Why I'm Endorsing Barack Obama

The question I have been asking myself and others during my entire life in public policy and throughout this 2008 presidential Campaign -- the question which tens of millions of women and men have also been asking -- is how do we best bring America together in shared purpose, prosperity and, especially, equality.

Those of us who until last week worked for Senator John Edwards to become president were always fighting for something bigger than any of us and bigger than all of us. We were also part of a movement with the objective, John's objective, of lifting up all Americans.

John Edwards is not going to be president, and so what we who were helping him must do is now elect the individual who has deep in his core John's principles and vision for this country. And so today, with every passion and enthusiasm I have, I am endorsing Senator Barack Obama to be president of the United States

Barack Obama is also calling our nation to the greatness that we all want but that we're uncertain we can still achieve. Others talk about greatness and they even say all the right words, but they do not bring those words to life. Their words do not grab us by the arms and pull us along together.

Barack Obama, like John Edwards, is redefining what is possible and in so doing he's changing us, each one of us.

Many who had given up on politics are re-engaging. Many who had grown tolerant of the intolerable are now ready to demand more ­ and not just from themselves but others. And many who had given up believing that the ideals of equality, dignity and justice would ever again be as politically important as money and power, now believe again.

And this too is why I'm endorsing Senator Barack Obama.

Barack and John Edwards were different candidates, with different backgrounds and life experiences, but all these many months and really throughout their lives, they have been on a common path.

Both are focused on changing our politics, both are committed to shaking the foundation of the Washington establishment, and both are profound voices for what our country should and can be.

When I endorsed John Edwards for president, I did so because I was confident he would help lift women out of poverty and protect a woman's right to make her own decisions about if or when to have a family. I was confident that if John were in the White House, the single mother, who was working two jobs, living paycheck to paycheck, and worried about health care and child care, would have more influence than the well-healed corporate CEO armed with a team of lobbyists.

And when I endorsed John Edwards I also knew that Barack Obama shared every one of these concerns, and over the course of Barack's own campaign, the nation has come to believe in him just like I always have as well.

Senator Obama is not just prepared to lead ­ as our beloved Teddy and Caroline Kennedy have said, he is prepared to lead in a way different than we have seen for decades. Not out in front with us behind him, but rather with us beside him.

And that difference is all the difference. That difference separates just any president from a great president; and right now, we need a great president.

Barack Obama will be that great president. He will bring us all together. And together, we will change our country.

During these past many years, we have lost the sense of what we could do together, who we could be, what was possible.

That's changing.

And Barack Obama is the one changing that.

With him, greatness is again within reach.

-- Kate Michelman, Former President, NARAL Pro-Choice America

Comments

[BinBaldwin]

So you supported the Bill Clinton guilty of sexual harrassment and do not support his wife who is as much a victim as anyone ? What has Obama done for the feminist movement? He belongs to a Church that made Farrakhan their MAN of the YEAR. I suppose Islam is now a Feminist Org.

[DenverDem]

John Edwards did raise many issues important to the poor. However, for me the biggest issue that we have is one of LEADERSHIP. Real, genuine leadership. Actually, ideas are plentiful. They get proposed and they die.

The nation suffers from inspiring, motivating, visionary leadership. More than anything, that is what Obama offers.

[sarahlane]

Hi Kate. It's nice to hear your thoughts on the remaining two candidates. I met you in Iowa, I was with my ma, we were the big Edwards supporters from the great NW. I honestly can't decide which candidate out of Hillary and Obama will really champion the poor. Which candidate can I really trust to push UHC? I trusted John to work hard on those issues as POTUS, and that was a big reason I supported his candidacy. I'm still casting my vote for Edwards, because neither Obama or Hillary have proven they will fight for the least among us. If one of them starts adopting John's policies, I could change my mind.

BTW, thanks so much for being such an inspiration to ladies like me ;) We need more people like you fighting for us.

[neworleanslady68]

Thank you to the Edwards people. John Edwards kept New Orleans in the conversation. I really appreciate it.

[DietrichMoody]

I have mentioned this before, but as a male, I hope it bears repeating, I wouldn't even enforce the idea of sexism on others but I think Hillary Clinton has bred and is capable of breeding more sexism, based on precedent. Do you think Hillary realizes this irony?

Because so much of how she got from Point A to Point B, appear in my mind, to have transpired and gone like this:

"well lady - you want to be President someday? - Let's vet you and appear to abuse you for 20 years (because for a woman it has to be like this) - we will forgive your Husband, a powerful man, who appears reasonable but who publicly abuses your trust (this won't make you look too threatening)
- you need credentials of a First Lady first, (will use this as White House experience and burn you into the conscience of the People) - AND your husband was President (this will give you the other leg to stand on)- you must look like you can hold a political seat, like NY only AFTER you've lived vicariously through your Husband/Male politician (we'll put you in a place where your husband has high approval ratings) - Now you are ready and worthy of running as a viable female Presidential candidate"

Does this set a bad precedent? And some women are following along with this thinking, picking the good part - her time as Bill Clinton's wife as reason to vote for her - which by all intensive purposes is the BAD PART, her marriage, and forgetting to look at the big picture of HOW she got from Point A to Point D.

[longislandlol]

God bless you Kate...

[Thurber]

Thank you Kate, and welcome to this historic campaign.

[dantheman]

The Obama haters are so full of hate and anger that I sometimes wonder if they care about America at all. Here we have a candidate who's support is mostly based on the grass roots movement, and the haters attack him without mercy. It's like these cretins want to silence the grass roots. You hear us knockin? We won't be denied.

