Four years ago, candidate Obama promised to break out his walking shoes and join the picket line if anyone threatened the collective bargaining rights of workers.
He forgot that promise when Governor Scott Walker stripped most public sector workers of their collective bargaining rights two years ago. He did not join the people who protested Act 10 in Madison.
And most people understand his unwillingness to inject himself into the Chicago teachers’ strike (which does not threaten collective bargaining rights).
But now he gets another chance in Wisconsin! A judge says the law is unconstitutional. President Obama taught constitutional law. What does he think? Is it fair to preserve the rights of firefighters and police, but not teachers and nurses?
What will President Obama do? This is not a battle between two allies.
Speak up, Mr. President, please.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I doubt that he will. Politicians lose their backbones in an election year.
Obama take a stand. I’m rolling on the floor and I’m not laughing.
I’ll be surprised. Obama may have taught constitutional law, but that doesn’t mean either: (a) he “believes” or has any commitment to the US Constitution, or (b) he views whatever commitment he has to the constitution as superior to his political needs.
Under part (a), just look at Obama’s horrific expansion of executive powers that began with the Bush administration after 9/11–The NDAA (recently overturned) would gut the 4th and 5th Amendment protections; he has become “the assassin in chief” with his drone strikes, even killing an American (connected to Al Qaeda) using a drone strike without following the due process rights guaranteed to all Americans; and he maintains Guantanamo Bay, despite his promises to close the facility. Are these the actions of a man who has a strong moral commitment to the spirit and letter of the Constitution? I can’t imagine anyone advocating these actions on one of his law school exams and getting a passing grade.
Why would he do this? Well we now come to (b): political expedience. I recently came across an opinion (sorry, no reference handy) arguing that above all things–even in terms of his philosophy of law–Obama is a thoroughgoing instrumentalist; in other words, for Obama the ends usually justify the means. So, how he understands the law, how he chooses to act, ultimately is based on a calculation of what he wants. He is a man of weak principles. A moral coward. Since he wants to be president, he will determine the set of actions that will give him the best odds of winning; if that requires taking stands that reduce the ability of the GOP to attack his positions as “soft” or terrorists or “weak” on union demands, the he’ll do that.
People used to compare Obama to Start Trek’s hyperlogical Mr. Spock. They got what they wanted–An amoral political calculating machine.
So will he join the CTU picket line like Green candidate Jill Stein did, or weigh in for the unions on Act 10? I’ll hope otherwise, but I won’t hold my breath until I can see how it will guarantee him the win in November.
M&S,
Agree with your analysis of Obomber (yes, I use derogatory names for those who deserve it, think Rheeject, so call me whatever you want, I’m sure some of my students have called me worse-ha ha).
Your stated “even killing an American (connected to Al Qaeda)” No need to have mentioned the “al Qaeda” part. I was an extrajudicial killing-murder and no two ways about it. But it’s a bit more complicated than supposedly taking out a “terrorist sympathizer”. You see Al Awlaki’s father attempted to find out through the courts, all the way up to the supremos, the justification for his son’s listing on a “kill” list. Well the government argued that the program was so secret that they couldn’t even deny nor acknowledge that it existed. And the supremos bought it hook line and sinker, while throwing out the case stating that the father had no “standing”, that his son had to be the one to challenge the governments position. Right, I’m going to come out of hiding to challenge the government that wants to kill me position. We know what happened to many (and quite a number who were proven to not be “terrorists”) whom the government rounded up prior-extraordinary rendition, torture, even death. For excellent documentation look up Glen Greenwald’s work in this area.
Now, the little known fact is that after killing Al Awlaki, two weeks later our government also killed his sixteen, yes sixteen, year old son in the same fashion (along with his son’s sixteen year old cousin)-death from the sky. Why would they kill a sixteen year old? Well guess who would have had “standing” in the courts to sue the government over the extra-judicial killing of his father? Gotta make sure you cover all your bases. Sick, just plain sick and wrong, just plain wrong. Obama is worse than a mob Don ordering a hit.
Not “I was” but “it was”
I just mentioned al Quaeda because I forgot Al Awlaki’s name and was too rushed to search for it; I tried to make it clear his affiliation didn’t matter by referring to “all” Americans later in the sentence. And I certainly agree with everything else you wrote.
He is a man of weak principles. A moral coward. Robert Redford in 2009 at Sun Dance said he was weak. I’ve come to agree with him.
Doesn’t it seem our President says one thing and does another? It’s becoming quite clear he is no friend to teachers. “Actions speak louder than words.”. Even if President Obama responded, I wouldn’t believe a word he says until he acted.
I disapprove of Obama because he does not do what he says he will do. I disapporve of Romney because I think he will do exactly what he says he will do.
In the President’s defense, it’s not easy to get to the mall when you have a lengthy to-do list from Bill Gates, and even then, comfortable shoes are tough to find.
But it’s the “to-do list” that’s the problem. We elected the man to act as the chief executive for the nation; not be Bill Gates’s (or Wall Street’s) toady.
Which is why someone Diane blogged about a while back helpfully sent Obama a pair of comfy shoes.
Perhaps they don’t fit.
