Call to Renewal Keynote Address Call to Renewal Pt 1Call to Renewal Part 2 TOPIC: Our Past, Our Future & Vision for America June 
28, 2006 Call to Renewal' Keynote Address Complete Text Good morning. I appreciate the opportunity to speak here at the Call to R
enewal's Building a Covenant for a New America conference. I've had the opportunity to take a look at your Covenant for a New Ame
rica. It is filled with outstanding policies and prescriptions for much of what ails this country. So I'd like to congratulate yo
u all on the thoughtful presentations you've given so far about poverty and justice in America, and for putting fire under the fe
et of the political leadership here in Washington.But today I'd like to talk about the connection between religion and politics a
nd perhaps offer some thoughts about how we can sort through some of the often bitter arguments that we've been seeing over the l
ast several years.I do so because, as you all know, we can affirm the importance of poverty in the Bible; and we can raise up and
 pass out this Covenant for a New America. We can talk to the press, and we can discuss the religious call to address poverty and
 environmental stewardship all we want, but it won't have an impact unless we tackle head-on the mutual suspicion that sometimes 
exists between religious America and secular America.I want to give you an example that I think illustrates this fact. As some of
 you know, during the 2004 U.S. Senate General Election I ran against a gentleman named Alan Keyes. Mr. Keyes is well-versed in t
he Jerry Falwell-Pat Robertson style of rhetoric that often labels progressives as both immoral and godless.Indeed, Mr. Keyes ann
ounced towards the end of the campaign that, "Jesus Christ would not vote for Barack Obama. Christ would not vote for Barack Obam
a because Barack Obama has behaved in a way that it is inconceivable for Christ to have behaved."Jesus Christ would not vote for 
Barack Obama.Now, I was urged by some of my liberal supporters not to take this statement seriously, to essentially ignore it. To
 them, Mr. Keyes was an extremist, and his arguments not worth entertaining. And since at the time, I was up 40 points in the pol
ls, it probably wasn't a bad piece of strategic advice.But what they didn't understand, however, was that I had to take Mr. Keyes
 seriously, for he claimed to speak for my religion, and my God. He claimed knowledge of certain truths.Mr. Obama says he's a Chr
istian, he was saying, and yet he supports a lifestyle that the Bible calls an abomination.Mr. Obama says he's a Christian, but s
upports the destruction of innocent and sacred life.And so what would my supporters have me say? How should I respond? Should I s
ay that a literalist reading of the Bible was folly? Should I say that Mr. Keyes, who is a Roman Catholic, should ignore the teac
hings of the Pope?Unwilling to go there, I answered with what has come to be the typically liberal response in such debates - nam
ely, I said that we live in a pluralistic society, that I can't impose my own religious views on another, that I was running to b
e the U.S. Senator of Illinois and not the Minister of Illinois.But Mr. Keyes's implicit accusation that I was not a true Christi
an nagged at me, and I was also aware that my answer did not adequately address the role my faith has in guiding my own values an
d my own beliefs.Now, my dilemma was by no means unique. In a way, it reflected the broader debate we've been having in this coun
try for the last thirty years over the role of religion in politics.For some time now, there has been plenty of talk among pundit
s and pollsters that the political divide in this country has fallen sharply along religious lines. Indeed, the single biggest "g
ap" in party affiliation among white Americans today is not between men and women, or those who reside in so-called Red States an
d those who reside in Blue, but between those who attend church regularly and those who don't.Conservative leaders have been all 
too happy to exploit this gap, consistently reminding evangelical Christians that Democrats disrespect their values and dislike t
heir Church, while suggesting to the rest of the country that religious Americans care only about issues like abortion and gay ma
rriage; school prayer and intelligent design.Democrats, for the most part, have taken the bait. At best, we may try to avoid the 
conversation about religious values altogether, fearful of offending anyone and claiming that - regardless of our personal belief
s - constitutional principles tie our hands. At worst, there are some liberals who dismiss religion in the public square as inher
ently irrational or intolerant, insisting on a caricature of religious Americans that paints them as fanatical, or thinking that 
the very word "Christian" describes one's political opponents, not people of faith.Now, such strategies of avoidance may work for
 progressives when our opponent is Alan Keyes. But over the long haul, I think we make a mistake when we fail to acknowledge the 
power of faith in people's lives -- in the lives of the American people -- and I think it's time that we join a serious debate ab
out how to reconcile faith with our modern, pluralistic democracy.And if we're going to do that then we first need to understand 
that Americans are a religious people. 90 percent of us believe in God, 70 percent affiliate themselves with an organized religio
