Caucus 2008:

Obama’s ‘Yes, we can’ echoes Culinary’s

He accepts union’s endorsement but still has to fight for caucusgoers

Sam Morris

Presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama makes an appearance at the Culinary Workers Union Friday, two days after receiving the labor organization’s endorsement.

By Michael Mishak (contact)

Saturday, Jan. 12, 2008 | 2 a.m.

Photo Gallery

Presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama makes an appearance at the Culinary Workers Union Friday, Jan. 11, 2008 a day after receiving the labor organization's endorsement. Union Secretary D. Taylor is on the right.

On Friday, Jan. 11, presidential candidate Barack Obama visited Las Vegas, making stops at the Culinary Workers Union and Del Sol High School for a town hall meeting. Obama was endorsed by the union two days earlier.

Thumbnails Gallery

When Barack Obama introduced a new refrain to his stump speech after losing the New Hampshire primary Tuesday, it was aimed specifically at a Nevada audience: Culinary Workers Local 226.

“Yes, we can!” Obama told supporters, over and over, after his narrow loss to Hillary Clinton.

Although it fit with the Illinois senator’s message of hope, Culinary workers in Las Vegas recognized it as the labor slogan popularized by United Farm Workers leader Cesar Chavez. Indeed, the phrase, in Spanish, is plastered all over the walls of the union’s headquarters here.

Apparently the the 60,000-strong Culinary, Nevada’s largest and most politically active union, heard Obama loud and clear, endorsing him on Wednesday. He came to town Friday to accept the endorsement and to solidify his support among the union’s rank and file in the week before the state’s Jan. 19 caucus.

“I am fired up,” Obama told hundreds of Culinary members gathered in the union’s large hall. “I love this union.”

It remains to be seen how much the Culinary loves Obama. After months of speculation and heated debate between the Culinary local and international parent Unite Here, the union made its pick this week, 10 days before the Nevada caucus.

Members have been fiercely courted by the major Democratic candidates all year, and Clinton used a visit here Thursday in part to test the strength of the union’s endorsement.

She walked a northeast Las Vegas neighborhood heavy with Culinary workers and won the support of several. Her message: The endorsement means nothing and Culinary members should follow their conscience.

Before Obama’s arrival Friday, the Clinton campaign continued its effort to undermine the Culinary’s support.

Speaking to reporters on a conference call, current and former casino executives, in addition to prominent elected officials, blasted Obama as a foe of gaming and called him a hypocrite.

As state senator, Obama reportedly questioned the use of gaming as a tool for economic development in Illinois. In 1999, he voted against a bill that ultimately expanded gaming there. As a presidential candidate, Obama has praised Nevada’s gaming industry because, he says, it’s well-regulated.

Unclear in the discussion, however, was the relevance of Obama’s gaming record. Regulation is largely a state, not federal, issue.

The union fired back on Obama’s behalf, sending more than 200 organizers into the streets and into Strip casinos to reinforce its message: Stay together, caucus for Obama and trust the union that last year won the most generous contracts in its history.

Obama sought solidarity Friday, telling the story of his humble beginnings as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago and speaking about his experience walking the picket line with striking workers at the Congress Hotel.

“Over 20 years ago, I walked away from a job on Wall Street to work as a community organizer,” he said. “I spent 3 1/2 years doing what members of Culinary 226 are doing today: organizing to keep the American dream alive for all people.”

Obama then pointed to the Culinary, which has tripled its membership over the past 20 years and won increasingly generous wage and benefits packages for casino and hotel workers, as the model for the country. A win in the Nevada caucus, he said, would send a signal.

At one point, he lauded the union for its fight with the Tropicana, the only major Strip casino that has not signed a new contract with the Culinary.

“We’re going to show America that what happens in Vegas, it’s not going to stay in Vegas anymore,” Obama said. “We’re going to start something in Vegas and send it across Nevada and across America, and everybody is going to know the power of a united people.”

In a 30-minute speech, he promised middle-class tax cuts and relief for those affected by the subprime mortgage crisis. Obama also pledged to raise the minimum wage every year to keep pace with inflation.

Obama, who was interrupted several times by chants of his name, then drilled down on Clinton’s key line of attack that he’s all talk, no substance.

He ticked off his resume: organizer, civil rights attorney, state senator, U.S. senator.

“Change for me is not just rhetoric,” he said. “It’s been the cause of my life.”

And then, the labor slogan, in Spanish: “Si, se puede!”

Obama echoed the theme at a rally at Del Sol High School, where a line of more than 1,000 people snaked around the block, through the parking lot and into a packed gymnasium, where more than 2,600 people had already gathered. Asked for a show of hands, nearly all indicated they would caucus. Obama asked how many were undecided and only a sprinkling of hands went up.

