What Exactly Is A Community Organizer?

[Scott Campbell]

I really don't know.

[HowardRoark]

From WIKI:

Community organizing is a process by which people are brought together to act in common self-interest. While organizing describes any activity involving people interacting with one another in a formal manner, much community organizing is in the pursuit of a common agenda. Many groups seek populist goals and the ideal of participatory democracy. Community organizers create social movements by building a base of concerned people, mobilizing these community members to act, and developing leadership from and relationships among the people involved.

[sheepshead]

A guy without a job, gets a bunch of other people without jobs, to gather at city hall or an alderman's office and try to get some shit done.

Barry's task was to get asbestos ( a noble and serious cause) out of older buildings on the south side.

His efforts produced NO results.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Obama's first book, "Dreams From My Father," delves into the subject quite deeply.

A couple things I took away from that read:

"Community organizer" is basically just a euphamism for "lobbyist."

Rather than being hired by a big corporation to lobby politicians in Washington about a particular piece of legislation that impacts that particular corporation, Obama was hired as an organizer trainee by Marty Kaufman, a veteran organizer on Chicago's south side. Kaufman was finding resistence organizing blacks because he was a white Jew. He was looking for a black organizer, so he hired Obama. Among other things, Obama had been trying to find work on the staff of Harold Washington, Chicago's first black mayor.

I can't remember who bankrolled kaufman. I believe it was various churches and other neighborhood institutions. Part of his budget may have come from the City of Chicago as well.

Anyway, Kaufman's stated goal at the moment of Obama's hiring was "trying to pull urban blacks and suburban whites together around a plan to save manufacturing jobs in metropolitan Chicago." Kaufman told Obama "most of our work is with churches... ...If poor and working -class people want to build real power, they have to have some sort of institutional base... ...Churces won't work with you, though, just out of the goodness of their hearts... ...they won't really move unless you show them how it'll help them pay their heating bill."

And so Obama's career as an organizer began. He eventually met the infamous Reverand Jeremiah Wright and joined his congregation. His first big organizer accomplishment came when he happened upon the Altgeld Gardens public housing project. He organized the residents to petition the mayor to have asbestos removed from that project. The political machine eventually set up a program and a budget for housing complaints of this type. Unfortunately, the budget was inadequate (of course) and the program was designed and located not to meet people's needs, but the needs of the political machine. Obama was disillusioned and decided he had to, henceforth, organize in the political realm where the real power resided.

Imagine a Fuller Brush man going from door to door in suburban America hawking cleaning supplies. No mean feat. Obama was basically going door to door in Chicago's south side hawking his vision for easing the plight of the poor, disadvantaged and discriminated-against residents by banding together. These are people who lived in fear among rats and crack-heads. They distrusted outsiders and politicians. Obama succeeded to an extent. No mean feat either.

However, after all was said and done, I think Obama acknowledged his work as an organizer was basically a waste.

In the book he didn't go into his later association with the infamous land developer, Antonin Rezko (who is now in jail). That's when he really started to make a name for himself and gain real star power.

[mraynrand]

From NRO's Stanley Kurtz, who is looking into Obama's efforts as chairman of the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. This would be more community involvement, in this case to undermine the principles (and principals) at local schools and impose a (surprise!) radical agenda.


Excerpt:
"When Obama made his first run for political office, articles in both the Chicago Defender and the Hyde Park Herald featured among his qualifications his position as chairman of the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a foundation where Ayers was a founder and guiding force. Obama assumed the Annenberg board chairmanship only months before his first run for office, and almost certainly received the job at the behest of Bill Ayers. During Obama’s time as Annenberg board chairman, Ayers’s own education projects received substantial funding. Indeed, during its first year, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge struggled with significant concerns about possible conflicts of interest. With a writ to aid Chicago’s public schools, the Annenberg challenge played a deeply political role in Chicago’s education wars, and as Annenberg board chairman, Obama clearly aligned himself with Ayers’s radical views on education issues. With Obama heading up the board and Ayers heading up the other key operating body of the Annenberg Challenge, the two would necessarily have had a close working relationship for years (therefore “exchanging ideas on a regular basis”). So when Ayers and Dorhn hosted that kickoff for the first Obama campaign, it was not a random happenstance, but merely further evidence of a close and ongoing political partnership. Of course, all of this clearly contradicts Obama’s dismissal of the significance of his relationship with Ayers.