n, 38 percent call themselves committed Christians, and substantially more people in America believe in angels than they do in ev
olution.This religious tendency is not simply the result of successful marketing by skilled preachers or the draw of popular mega
-churches. In fact, it speaks to a hunger that's deeper than that - a hunger that goes beyond any particular issue or cause.Each 
day, it seems, thousands of Americans are going about their daily rounds - dropping off the kids at school, driving to the office
, flying to a business meeting, shopping at the mall, trying to stay on their diets - and they're coming to the realization that 
something is missing. They are deciding that their work, their possessions, their diversions, their sheer busyness, is not enough
.They want a sense of purpose, a narrative arc to their lives. They're looking to relieve a chronic loneliness, a feeling support
ed by a recent study that shows Americans have fewer close friends and confidants than ever before. And so they need an assurance
 that somebody out there cares about them, is listening to them - that they are not just destined to travel down that long highwa
y towards nothingness.And I speak with some experience on this matter. I was not raised in a particularly religious household, as
 undoubtedly many in the audience were. My father, who returned to Kenya when I was just two, was born Muslim but as an adult bec
ame an atheist. My mother, whose parents were non-practicing Baptists and Methodists, was probably one of the most spiritual and 
kindest people I've ever known, but grew up with a healthy skepticism of organized religion herself. As a consequence, so did I.I
t wasn't until after college, when I went to Chicago to work as a community organizer for a group of Christian churches, that I c
onfronted my own spiritual dilemma.I was working with churches, and the Christians who I worked with recognized themselves in me.
 They saw that I knew their Book and that I shared their values and sang their songs. But they sensed that a part of me that rema
ined removed, detached, that I was an observer in their midst.And in time, I came to realize that something was missing as well -
- that without a vessel for my beliefs, without a commitment to a particular community of faith, at some level I would always rem
ain apart, and alone.And if it weren't for the particular attributes of the historically black church, I may have accepted this f
ate. But as the months passed in Chicago, I found myself drawn - not just to work with the church, but to be in the church.For on
e thing, I believed and still believe in the power of the African-American religious tradition to spur social change, a power mad
e real by some of the leaders here today. Because of its past, the black church understands in an intimate way the Biblical call 
to feed the hungry and cloth the naked and challenge powers and principalities. And in its historical struggles for freedom and t
he rights of man, I was able to see faith as more than just a comfort to the weary or a hedge against death, but rather as an act
ive, palpable agent in the world. As a source of hope.And perhaps it was out of this intimate knowledge of hardship -- the ground
ing of faith in struggle -- that the church offered me a second insight, one that I think is important to emphasize today.Faith d
oesn't mean that you don't have doubts.You need to come to church in the first place precisely because you are first of this worl
d, not apart from it. You need to embrace Christ precisely because you have sins to wash away - because you are human and need an
 ally in this difficult journey.It was because of these newfound understandings that I was finally able to walk down the aisle of
 Trinity United Church of Christ on 95th Street in the Southside of Chicago one day and affirm my Christian faith. It came about 
as a choice, and not an epiphany. I didn't fall out in church. The questions I had didn't magically disappear. But kneeling benea
th that cross on the South Side, I felt that I heard God's spirit beckoning me. I submitted myself to His will, and dedicated mys
elf to discovering His truth.That's a path that has been shared by millions upon millions of Americans - evangelicals, Catholics,
 Protestants, Jews and Muslims alike; some since birth, others at certain turning points in their lives. It is not something they
 set apart from the rest of their beliefs and values. In fact, it is often what drives their beliefs and their values.And that is
 why that, if we truly hope to speak to people where they're at - to communicate our hopes and values in a way that's relevant to
 their own - then as progressives, we cannot abandon the field of religious discourse.Because when we ignore the debate about wha
t it means to be a good Christian or Muslim or Jew; when we discuss religion only in the negative sense of where or how it should
 not be practiced, rather than in the positive sense of what it tells us about our obligations towards one another; when we shy a
way from religious venues and religious broadcasts because we assume that we will be unwelcome - others will fill the vacuum, tho
se with the most insular views of faith, or those who cynically use religion to justify partisan ends.In other words, if we don't
 reach out to evangelical Christians and other religious Americans and tell them what we stand for, then the Jerry Falwells and P
