Also, while we're on the topic, didn't I hear that Obama actually transferred to Columbia?

Meaning he went to a "lesser" (i.e., non-Ivy League or whatever) school first, essentially "working his way up" to Columbia?

In other words, he didn't just coast from Andover to Yale to Harvard or any such thing, right? He actually worked to go to those schools, unlike our current Flunky-in-Chief.

(Exhibit A for why white privilege harms all of us.)

I enjoyed your implied oxymoron: independent moral logical politicians.

I've thought that Obama should hold remedial classes in constitutional law for those rubberstampers in Congress, if not the public in general. The legislative branch is supposed to be co-equal to the Executive.

Anyone who has watched the stock market tech bubble and now the housing bubble should conclude that people in crowds don't always act rationally.

No system is perfect, the Senate held up civil rights reforms until LBJ slammed it through, and I believe the maelstrom of public support was a major factor in the Senate Iraq war vote.

Happy there was a question mark. It begs the question, who does the privileged Obama think he's kidding? He knows Hillary's core supporters are the working-class and he's probably been watching her speeches to see why they gravitate to her and migrate away from him. The reason is: Obama has lured the educated and the wealthy. It suggests to me Obama thinks working-class folks are stupid. We're not, we're smart enough to see through you and your rhetoric. You call Hillary "a Washington Insider" while all your supporters are "Washington Insiders" from Kerry, Kennedy and Tom Daschle to name a few. Obama loves Washington Insiders. They know their way around and Obama, aren't you a Washington Insider? Your claim to fame is your two years in the US Senate. The rest of the time you have been campaigning. You have wealthy friends. Obama, you have not a clue about working class America. Nice try!

You forgot to discount his eight years spent in the Illinois legislature. Obama might have run into one or two working class folks on his way out for a designer beer during that period of time.

"Retard"? Did you just graduate from middle school?

A president is not primarily a legal figure, he is the 'leader' of the country. This encompasses legal, social, military, artistic, scientific, historic and economic roles.

To point out that a president should be an attorney is like John McCain saying the next president must be a general. I think the next president should be a union leader. But it is certainly obvious that he has to be a ... generalist.

So here on a blog on Obama being a 'working class hero' we call someone standing up for the working class a 'retard' when they point out that the attorney role for so many politicans is problematic. Only proves my point. Maybe you should eat more hotdogs.

By the way, I am a 56 year old man who worked in blue collar jobs for 20 years, and now has worked as a paralegal for about 10 more, after 3 years as an administrative assistant and temp. And certainly, brought up a family on the way. So do attorney's play with me? No. And most people in my class have the same queasy feeling.

I agree with both Lenin & Shakespeare. Any survey of the millionaires and attorneys in office should give a sensible person pause.

Fester, brunnhilde, RealityCounts, et al..., take the test @ http://www.politicalcompass.org (thanks Aycharach!) and let us know where you stand. I'm really interested in knowing where you're coming from.

P.S. I took it and posted my results in Glenn Greenwald's latest thread. You may be surprised to know where I stand :-)

Someone from PA please correct me if I'm wrong, but Yuengling has been expanding and upscaling itself recently, hasn't it? Maybe the original Lager is still seen as ordinary beer, but I know they make a decent porter, and maybe even a Red or a Black and Tan (or am I thinking of someone else?)

Madden, your idea that force is necessary for strikes in bowling is as true as Bush's that force is the key to winning colonial wars, such as Iraq.

Economic Left/Right: -0.88

Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.54

"Working class" people can listen to and understand speeches that last half an hour, they can evaluate the wisdom of candidates who present them with ideas instead of slogans, they likely can do all sorts of things which would surprise you, Mr. Madden, despite what you may read in USA TODAY (which I've even seen in the hands of men who have shined shoes and wear ties.) What a classless commentary! Now that we've learned that a Yale degree is absolutely unrelated to intellect, perhaps you might be willing to admit that there is some possibility that a campaign based on reason, as well as hope, will succeed. It strikes me that Senator Clinton doesn't look or act all that "working class" -- only that she's trying very hard to influence votes on the basis of racial prejudice or her gender. It's a great time, in fact, for candidates with the ability to make complex solutions to complex problems more understandable -- not just to voters, but to the supposed "journalists" who constantly try to "dumb down" ideas to get sound bites.

Because Hillary doesn't pay hers.

That could stand a little discussion. You need to keep the insurance coverage of your staff current.

When will Hillary pay her health insurance bills?

Cool :-). So you _are_ Salon material after all, hehe. Funny, after skimming through some of your exchanges with the regulars I would have classified you as an "extreme right-winger". (TBH, I haven't paid much attention :-).

You say: "No system is perfect, the Senate held up civil rights reforms until LBJ slammed it through, and I believe the maelstrom of public support was a major factor in the Senate Iraq war vote."

Thank you for the voice of reason here. Yes, LBJ DID slam the civil rights agenda through - just as Hillary Clinton posited (and was subsequently gutted for so doing, though she spoke a plain truth). And yes, her vote on the Iraq resolution undoubtedly reflected the sentiments of a great many voters in the state which took the brunt of 9/11.