This much we know from the public record, but a large cache of documents housed in the Richard J. Daley Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), is likely to flesh out the story. That document cache contains the internal files of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. The records in question are extensive, consisting of 132 boxes, containing 947 file folders, a total of about 70 linear feet of material. Not only would these files illuminate the working relationship between Obama and Bill Ayers, they would also provide significant insight into a web of ties linking Obama to various radical organizations, including Obama-approved foundation gifts to political allies. Obama’s leadership style and abilities are also sure to be illuminated by the documents in question."

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTgwZTVmN2QyNzk2MmUxMzA5OTg0ODZlM2Y2OGI0NDM=

[Harlan Huckleby]

Community organizers do a lot of positive work. Conservatives would be fools to fall into the trap of critisizing Obama's work as a community organizer, that would be nearly as dumb as the Dems mocking Palins service as a small town mayor.

I think it was totally fair for Palin to contrast her responsibilities as a mayor with Obama's often-cited credential as a community organizer. A small town mayor is more impressive.

I think the truth is that neither Palin or Obama are qualified to be president. At this stage of their careers, they are ideal choices to be Vice President. Now, it is true that they have to be able to handle the Presidency for a couple years in a pinch, but that mainly means they need a certain temperment. Similar to a backup QB in football, the backup isn't expected to be as capable as a starter.

The tragedy of the Democratic ticket is that they have the P and VP in the wrong positions.

[mraynrand]

Community organizers do a lot of positive work. Conservatives would be fools to fall into the trap of critisizing Obama's work as a community organizer, that would be nearly as dumb as the Dems mocking Palins service as a small town mayor.

That's right. and I think they are being smart in saying that it is lightweight as far as qualifications for president. They are not saying (or they shouldn't be saying) that it's not necessarily a worthwhile thing. They should reserve the right to then critique Obama's effectiveness AS a community organizer and evaluate what he was trying to accomplish as far as insight into his ideology. Thus the relevance of the Annenberg Challenge experience.

[Maxie the Taxi]

In many respects Obama's entire philosophy on how to solve public "problems" is rooted in "community organizing." Obama is not a doctrinaire socialist. He believes -- as "It-Takes-A-Village" Hillary believes -- that social problems can be solved by all of us coming together, under the direction and purview of government, to find and participate in a solution. This attitude is prominent in all of Obama's domestic and foreign policy prescriptions.

For instance, on healthcare, he doesn't advocate a single-payer system. He advocates private healthcare providers working in partnership with government. Private corporations provide healthcare service; government provides heavy regulation, subsidies and tax credits to providers and patients alike.

Anyone who believes that such an approach may actually achieve promised results in the real world owes it to himself to read the following Boston Globe article. The article describes how Obama's vision of affordable public housing in Chicago turned into a nightmare. As you read about the shocking incompetence, greed, collusion and denial surrounding the public housing debacle in Chicago, imagine the scale of what would occur if Obama were given the chance to implement his plan for affordable, universal healthcare nationwide.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/

[Freak Out]

Community organizers do a lot of positive work. Conservatives would be fools to fall into the trap of critisizing Obama's work as a community organizer, that would be nearly as dumb as the Dems mocking Palins service as a small town mayor.

That's right. and I think they are being smart in saying that it is lightweight as far as qualifications for president. They are not saying (or they shouldn't be saying) that it's not necessarily a worthwhile thing. They should reserve the right to then critique Obama's effectiveness AS a community organizer and evaluate what he was trying to accomplish as far as insight into his ideology. Thus the relevance of the Annenberg Challenge experience.

Unless you are the former mayor of NYC.

[texaspackerbacker]

Ya'all are bouncing all around it, but missing the real answer.

A COMMUNITY ORGANIZER VISITS GROUPS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE GENERALLY HAPPY AND SATISFIED WITH THEIR LOT IN LIFE. HE INFORMS THEM OF EXACTLY HOW MISERABLE THEY REALLY OUGHT TO BE, AND HOW GOVERNMENT CAN FIX THEIR NEWLY REALIZED PROBLEMS AND MISERIES.

Wouldn't that just make you all warm and fuzzy to have a job like that?

[mraynrand]

Community organizers do a lot of positive work. Conservatives would be fools to fall into the trap of critisizing Obama's work as a community organizer, that would be nearly as dumb as the Dems mocking Palins service as a small town mayor.

That's right. and I think they are being smart in saying that it is lightweight as far as qualifications for president. They are not saying (or they shouldn't be saying) that it's not necessarily a worthwhile thing. They should reserve the right to then critique Obama's effectiveness AS a community organizer and evaluate what he was trying to accomplish as far as insight into his ideology. Thus the relevance of the Annenberg Challenge experience.