There, Obama was introduced by Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, whose endorsement was strongly sought by Clinton.

Obama delivered his standard stump speech but spent most of the time answering questions from a feisty crowd that at times sniped at the candidate to be more specific.

“I don’t know if I can be any clearer, young lady,” Obama said, answering a question about overturning potentially unconstitutional programs such as warrantless wiretapping. “Goodness gracious.”

The crowd was Western-centric, asking questions about renewable energy, immigration reform, Yucca Mountain and the state’s public employee pension plan.

In a tense moment, Obama confronted the hazards of dealing with Western issues and the high emotions surrounding ones like immigration. A woman asked him what he would do to secure the borders and end the problem of “anchor babies,” a phrase sometimes used to describe a child born in the United States to illegal immigrants or other noncitizens.

A hush fell over the crowd. Obama didn’t flinch, saying he would not change the provision in the Constitution that makes children born here U.S. citizens. He vowed to put illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship, but not before they pay a fine and learn English. The latter requirement earned him some of his biggest applause of the night.

“I apologize ahead of time if I don’t get to all your questions,” he told the crowd from the outset. “But I’m going to be here all next week. I’ll come back and answer them.”

Meanwhile, Clinton will have another shot of her own at Nevada voters today when she visits Las Vegas and Reno to court Hispanics.

Sun reporter Alexandra Berzon contributed to this report.

Discussion: 29 comments so far…

By SunDog

1/12/08 at 7:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

...Clinton used a visit here Thursday in part to test the strength of the union’s endorsement.She walked a northeast Las Vegas neighborhood heavy with Culinary workers and won the support of several. Her message: The endorsement means nothing and Culinary members should follow their conscience....

Typical Clinton politics--divisiveness, right out of the Karl Rove classroom, as she tries to divide union members. How shameful. This just shows that there's not going to be a change with a Billary presidency, they will continue the divisiveness that has limited this country in moving forward. Billary's campaign motto should be "the more things change, the more they remain the same." Thanks but no thanks.
By bunky

1/12/08 at 7:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

Pics of Hillary "listening intently" in home of Latino -- perfect pic of pandering. Hill/Bill just go away.
By dailyfare

1/12/08 at 7:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

If Clinton is for the workers, why is she attempting to divide the union. Obviously, as individual voters, workers can caucus for whom they want - but why is she sending the message that she's a divisive figure? Interesting campaign strategy.
By GeneS

1/12/08 at 8:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Unions are crying that they are losing members.
Remember that swooshing SOUND when all the good
paying jobs left the country? Ask the Clintons
about the GATT/NAFTA treaty. Ohhhh...thats right,
Hillary said it wasn't implemented the way they
we're HOPING. There is that word she doesn't like
again. I can see why. And the UNIONS are backing
her for President???...HaHaHaHaHaHaHa
By aw

1/12/08 at 9:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

say it ain't so Culinary Workers-

Headline from Time Magazine and link to article:

"Racial Tensions a Potential Boost For Clinton
Some strategists suggest Hispanics may be reluctant to support a black candidate"
Clinton pollster advises

http://thepage.time.com/

Please - open your eyes --
Obama '08
By Eyzwidopn

1/12/08 at 10:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Obama should let the Culinary workers know that although he's very grateful for the unions endorsement, he does not expect the individual workers to just hand him their votes because the union says they should vote for him.

Obama should make it a point to express to the workers and all Nevadans that he will fight hard for their individual votes by doing what he's done in Iowa and NH - having a conversation on the issues that matter to them and how he will lead a unified country towards achieving solutions for those issues.
By WILKNS

1/12/08 at 12:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Sen. Clinton is not trying to divide the union workers as the Obama and Union leadership stated above in the first couple of comments, she's just stating her beliefs that she is more qualified, which she is, to make life better for the union and it's members.

As for pandering in that picture, nice spin but no cigar. What would you and the union workers say if she didn't come to speak to you all and if she didn't explain what she has done for you in the past as Senator and First Lady and what she will do for you in the future as President? You'd probably badmouth her then too.

You're making comments just like the Republicans did to her and Bill when he started running for President and all through his two terms, accusing her of doing exactly what you are doing,making false statements to make her look bad.

You better hope she gets elected because unfortunately I think Obama, while probably being a good man, is about 10 years away from having the experience needed to be the leader of the world.

