I applaud Obama for his supposedly xenophobic remarks about Clinton's position on outsourcing

[LBJDemocrat]

I'm very surprised that Obama's gotten the courage to let his campaign tear Clinton down for her crimes against the American worker. This will likely cost him Wall Street dollars relative to the Senator from Punjab. Bold move.

Even if you're skeptical of Obama's true beliefs on this issue, he's making it clear that there will be a political penalty for betraying the worker.

I'm known on this forum for intensely disliking Obama, but I've said that if he makes his position on trade known, I'll reconsider. If he continues down this path, I may very well reconsider.

Here's a thread that explains what I'm talking about: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3318701

[Hart2008]

1. Was Obama really supporting the American worker, or playing Gotcha?

Until it is proven to my satisfaction that he will curtail outsourcing, I see this as more politics as usual, i.e., take a shot at your opponent any way possible.

I still don't know where Obama is on this issue.

With only 2 years in the Senate he doesn't have much of a record on any of the big national issues. He is just a blank slate IMHO.

[LBJDemocrat]

2. True

Still, it's a sacrifice because it turns off Wall Street's potential donors.

[Hart2008]

4. Only a sacrifice if it was intended to be made public. No proof of that.

Without knowing the full story about how this expose was made public, it is hard to judge the Obama campaign's intention.

It appears it was not distributed for attribution, so it is hard to give him any praise for it.

Maybe some positive publicity from this will encourage him to run a more populist campaign, but it is too early to judge.

[liberalpragmatist]

3. Was the Jesse Helms affirmative action ad "racist"

Remember his 1990 campaign ad - featuring a pair of white hands holding a "laid off" letter because it was given to a "minority"?

If someone used a similar ad using brown hands from an Indian or showed a Chinese face, would that not be racist?

You can criticize outsourcing without attacking Indians or casting aspersions on someone just because they talk with Indian people or favor closer relations with India. And that goes for any country.

[Hart2008]

5. You are comparing apples and oranges. American workers are losing with outsourcing.

Their race doesn't matter.

Comparing affirmative action, which benefits certain groups of Americans, with outsourcing, which hurts all American workers, doesn't work.

Indian American tech workers are hurt by outsourcing jobs to India, Pakistan, Ireland, or South Africa. It is not a racial issue.

[pampango]

7. Not sure I agree.

Affirmative action gives preferences for certain groups based on birth characteristics, e.g. race, gender, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, etc.

Outsourcing benefits one group of workers over another and the key distinction is national origin. By this logic an ethnic Indian here could benefit from affirmative action, but the same guy, if he is in India, should not be allowed to benefit from outsourcing.

I realize that the key difference is that one guy is an AMERICAN, and the other guy is well, NOT AN AMERICAN. While I believe that Americans are special, I don't think we are that special.

Also, while it is true that outsourcing can be destined for any number of countries, we all know which two large Asian countries we all associate outsourcing with. Similarly, while illegal immigrants come from many countries, we all know which Latin American country we associate with illegal immigration.

A lot of people who oppose affirmative action will say they are not racist or sexist or homophobes. Since affirmative action is perceived to benefit certain groups, we can usually figure out if someone really opposes it on principle or for a more hateful reason. Similarly, outsourcing and illegal immigration are so closely tied to certain countries and ethnicities in the public perception that it pays to not always accept at face value protestations that one's opposition to one or the other is based on pure moral principle and not something else.

[Hart2008]

8. So protecting well paying tech jobs for American workers is racism???

Americans come in all races, colors and religions. It is not racism to protect their jobs and their standard of living.

The failure of the Democratic party to protect American workers from disasters such as outsourcing explains why they have been in the minority in Congress for so long, as bad as Bush has been.

[pampango]

18. Don't think that I played the race "card" if you read my post.

I focused on national origin. It is kind of hard to argue that outsourcing benefits groups of workers in some countries and hurts groups in other countries. The pain/benefit of outsourcing accrues based on national origin, or more precisely, national residence, since workers suffer or benefit based on the country they live in not necessarily that in which their citizenship is tied.

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

9. Is it a crime for an AMERICAN politician to stand up for AMERICAN workers?

Aren't we, American citizens, the ones who elect them? Don't we elect them to fight for OUR interests?

:shrug:

[pampango]

19. No crime at all. I just don't think it makes the world a better place,

if every countries' politicians stand up for their countries workers and treat the workers in every other country as the enemy.

Although I must admit that yours is not a bad strategy for the US. We already have ours, so walling off the rest of the world would still result in a pretty decent life for Americans. The fact that such a strategy would leave the Third World with the prospect of producing goods and services for their own domestic economies (such as they are) should not concern us, because they are not Americans. Therefore, they do not deserve the same level of concern for the quality of their lives, as long as they keep their goods and services to themselves. They should just "pull themselves up by their own bootstraps."

I fully support higher taxes on Americans who make 5 to 10 times as much as I do, but I hate it when the Third World "taxes" me, through outsourcing or illegal immigration, just because I make 5 to 10 to 100 times as much as their citizens do. I do realize that we expect our politicians to protect us from the "taxes" the Third World seeks to impose on us, just as America's billionaires expect our politicians to protect them from the rest of us. (I know that I am forgetting that citizenship trumps everything - we are Americans after all - and that world "citizenship" is a RW concept, not a progressive one.)