In the year-and-half since Act 10 was introduced hundreds of thousands have taken to the streets to protest, tens of thousands have volunteered in two rounds of recall elections, hundreds continue to protest daily at the Solidarity Singalong (and are being issued citations for singing, holding signs and carrying songbooks), tens of thousands are mobilizing for the November election, citizens are documenting and speaking out on each and every piece of legislation as never before. Despite all this activity, all these people working “to be the change we have waited for,”
Obama has largely been absent, at best mumbling words of half-hearted support, at worst actively supporting policies and practices much like Scott Walker’s (such as applauding the firing of teachers in Rhode Island, working to expand charters and testing and the abuse of test scores to evaluate students, teachers, schools and districts). My guess is that Obama will continue to be missing in action, and many of us in Wisconsin have ceased to care about that.
My guess is that Obama will continue to be missing in action, and many of us in Wisconsin have ceased to care about that. Exactly.
The President is too busy doubling down on NCLB.
The least frequent topic of conversation that I have heard on the strike lines and daily rallies these past ten days is Obama. The butt of a dismissive joke now and then but rarely the subject of serious discussion.
As for Rahm and CPS’s challenge to collective bargaining. This is an issue in Chicago, where Senate Bill 7, bought and paid for by corporate reformers like Jonah Edelman’s Stand for Children, the Democratic Party and promoted as a national model by the leadership of the two state teacher unions (and their national counterparts) undermined collective bargaining by creating a higher threshold for strike authorization and changes to what are subjects of permissive and mandatory bargaining.
I thank you for bringing up the plight of my state, but, no-he won’t confront Walker or the unconstitutional nature of Act 10. The script of the campaign has been laid out in the Democratic Party’s convention. Wisconsin was brought up by Tammy Baldwin (4 minute-long speech) who said that Walker/Tommy Thompson/Paul Ryan do not represent Wisconsin. The truth is that a good percentage of regular voters buy everything the TeaPublicans are saying in WI. Then the Wisconsin protest footage was also used briefly in a video at the DNC with the audio “we wont’ back down” playing over the top. Which tells us that our protests will be used as meaningless and manipulative propaganda. That’s all we’re going to get from D.C. I am not commenting on how anybody should vote, however, I must say it is past the time for all of us to face facts and look for remedies for education problems that exist independent of Obama and the Dems. I suggest readers learn about CTU’s organizing methods.
My intuition about what lies behind Obama’s unheard voice on the Chicago strike is the same for virtually any unheard black leader who has not actually witnessed the devastating effects of NCLB first hand: the niave belief that something is finally being done to level the playing field without a clue as to the ghettoizing effects of this policy. Test scores come in, are posted on the school systems’ web page, are noted by concerned parents who, if they can swing it, pull their kids. The key question is who is left behind in NCLB? It is amazing to watch kids who have no vested interest in doing well on a test–for myriad reasons no-one seems all that keen on addressing–bringing down a strong group of professional educators at a strong high school in just a few short years. The school cop becomes two school cops which then becomes three full-time cops and two squad cars. All the social outcasts who remain will ever know of education is an endless series of worksheet drills punctuated by random acts of violence.. What must college look like to kids who have no one in their family to describe it? I’ve witnessed the level of desperation that made our leaders grasp at the straw of NCLB, but the reality of it has been a sad, sad spectacle of precisely the kind of segregation of our most vulnerable populations–the population that needed rescuing! All people hear is union rights and teacher salary concerns. Until the president understands the real effects on the very people he sought to help through community organizing, we can expect the niave faith in testing to persist. Concrete, measurable, and very effective at isolating groups of people we had once hoped to integrate into American society.
Excellent comment! Thanks!
Thought. Teachers and Nurses–on one hand; Police and Firefighters on the other. It can’ be just that one side is more “essential”–so why treat them differently. Well…one is traditionally female and the other…traditionally very macho. I do catch on slowly.
Actually, the CTU strike was in part about collective bargaining. I have no idea why this was not more public, but the BoE was trying to include a paragraph in the new contract that would have stripped the CTU of their collective bargaining rights. You can view it in this PDF on the very last page:
Click to access Contract_Bargaining_Update_8_22_2012.pdf
I was told that every time the CTU tried to get it removed from the contract, they were told that was not an option. Finally, we got word towards the end of last week that the BoE finally removed the paragraph. That was a HUGE victory and one many will not even know about.
And the press, et.al., were questioning the time CTU requested to
read the proposal!
“Don’t label a school as failing one day and then throw your hands up and walk away from it the next. Don’t tell us that the only way to teach a child is to spend too much of a year preparing him to fill out a few bubbles in a standardized test…You didn’t devote your lives to testing. You devoted it to teaching, and teaching is what you should be allowed to do.” — Candidate Barack Obama, Summer 2007
WHAT happened to that point-of-view?
I’m not sure…I see some possibilities…
1. He doesn’t understand that his policies are hurting public education not helping.
2. He has sold out for campaign donations and business interests.
3. He’s not strong enough to stand up against the 1%.
4. He’s misinformed or misled by his advisors and doesn’t see our side of the story.