Don't buy into his rhetoric that he is different than the Washington politicians he's putting down. If he really feels that way why did he ask Kerry for his endorsement, a guy that's been in Washington for the last 30 years.
By UnionGRL

1/12/08 at 2:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Anyone see the movie "Sicko"? Remeber who was tacking 10's of 1000s of dollar from the big lobbyist: http://www.xpress4me.com/images/08/01/09...
By Voice

1/12/08 at 3:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Obama is the guy who can unite this country. Hillary will not be able to bring support from across the board.

Also Obama has better judgment.
Hillary voted for the war!!!!!!!
By Si_Se_Puede

1/12/08 at 3:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Triangulating, Divide and Conquer will not work this time in our history.

The only election where the Clintons managed to eke a 2-point victory and 0 delegate advantage is highly questionable. In a caucus (Iowa) that could not be rigged, they tried to disenfranchize students and failed. In another caucus (Nevada) that cannot be rigged, they're trying to disenfranchize casino workers by changing the rule of the game in the middle of the game and by pitting blacks against hispanics. Can we beat them? Yes, we can! Si, se puede!

http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Triang...
By bwilliam46

1/12/08 at 4:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Please, good people of Nevada, send a clear message to the divisiveness of Billary. Vote for an honorable, hard-working man who will really help the poor and help the Country: Obama.
By WILKNS

1/12/08 at 8:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

It's amazing how hard the union gets some of the members who agree with the leadership to load up message boards and blogs with their negative nonsense just as they are doing here with Sen. Clinton.

You make false accusations about her and then aaccuse her of doing exactly what you're doing.

Is what your saying mean that you think your fellow union members who vote for Hillary are not as good or as smart as you are? If that's not divisiveness then I don't know what is. Have respect for those fellow members as you would want them to respect you.

All the blowhard phoney accusations you make here and other places is not going to work.

The fact is Hillary Clinton has worked for many years to do good things for workers of all ages and all jobs, Obama hasn't been around long enough to do anything for anybody. He needs to come back in 5 or ten years after he has some experience under his belt and actually can point to a record of accomplishment before he runs for the office of President. He hasn't done a thing since he's been in the Senate except to position himself and get ready to run for President but he hasn't earned it yet.

Allow me to paraphrase an old saying, "Action talks and bull.... walks!"
By ChuyCP

1/12/08 at 9:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

I am not confused.

I have spend time reading Obama's facts from different sources. I have been spending time hearing and watching his speeches. I've read about what he stands for. I have read about his experience.

Mrs. Clinton may eat as many tacos and burritos as she want, good for her. No way!

Right now I have made my mind about and I tell you, after few months of thinking and pondering all sides of the question I have no doubt about who I go for.

I am not going to lecture anybody on this. I see substance in Obama's vision. If it is a tale, it is not fairy tale but a fair tale that we can connect with. He promotes unitiy and empowers people. He will promote solution from the bottom up, not the other way around.

I go with Barack Obama.
Si se puede, claro que si!
Ahora o nunca.
By sarahbear

1/13/08 at 12:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Differences betweeen HILLARY and BARACK:

1. Hillary does not find anything wrong with taking money from Washington lobbyists and big businesses to fund her campaign and that of others. She is the only Democrat in the election to take this stance. I reject the notion that it takes experience to bring about change, and this issue single-handedly proves it. To bring about real change the country needs someone who has not been in Washington long enough to be corrupted by it. We need a President who will say no to Washington lobbyists giving money to our politicians in return for favors. If Hillary is elected she is going to owe all these businesses and special interests favors, and her ability to make sound decisions for the people of America instead of these lobbyists will be hampered as a result of it. Obama’s stance on the issue is lobbyists should be able to spend time in Washington pleading their cases to politicians, but not be able to provide politicians with money. That would allow reputable special interests, like some environmental groups, to have a voice but it would do away with the blackmail corruption that is rampant throughout Washington.
By sarahbear

1/13/08 at 12:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

2. I do not believe Hillary’s foresight and judgment is comparable to that of Obama’s. Obama was against the Iraq War before it even began. Not only was Hillary for it, she also recently gave a vote to identify a large portion of Iran’s military a terrorist organization, which could’ve easily allowed President Bush to have sufficient reason to go to war with Iran as well. Hillary received a lot of criticism for that from her Democratic colleagues in Washington for obvious reasons. I should also say that Bill Clinton originally said he was for the Iraq War when it began and recently lied and said he was always against it, so I do not believe he can help her make any better decisions. Furthermore, Obama has been saying for a while now that we should go into Pakistan with or without the support of President Musharraf to apprehend the terrorists in the border region there. Obama got a lot of criticism from Hillary and the Republicans for that statement because they saw Musharraf as an ally they did not want to offend, even though it is quite clear he is incapable and unwilling to aid us. There has even been an accusation that Musharraf has misused funds we sent him for the purpose of tracking and apprehending the terrorists to use for the purpose of putting surveillance on his political opponents. It was not until January 5th of this year that Hillary and the other Democrats jumped onboard with Obama’s plan to deal with the terrorists in Pakistan. Again, I think this shows his superior judgment.
By sarahbear

1/13/08 at 12:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

3. There is one fundamental difference between Hillary and Obama’s health care plans. Hillary would force everyone to have insurance or pay a penalty and Obama would simply lower the costs as much as possible but not make it mandatory. I think Hillary’s idea is a little short-sighted. There will always be poor folk who cannot afford it regardless of how cheap the government makes it. To ask them to pay a penalty is, in my opinion, cruel and unreasonable.