[Jim Sagle]

13. Outsourcing benefits one group of workers over another and the key distinction is national origin?

WRONG!!! The key distinction is CITIZENSHIP.

Your argument disintegrates at that point.

Fuck globalism.

[pampango]

17. The distinction is not just citizenship.

If my hypothetical Indian guy immigrates here legally, he cannot be discriminated against based on his national origin, even though he is not an American citizen, and may even benefit from affirmative action, since he is a minority. If his job here than gets outsourced to another country, he is hurt based not on his citizenship, but on his country of residence.

[Jim Sagle]

21. The KEY distinction is citizenship.

American government should represent American workers, regardless of race. Period.

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

23. Thank you!

:toast:

[pampango]

24. And damn the rest of the world.

Progressive views have changed over the course of my life.

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

25. We don't vote for world elections

We vote for American elections. We change our country first because it's where we can have the power to change things.

[pampango]

26. We don't vote in world elections, but that doesn't mean that we

shouldn't care about the rest of the world. I don't vote in California elections, but I still care about them.

[Jim Sagle]

27. Our world starts here. Once we secure worker rights at home, we can work on

extending their protection abroad.

Democracy means nothing unless it includes self-government. And in America, that means protecting American workers.

Fun facts via Thom Hartmann's show Friday:

1) India will not ALLOW foreign companies into its retail distribution system.

2) 97% of Indian retail revenuses go to small, local business - only 3% go to corporations.

Sounds like something we could try, yes?

[pampango]

29. Couldn't agree more about the importance of securing worker

rights here in the US.

This is not directed at you, but I do worry, in general, about suggestions that we have to solve every problem in the US before we can do anything to help people in other countries, who may have problems even worse than those we have here at home. I hope we can work on both simultaneously.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

11. Amen. And let's face it. If HRC did the same those who are defending BO would be crucifying her nt

[Hart2008]

12. If leopard HRC changed her spots on this I would not call her a racist.

I might call her an opportunist for following polling, or even a hypocrite, but not a racist.

And, again, I am not in the Obama camp.

[davidwparker]

6. "political penalty for betraying the worker." - Good for him. Folks, I will

not vote for Hillary under any circumstances. Not in the primary. Not in the general. Hillary will NOT get my vote.

I'm looking for who best supports the middle class and working poor and who I feel can win. Outsourcing is a problem. Trade imbalances are problems. Lack of universal health care is a problem. Stealing from the social security trust fund is a problem.

[eridani]

10. Her husband shafted American workers--

--still he also blocked some nasty Repub initiatives. Expect the same from her. I want better, sure, but in the general election she'd still be better than any Republican.

[illinoisprogressive]

14. it's ok. I intensely dislike Hillary. lol. but, seriously, this was the intent

to let people know that with her union busting advisors and her free trade positions that we can expect the jobs and the middle class to keep on bleeding if she is president.

[Tellurian]

28. No, it's not ok..

when you make a statement against someone's candidate...provide proof.(links) Rather than listening to yourself talk. If you make a statement be prepared to back it up so it can be examined and discussed.

There is a whole thread about this dynamic here. We're getting sick and tired of the bomb throwers who toss one and then disappear. You profess to hold the politico feet to the fire for change. How about doing a little research and taking a stand on credible evidence, rather than the next best thing that floats between the synapses and posting it. iow- Lead by example..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3322514

[TeamJordan23]

15. Is it true about Tata Consulting; about how they only created 10 jobs there & Hillary defended them?

While they outsourced thousands to other countries? If so, shameless.

[snowbear]

16. Seriously?

"Tata Consulting"?

[HughBeaumont]

22. 80% of Tata's US hires are Indian workers.

http://www.bufflink.org/NewsText/381887604282407.html

Embroiled in a controversy over "off-shoring" of white collar jobs, TCS is pointing to its positive contributions to the U.S. economy. Nationwide, TCS America provides about 8,000 jobs in more than 50 offices. About 80 percent are filled by workers from India, Gupta said, but local hiring is growing.

I noticed how they interviewed two Americans, as if that excuses the bleeding or trumpets offshoring's "positive contribution" to the economy. Um, Gupta? The worker rarely, if at all, sees any benefit from this practice. Often times, he/she gets the shaftola in the form of layoffs and training their replacement, hardly a myth and getting more commonplace in chainsaw corporate America.

The point is, Hillary tends to talk out of both sides of her mouth on this issue, depending on the crowd. She wants to impress me, then take a firm stand and CALL for worker protection in these trade agreements you sign. Kucinich is the only one who REALLY thinks of the worker. There needs to be assurance that workers here will not lose their jobs or be forced to train their shipped over/overseas replacements.

Of course, such a proviso would kind of defeat the whole purpose, wouldn't it?

[MGKrebs]

20. I find it doubful that Obama himself approved this piece.

The memo did not have campaign identity on it. The campaign could have made the point about outsourcing without the "Punjab" reference or whatever it was that made them feel they couldn't use this memo officially. It just looks like a freelance project to me.

[Tellurian]

30. We'll have to wait and see his response to the outraged, insulted Indians