at Robertsons and Alan Keyeses will continue to hold sway.More fundamentally, the discomfort of some progressives with any hint o
f religion has often prevented us from effectively addressing issues in moral terms. Some of the problem here is rhetorical - if 
we scrub language of all religious content, we forfeit the imagery and terminology through which millions of Americans understand
 both their personal morality and social justice.Imagine Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address without reference to "the judgments o
f the Lord." Or King's I Have a Dream speech without references to "all of God's children." Their summoning of a higher truth hel
ped inspire what had seemed impossible, and move the nation to embrace a common destiny.Our failure as progressives to tap into t
he moral underpinnings of the nation is not just rhetorical, though. Our fear of getting "preachy" may also lead us to discount t
he role that values and culture play in some of our most urgent social problems.After all, the problems of poverty and racism, th
e uninsured and the unemployed, are not simply technical problems in search of the perfect ten point plan. They are rooted in bot
h societal indifference and individual callousness - in the imperfections of man.Solving these problems will require changes in g
overnment policy, but it will also require changes in hearts and a change in minds. I believe in keeping guns out of our inner ci
ties, and that our leaders must say so in the face of the gun manufacturers' lobby - but I also believe that when a gang-banger s
hoots indiscriminately into a crowd because he feels somebody disrespected him, we've got a moral problem. There's a hole in that
 young man's heart - a hole that the government alone cannot fix.I believe in vigorous enforcement of our non-discrimination laws
. But I also believe that a transformation of conscience and a genuine commitment to diversity on the part of the nation's CEOs c
ould bring about quicker results than a battalion of lawyers. They have more lawyers than us anyway.I think that we should put mo
re of our tax dollars into educating poor girls and boys. I think that the work that Marian Wright Edelman has done all her life 
is absolutely how we should prioritize our resources in the wealthiest nation on earth. I also think that we should give them the
 information about contraception that can prevent unwanted pregnancies, lower abortion rates, and help assure that that every chi
ld is loved and cherished.But, you know, my Bible tells me that if we train a child in the way he should go, when he is old he wi
ll not turn from it. So I think faith and guidance can help fortify a young woman's sense of self, a young man's sense of respons
ibility, and a sense of reverence that all young people should have for the act of sexual intimacy.I am not suggesting that every
 progressive suddenly latch on to religious terminology - that can be dangerous. Nothing is more transparent than inauthentic exp
ressions of faith. As Jim has mentioned, some politicians come and clap -- off rhythm -- to the choir. We don't need that.In fact
, because I do not believe that religious people have a monopoly on morality, I would rather have someone who is grounded in mora
lity and ethics, and who is also secular, affirm their morality and ethics and values without pretending that they're something t
hey're not. They don't need to do that. None of us need to do that.But what I am suggesting is this - secularists are wrong when 
they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square. Frederick Douglas, Abraham Lincoln
, Williams Jennings Bryant, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King - indeed, the majority of great reformers in American history - were 
not only motivated by faith, but repeatedly used religious language to argue for their cause. So to say that men and women should
 not inject their "personal morality" into public policy debates is a practical absurdity. Our law is by definition a codificatio
n of morality, much of it grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition.Moreover, if we progressives shed some of these biases, we mi
ght recognize some overlapping values that both religious and secular people share when it comes to the moral and material direct
ion of our country. We might recognize that the call to sacrifice on behalf of the next generation, the need to think in terms of
 "thou" and not just "I," resonates in religious congregations all across the country. And we might realize that we have the abil
ity to reach out to the evangelical community and engage millions of religious Americans in the larger project of American renewa
l.Some of this is already beginning to happen. Pastors, friends of mine like Rick Warren and T.D. Jakes are wielding their enormo
us influences to confront AIDS, Third World debt relief, and the genocide in Darfur. Religious thinkers and activists like our go
od friend Jim Wallis and Tony Campolo are lifting up the Biblical injunction to help the poor as a means of mobilizing Christians
 against budget cuts to social programs and growing inequality.And by the way, we need Christians on Capitol Hill, Jews on Capito
l Hill and Muslims on Capitol Hill talking about the estate tax. When you've got an estate tax debate that proposes a trillion do
llars being taken out of social programs to go to a handful of folks who don't need and weren't even asking for it, you know that