Unless you are the former mayor of NYC.

I have no idea what you mean.







Below is the text of Giuliani's speech with the reference to Community Organizer highlighted. It is stated as a fact: he was a community organizer:.


Text:

Almost exactly one year ago during a Republican presidential debate in Durham, New Hampshire, I said that if I weren't running for President myself, I'd be supporting John McCain. Well, I'm not, and I do.

Every four years, we are told that this Presidential election is the most important election of our lifetime. This year - 2008 - IS the most important.

This has already been historic. It is the longest Presidential campaign in history. And it sometimes felt even longer.

The American people realize this election represents a turning point. In two months they will decide the future direction of our nation. It's a decision to follow one path or another.
Story continues below
advertisement

'We the people' - the citizens of the United States - get to decide our next president...not the media, not Hollywood celebrities, not anyone else.

This is a time for choosing - and to those Americans who still feel torn in this election, I'd like to suggest one way to think about the choice you have to make in 2008:

You're hiring someone to do a job - an important job that involves the safety and security of your family. Imagine that you have two job applications in your hand - with the names and party affiliations taken off the top. They're both good and patriotic men - with very different life experiences that have led them to this moment in history.

You've got to make this decision right. Who would you hire?

On the one hand, you've got a man who has dedicated his life to the service of his country. He's been tested time and again by crisis. He's passed every test.

Even his adversaries acknowledge that he is a true American hero. He loves America as we all do - but he's sacrificed for it as few do. As a young man, he joined the military...and being a "Top Gun" kind of guy, he became a fighter pilot. He was on a mission over Hanoi when his plane was shot down.

He was tortured in a POW camp, but he refused his captors' offers of early release. Because this is a man who believes in serving a cause greater than self-interest. He came home a national hero.

He had earned a life of peace and quiet, but he was called to public service again, running for Congress and then the Senate as a proud foot-soldier in the Reagan Revolution. His principled independence never wavered. He stood up to special interests, fought for fiscal discipline, ethics reform and a strong national defense.

That's one man.

On the other hand, you have a resume from a gifted man with an Ivy League education. He worked as a community organizer, and immersed himself in Chicago machine politics. Then he ran for the state legislature - where nearly 130 times he was unable to make a decision yes or no. He simply voted "present."

As Mayor of New York City, I never got a chance to vote "present." And you know, when you're President of the United States, you can't just vote "present." You must make decisions.

A few years later, he ran for the U.S. Senate. He won and has spent most of his time as a "celebrity senator." No leadership or major legislation to speak of. His rise is remarkable in its own right - it's the kind of thing that could happen only in America. But he's never run a city, never run a state, never run a business.

He's never had to lead people in crisis.

This is not a personal attack....it's a statement of fact - Barack Obama has never led anything.

Nothing. Nada.

The choice in this election comes down to substance over style. John has been tested. Barack Obama has not.

Tough times require strong leadership, and this is no time for on the job training.

It's about who can answer that crisis call - yes, Hillary, at 3:00 in the morning.

Well, no one can look at John McCain and say that he is not ready to be Commander in Chief.

So, our opponents want to reframe the debate. They would have you believe that this election is about 'change versus more of the same.' But that's really a false choice. Because "change" is not a destination ... just as "hope" is not a strategy.

John McCain will bring about the change that will create jobs and prosperity. He will lower taxes so our economy can grow. He will reduce government spending to strengthen our dollar. He will expand free trade so we can be even more competitive. He will lead us toward an America that will be independent of foreign oil by an all-of-the-above approach, including nuclear power and off-shore drilling.

This is the kind of change we need.

And he will keep us on offense against terrorism at home and abroad. For 4 days in Denver and for the past 18 months Democrats have been afraid to use the words "Islamic Terrorism." During their convention, the Democrats rarely mentioned the attacks of September 11.

They are in a state of denial about the threat that faces us now and in the future.

You need to face your enemy in order to defeat them. John McCain will face this threat and lead us on to victory.

Look at just one example in a lifetime of principled stands -- John McCain's support for the troop surge in Iraq. The Democratic Party had given up on Iraq. And I believe, ladies and gentlemen, that when they gave up on Iraq they were giving up on America. The Democratic leader in the Senate said so: "America has lost."

Well, if America lost, who won? Al Qaida? Bin Laden? In the single biggest policy decision of this election, John McCain got it right and Barack Obama got it wrong.

If Barack Obama had been President, there would have been no troop surge and our troops would have been withdrawn in defeat.