They are virtually identical on every other major issue. However, being President requires more than just having the right stance on an issue. It takes foresight, judgment, honesty, reliability, and the willingness to see things from others' point of view. I believe Obama embodies all these characteristics more than any other candidate I have ever seen running for any election at any level since I was first able to vote. He has the judgment to make the right decisions the first time and the compassion to listen to the other side and understand their concerns so he can bring this country and this world together. That is a very rare combination and Hillary possesses neither of those qualities.
By aw

1/13/08 at 6:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

tO: JFNIKKI --
you can cut out the middle man and just vote republican ----please see below:

--------------------------
It is common knowledge that the Republicans want to run against Senator Clinton - as they feel they can beat her the easiest (easier than either Obama or Edwards); Hillary is the dream candidate for the republican machine --
They are "fired up and ready to go" should Hillary Clinton be the democratic nominee --

See link below for the following information (also was on TV this am)

"New York Sen. Hillary Clinton is Republicans' choice for a Democratic candidate.

Said GOP pollster Whit Ayres: "When it comes to Republicans, Hillary Clinton is a unifier, not a divider."

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/246......

FACTS MATTER -- AT LEAST THEY SHOULD MATTER
Obama -08
By bettyh

1/13/08 at 7:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

John Edwards has stood up for working people for many years. He deeply cares about making sure that everyone has opportunities for a good life in this country. Before ever entering politics, the Edwards set up an afterschool program in NC - at their own expense - to help all children have a fair chance to do well at school. The cause of fighting for working people is not just a political speech for Edwards. It is in his heart.

I know that some unions fear backing someone who is a bit of an underdog. But members still have a choice. It makes sense to me that Edwards has been left out of national news coverage, since he opposes the large corporate interests who own media and their biggest sponsors. But it is well worth your time to find out about this man's plans and ideas. Many of the things Obama and Hillary were talking about are the same things Edwards has been talking about for years.

I know that John and Elizabeth will make these changes happen for us, if we stand up and vote for John. Please cast your vote for John Edwards.
By bernie

1/13/08 at 11:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

I would like to see a Obama Edwards team or vice verse. Hillary Clinton would not accept either one.After checking out her health care plan In so many words it sucks. She is not offering help.She wants to force people weather they can afford it or not to have insurance,That is not right.Union or non union check your facts very carefully before you caucus..You will have to live with what happens for at least four years .Do we really want another Clinton in our oval office I say not
By eades

1/13/08 at 12:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

In the bipartisan battle of "experience" vs. "change," one thing seems clear: There is no shortage of experience in Washington. If Washington experience came in dozens, it would be a dime a dozen. Washington experience is what led us into the foreign and domestic mess we're in today. What we are short of in Washington is fresh ideas and unifying vision. Put a president with these in the White House, and all that Washington experience can be put to work taking America in a new direction. This is why I support Barack Obama for president.
By geez

1/14/08 at 2:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

edwards in '08...name a single anti-war protest attended either by clinton or mr. obama?
By SeedofChange

1/14/08 at 5:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

http://www.barackobama.com/learn/meet_ba...

Look under "Political Career" of Obama. Six years in Illinois congress, 1 paragraph, 2 sentence to describe his great achievements :-)

In the same segment, 2 years in US Senate, 2 paragraph, lot of sentence with no concrete achievements. He sould have mentioned his achievement that Senator can not any longer eat with lobbist, unless they are standing up :-)

It is amazing, what he is getting away with. Republicans and corporate media will not let this guy get away with this once they get him as nominee.
By SeedofChange

1/14/08 at 6:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Obama is trying to win South Carolina with race baiting. He will pay a big price in Nevada from Hispanic population for his ploy.

Hussain at least can play politics well, but very short sighted.

Hussain's Iraq stand shows he has no back bone. We could not take a stand on Iran issue either, he voted absent.

Talking and doing is different.
By ChuyCP

1/14/08 at 6:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Obama/Edwards!!!

I like that!!!

I LOVE AMERICA!!!