 we need an injection of morality in our political debate.Across the country, individual churches like my own and your own are sp
onsoring day care programs, building senior centers, helping ex-offenders reclaim their lives, and rebuilding our gulf coast in t
he aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.So the question is, how do we build on these still-tentative partnerships between religious and
 secular people of good will? It's going to take more work, a lot more work than we've done so far. The tensions and the suspicio
ns on each side of the religious divide will have to be squarely addressed. And each side will need to accept some ground rules f
or collaboration.While I've already laid out some of the work that progressive leaders need to do, I want to talk a little bit ab
out what conservative leaders need to do -- some truths they need to acknowledge.For one, they need to understand the critical ro
le that the separation of church and state has played in preserving not only our democracy, but the robustness of our religious p
ractice. Folks tend to forget that during our founding, it wasn't the atheists or the civil libertarians who were the most effect
ive champions of the First Amendment. It was the persecuted minorities, it was Baptists like John Leland who didn't want the esta
blished churches to impose their views on folks who were getting happy out in the fields and teaching the scripture to slaves. It
 was the forbearers of the evangelicals who were the most adamant about not mingling government with religious, because they did 
not want state-sponsored religion hindering their ability to practice their faith as they understood it.Moreover, given the incre
asing diversity of America's population, the dangers of sectarianism have never been greater. Whatever we once were, we are no lo
nger just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of no
nbelievers.And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of Ame
rica, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson's, or Al Sharpton's? Which passages of Scri
pture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is ok and that eating shellfish is abom
ination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Ser
mon on the Mount - a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application?
 So before we get carried away, let's read our bibles. Folks haven't been reading their bibles.This brings me to my second point.
 Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values.
 It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reas
ons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I
 have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith a
t all.Now this is going to be difficult for some who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, as many evangelicals do. But in a plu
ralistic democracy, we have no choice. Politics depends on our ability to persuade each other of common aims based on a common re
ality. It involves the compromise, the art of what's possible. At some fundamental level, religion does not allow for compromise.
 It's the art of the impossible. If God has spoken, then followers are expected to live up to God's edicts, regardless of the con
sequences. To base one's life on such uncompromising commitments may be sublime, but to base our policy making on such commitment
s would be a dangerous thing. And if you doubt that, let me give you an example.We all know the story of Abraham and Isaac. Abrah
am is ordered by God to offer up his only son, and without argument, he takes Isaac to the mountaintop, binds him to an altar, an
d raises his knife, prepared to act as God has commanded.Of course, in the end God sends down an angel to intercede at the very l
ast minute, and Abraham passes God's test of devotion.But it's fair to say that if any of us leaving this church saw Abraham on a
 roof of a building raising his knife, we would, at the very least, call the police and expect the Department of Children and Fam
ily Services to take Isaac away from Abraham. We would do so because we do not hear what Abraham hears, do not see what Abraham s
ees, true as those experiences may be. So the best we can do is act in accordance with those things that we all see, and that we 
all hear, be it common laws or basic reason.Finally, any reconciliation between faith and democratic pluralism requires some sens
e of proportion.This goes for both sides.Even those who claim the Bible's inerrancy make distinctions between Scriptural edicts, 
sensing that some passages - the Ten Commandments, say, or a belief in Christ's divinity - are central to Christian faith, while 
others are more culturally specific and may be modified to accommodate modern life.The American people intuitively understand thi
s, which is why the majority of Catholics practice birth control and some of those opposed to gay marriage nevertheless are oppos
ed to a Constitutional amendment to ban it. Religious leadership need not accept such wisdom in counseling their flocks, but they
 should recognize this wisdom in their politics.But a sense of proportion should also guide those who police the boundaries betwe
en church and state. Not every mention of God in public is a breach to the wall of separation - context matters. It is doubtful t
hat children reciting the Pledge of Allegiance feel oppressed or brainwashed as a consequence of muttering the phrase "under God.