Senator McCain was the candidate most associated with the surge. And it was unpopular.

What do you think most other candidates would have done in that situation? They would have acted in their own self-interest by changing their position.
How many times have we seen Barack Obama do that?

Obama was going to take public financing for his campaign, until he didn't.

Obama was against wiretapping before he voted for it.

When speaking to a pro-Israel group, Obama favored an undivided Jerusalem. Until the very next day when he changed his mind.

I hope for his sake, Joe Biden got that VP thing in writing.

John McCain said, 'I'd rather lose an election than a war.' Because that's John McCain.

When Russia rolled over Georgia, John McCain knew exactly how to respond.

Having been to that part of the world many times and having developed a clear worldview over many years, John knew where he stood. Within hours, he established a very strong, informed position that let the world know exactly how he'll respond as President. At exactly the right time, John McCain said, "We're all Georgians."

Obama's first instinct was to create a moral equivalency - that "both sides" should "show restraint." The same moral equivalency that he has displayed in discussing the Palestinian Authority and the State of Israel.

Later, after discussing it with his 300 foreign policy advisors, he changed his position and suggested that the "the UN Security Council," could find a solution. Apparently, none of his 300 advisors told him that Russia has a veto on any UN action. Finally Obama put out a statement that looked ...well, it looked a lot like John McCain's.

Here's some free advice: Sen. Obama, next time just call John McCain.

Like Ronald Reagan, John McCain will enlarge our party. He's the candidate with the real record of bi-partisan cooperation. He's the candidate who can credibly reach out for the votes of Independents and Democrats.

In choosing Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, John McCain has chosen the future. Governor Palin represents a new generation. She's already one of the most successful governors in America - and the most popular. And she already has more executive experience than the entire Democratic ticket. She's led a city and a state. She's reduced taxes and government spending.

And she's actually done something about moving America toward energy independence - taking on the oil companies while encouraging more energy exploration here at home.

Taxpayers have an advocate in Sarah Palin - she even sold the former governor's private plane on E-Bay.

And as a former U.S. Attorney, I am impressed by her success in combating corruption - when she found unethical and illegal behavior among the power-brokers of her own party, she did not hesitate - she acted courageously and independently. That's the kind of reformer we need - she shook up Alaska. She'll shake up Washington.

And we sure need that.

And as we look to the future never let us forget that - when we are at our best - we are the party that expands Freedom. We began as a party dedicated to freeing people from slavery... And we are still the party that is willing to fight for freedom at home and around the world. We are the party that wants to expand individual freedom and economic freedom... because we believe that the secret of America's success is not central government, it is self-government. We are the party that believes in giving workers the right to work. The party that believes parents should choose where their children go to school.

And we are the party that believes unapologetically in America's essential greatness - that we are a shining city on the hill, a beacon of freedom that inspires people everywhere to reach for a better world.

So my fellow Republicans and my fellow Americans - over the next 8 weeks, remember that the results of this election are in your hands. You get to determine America's future. You can decide America's direction.

Thank you very much. And God Bless America

[sheepshead]

Ya'all are bouncing all around it, but missing the real answer.

A COMMUNITY ORGANIZER VISITS GROUPS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE GENERALLY HAPPY AND SATISFIED WITH THEIR LOT IN LIFE. HE INFORMS THEM OF EXACTLY HOW MISERABLE THEY REALLY OUGHT TO BE, AND HOW GOVERNMENT CAN FIX THEIR NEWLY REALIZED PROBLEMS AND MISERIES.

Wouldn't that just make you all warm and fuzzy to have a job like that?

That's it!!

What's also great is not only does this require explanation, once we figure out what it is, no one can document a single accomplishment!!

Also,

look for the left to paint us a racists for questioning this stuff. As if us white suburban types wouldnt understand a grass roots effort in the 'hood. You'll hear that next.

[Scott Campbell]

Wouldn't that just make you all warm and fuzzy to have a job like that?

Depends on what it paid.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Wouldn't that just make you all warm and fuzzy to have a job like that?

Depends on what it paid.

Obama was offered $10,000 per year to start with a $2,000 travel allowance to buy a car. Obama says in his book, "the salary would go up if things worked out."

[Scott Campbell]

Wouldn't that just make you all warm and fuzzy to have a job like that?

Depends on what it paid.

Obama was offered $10,000 per year to start with a $2,000 travel allowance to buy a car. Obama says in his book, "the salary would go up if things worked out."

That kind of dough would leave me feeling cold and lifeless.