person, despite how wrong he is on so many issues, including the surge and the war.
Now, I never thought I’d say this, but Ann Coulter has a point, at least on many of these examples. I don’t think Hillary is more conservative than McCain, even on the war, but they are both quite hawkish, so their positions aren’t all that different. On torture, McCain has been more liberal, Hillary has been more conservative (this is one of the few things I give McCain credit for). Hillary did support the war in the beginning, until it became politically unpopular for a Democrat to do so, and as was pointed out by Obama in the debate last night, this is a big liability for the general election. I don’t think Hillary would leave troops in Iraq nearly as long as McCain, but I do think there is reason to believe she wouldn’t withdraw them nearly as far as a lot of people think. She did leap to her feet and applaud when Bush mentioned this, and I remember being disgusted and saying out loud, “why the hell is she clapping??” She is one of the most hawkish Democrats, so this shouldn’t be a surprise, and it wasn’t really a surprise for me, but it pissed me off nonetheless. I’ll post on this later perhaps, but the surge isn’t working, yet Hillary has said again and again that it is, which completely undermines the Democratic position on the surge and the war in general. And I already mentioned the lying, Hillary and Bill are liars, there is no debating that, but I think Ann may be on to something here, because generally when the media starts to call them on their lies, they stop repeating them as much and switch to a new lie, or maybe a brief period of playing nice (Bill is currently in one of these periods now), followed by new lies. Again, I’m not sure what Ann thinks that McCain has lied about, so I can’t say whether or not he is better than the Clintons at getting away with lying. My gut says not.
The primary is finally over, and now it is really time to get to work. The Republicans still think they can deceive the American people into accepting another 4-8 years of Republican disasters, so we have to keep the pressure on. Any support you can give to Obama's campaign, whether monetary or voluntary will help us keep this movement successful. The time for change is now!