" I didn't. Having voluntary student prayer groups use school property to meet should not be a threat, any more than its use by t
he High School Republicans should threaten Democrats. And one can envision certain faith-based programs - targeting ex-offenders 
or substance abusers - that offer a uniquely powerful way of solving problems.So we all have some work to do here. But I am hopef
ul that we can bridge the gaps that exist and overcome the prejudices each of us bring to this debate. And I have faith that mill
ions of believing Americans want that to happen. No matter how religious they may or may not be, people are tired of seeing faith
 used as a tool of attack. They don't want faith used to belittle or to divide. They're tired of hearing folks deliver more scree
d than sermon. Because in the end, that's not how they think about faith in their own lives.So let me end with just one other int
eraction I had during my campaign. A few days after I won the Democratic nomination in my U.S. Senate race, I received an email f
rom a doctor at the University of Chicago Medical School that said the following:"Congratulations on your overwhelming and inspir
ing primary win. I was happy to vote for you, and I will tell you that I am seriously considering voting for you in the general e
lection. I write to express my concerns that may, in the end, prevent me from supporting you."The doctor described himself as a C
hristian who understood his commitments to be "totalizing." His faith led him to a strong opposition to abortion and gay marriage
, although he said that his faith also led him to question the idolatry of the free market and quick resort to militarism that se
emed to characterize much of the Republican agenda.But the reason the doctor was considering not voting for me was not simply my 
position on abortion. Rather, he had read an entry that my campaign had posted on my website, which suggested that I would fight 
"right-wing ideologues who want to take away a woman's right to choose." The doctor went on to write:"I sense that you have a str
ong sense of justice...and I also sense that you are a fair minded person with a high regard for reason...Whatever your convictio
ns, if you truly believe that those who oppose abortion are all ideologues driven by perverse desires to inflict suffering on wom
en, then you, in my judgment, are not fair-minded....You know that we enter times that are fraught with possibilities for good an
d for harm, times when we are struggling to make sense of a common polity in the context of plurality, when we are unsure of what
 grounds we have for making any claims that involve others...I do not ask at this point that you oppose abortion, only that you s
peak about this issue in fair-minded words."Fair-minded words.So I looked at my website and found the offending words. In fairnes
s to them, my staff had written them using standard Democratic boilerplate language to summarize my pro-choice position during th
e Democratic primary, at a time when some of my opponents were questioning my commitment to protect Roe v. Wade.Re-reading the do
ctor's letter, though, I felt a pang of shame. It is people like him who are looking for a deeper, fuller conversation about reli
gion in this country. They may not change their positions, but they are willing to listen and learn from those who are willing to
 speak in fair-minded words. Those who know of the central and awesome place that God holds in the lives of so many, and who refu
se to treat faith as simply another political issue with which to score points.So I wrote back to the doctor, and I thanked him f
or his advice. The next day, I circulated the email to my staff and changed the language on my website to state in clear but simp
le terms my pro-choice position. And that night, before I went to bed, I said a prayer of my own - a prayer that I might extend t
he same presumption of good faith to others that the doctor had extended to me.And that night, before I went to bed I said a pray
er of my own. It's a prayer I think I share with a lot of Americans. A hope that we can live with one another in a way that recon
ciles the beliefs of each with the good of all. It's a prayer worth praying, and a conversation worth having in this country in t
he months and years to come. Thank you. Floor Statement on Bushs Decision to Increase Troops in Iraq TOPIC: Iraq January 19, 2007
 Floor Statement on Bushs Decision to Increase Troops in Iraq Complete Text Mr. President, I would like to speak briefly on what 
is a roiling debate not only in the Senate but across the country, and that is the President's policy with respect to Iraq. There
 are countless reasons the American people have lost confidence in the President's Iraq policy, but chief among them has been the
 administration's insistence on making promises and assurances about progress and victory that do not appear to be grounded in th
e reality of the facts. We have been told we would be greeted as liberators. We have been promised the insurgency was in its last
 throes. We have been assured again and again that we are making progress and that the Iraqis would soon stand up so we could sta
nd down and our brave sons and daughters could start coming home. We have been asked to wait, we have been asked to be patient, a
nd we have been asked to give the President and the new Iraqi Government 6 more months, and then 6 more months after that, and th