The American People/Obama 2008!

[Obamagrl]

Michelman:

"Senator Obama...is prepared to lead in a way different than we have seen for decades. Not out in front with us behind him, but rather with us beside him...And that difference is all the difference­."

Exactly. What separates Obama is the willingness to lead for others--with the firm courage of his convictions.

Fareed Zakaria has an excellent piece in today's Newsweek on the ability to lead from a full commitment to one's convictions--rather than a fear of one's own beliefs.

Even more direct and to the point is "Running Scared", a post from the political psychology blog "Head of State" headofstate.blogspot.comm) Excerpt:

"Fear is playing a role in this year Democratic contest--but not the role that it has played in the recent past.

Clinton has constructed her career as an accommodation between her genuine reformist impulses, and a gradual wearing away of these that is comprised of both the wisdom of experience, and political calculation. Thus far, she has managed to do so while still presenting herself as a reformer, with the main concern being moderating the (largely inaccurate) perception of her as a "radical" by the swift-boating far right.

Given this, I think that Clinton never anticipated a candidate who would grasp the mantle of reform more surely than she would.

As a result, she has no real way to construct a solid position--embrace experience, and you lose the power than change holds this season. Embrace change, and you appear to be an imitator. Do both, and it appears to be a clever attempt to have both--too clearly tactical."

-From "Running Scared", headofstate.blogspot.com

[MR]

"Not out in front with us behind him, but rather with us beside him."

Should I send him my number so he can call me when he has to make a decision or should I just set a place setting for him at the table?

It seems the one thing Obama supporters have in common is rhetoric based on the biggest collection of nothing I have ever seen. And reading the reasons for those suporting him,they sound collectively like people wandering around in a desert thinking they see a mirage. If Clinton comes away winning the lions share of delegates on Tues its going to be interesting to see if these "inspired" souls suddenly turn mean and nasty as they have after every Obama loss. I predict they will.

[ProudNeoCon]

" was confident that if John were in the White House, the single mother, who was working two jobs, living paycheck to paycheck, and worried about health care and child care, would have more influence than the well-healed corporate CEO armed with a team of lobbyists.
"
Are you that naive? Who do you think donates most of the money to Edwards and Obama? Single mother?... Please...

[Rebelfriend]

As a dedicated John Edwards supporter who max'd out for him, who, with my son, helped raise about $100,000 for him, and who spent relentless hours on the internet hoping that Americans would realize what a great opportunity we had to have a truly great President in John Edwards, I am numb with rage and pain over his loss. This was the man who forced the others to address the issues. He led the way, and Clinton and Obama followed. But the corporate-­controlled mainstream media, ignored this brilliant, good man, did not tell people what he was saying -- his ideas, his vision -- the TRUE CANDIDATE OF REAL CHANGE -- but rather focused Americans on the glamour of having the first black or woman president.

The color of a person's skin, or their gender should NEVER be the basis on which we select our President and the leader of the free world.

For months, Obama followed Edwards, as has Clinton, frequently using the same words and phrases Edwards had used for many, many months. But the media covered Obama and Clinton -- relentlessly. And they purposely ignored the man who would do for our country what we needed so desperately: to break the grip of the corporations on our government and put the welfare of our nation and our people ahead of corporate greed.

I think Obama is a glamourous, charismatic candidate, but I do not trust that he has the strength, the courage, the vision, or the brave heart John Edwards would have provided.

Clinton, on the other hand seems much closer to Edwards in her positions. But she will also have great difficulty defeating the Republican nominee.

On February 5th, I am still going to vote in California for John Edwards. I will, as John Edwards said, leave to history who will be the nominee, and hope and pray that whoever it is will defeat the Republicans in November.

But I know this: the fact that our next President will not be John Edwards is a far greater loss to America and the world than it is to John Edwards.

[lisakaz]

Nice post. But aren't you afraid of being called a "misogynst" for not supporting Hillary? LOL.

[revdau]

Hyperbole does not a President make. Experience, concrete plans, and a history of working against the Republican shredder machine. I think the GOP wants Obama to win so that McCain can soundly beat him. Read all the sociopathic sexism aimed at Senator Clinton from all sides and you get the enormity of this all out war. Hillary has worked her whole life to get to this place. How dare someone call her patriarchal because she can play ball with the boys. Shame. This kind of knee-jerk shortsightedness and anti-powerful women rhetoric is disheartening, especially when it comes from women. Mostly I have seen this from women who are under 40 who do not remember or do not want to know what women went through so they could have any voice in politics. I am not ashamed of my feminism. That young women state they aren't feminists today or call themselves feminist and not see the war on Senator Clinton's character and who participate in it, like the writer above, are at best clueless at worst are so ground up with their own internalized sexism and don't see what is happening and therefore, are a part of the problem.
I know what it has taken for the women's movement to gain us this opportunity. The real revolution for women is to vote for Senator Clinton.
"I am not voting for Hillary Clinton because she is a woman but because I am." (quote from Robin Morgan, 2/2/2008).
Let's together contemplate the meaning of, "Well behaved women rarely make history". Then let's get out there and righteously kick some real patriarchal a*s by voting for the beloved, graceful, knowledgeable and smart as sh*t Senator from New York.

[vsign]

Barack says - Young people unite and do away with the old people! Tear down the bridge to the past and follow me! I will deliver the power to you, you so deserve.

Hillary says - Let's move together, as democrats, into the future - using all the talents we have, to solve the problems we have.

Who do I want to vote for? Hillary