en 6 more months after that.Now, after the loss of more than 3,000 American lives, after spending almost $400 billion, after Iraq
 has descended into civil war, we have been promised, once again, that the President's plan to escalate the war in Iraq will, thi
s time, be well planned, well coordinated, and well supported by the Iraqi Government. This time, we didn't have to wait to find 
out that none of this seems to be the case. Already, American military officials have told the New York Times that there is no cl
ear chain of command between Iraqis and U.S. commanders and no real indication that the Iraqis even want such a partnership. Yest
erday, Prime Minister al-Maliki, the person whom the President said had brought this plan to us, the man who is supposed to be ou
r partner-in-chief for this new plan, told foreign journalists that if the United States would only give his Army better weapons 
and equipment, our soldiers could go home.The President's decision to move forward with this escalation anyway, despite all evide
nce and military advice to the contrary, is the terrible consequence of the decision to give him the broad, open-ended authority 
to wage this war back in 2002. Over 4 years later, we can't revisit that decision or reverse some of the tragic outcomes, but wha
t we can do is make sure we provide the kind of oversight and constraints on the President this time that we failed to do the las
t time.I cannot in good conscience support this escalation. It is a policy which has already been tried and a policy which has fa
iled. Just this morning, I had veterans of the Iraq war visit my office to explain to me that this surge concept is, in fact, no 
different from what we have repeatedly tried, but with 20,000 troops, we will not in any imaginable way be able to accomplish any
 new progress.The fact is that we have tried this road before. In the end, no amount of American forces can solve the political d
ifferences that lie at the heart of somebody else's civil war. As the President's own military commanders have said, escalation o
nly prevents the Iraqis from taking more responsibility for their own future. It is even eroding our efforts in the wider war on 
terror as some of the extra soldiers will come directly from Afghanistan, where the Taliban has become resurgent.The President ha
s offered no evidence that more U.S. troops will be able to pressure Shias, Sunnis, and Kurds toward the necessary political sett
lement, and he has attached no consequences to his plan should the Iraqis fail to make progress. In fact, just last week, when I 
repeatedly asked Secretary Rice what would happen if the Iraqi Government failed to meet the benchmarks the President has called 
for and says are an integral part of their rationale for escalation, she couldn't give me an answer. When I asked her if there we
re any circumstances whatsoever in which we would tell the Iraqis that their failure to make progress means the end of our milita
ry commitment, she could not give me an answer. This is simply not good enough. When you ask how many more months and how many mo
re dollars and how many more lives it will take to end the policy that everyone now knows has not succeeded, ``I don't know'' isn
't good enough.Over the past 4 years, we have given this administration every chance to get this right, and they have disappointe
d us many times. But ultimately it is our brave men and women in uniform and their families who bear the greatest burden for thes
e mistakes. They have performed in an exemplary fashion. At no stage have they faltered in the mission that has been presented to
 them.Unfortunately, the strategy, the tactics, and the mission itself have been flawed. That is why Congress now has the duty to
 prevent even more mistakes and bring this war to a responsible end. That is why I plan to introduce legislation which I believe 
will stop the escalation of this war by placing a cap on the number of soldiers in Iraq. I wish to emphasize that I am not unique
 in taking this approach. I know Senator Dodd has crafted similar legislation. Senator Clinton, I believe, yesterday indicated sh
e shared similar views. The cap would not affect the money spent on the war or on our troops, but it would write into law that th
e number of U.S. forces in Iraq should not exceed the number that were there on January 10, 2007, the day the President announced
 his escalation policy.This measure would stop the escalation of the war in Iraq, but it is my belief that simply opposing the su
rge is not good enough. If we truly believe the only solution in Iraq is a political one--and I fervently believe that--if we bel
ieve a phased redeployment of U.S. forces in Iraq is the best--perhaps only--leverage we have to force a settlement between the c
ountry's warring factions, then we should act on that. That is why the second part of my legislation is a plan for phased redeplo
yment that I called for in a speech in Chicago 2 months ago. It is a responsible plan that protects American troops without causi
ng Iraq to suddenly descend into chaos. The President must announce to the Iraqi people that within 2 to 4 months, under this pla
n, U.S. policy will include a gradual and substantial reduction in U.S. forces. The President should then work with our military 
commanders to map out the best plan for such a redeployment and determine precise levels and dates.Drawing down our troops in Ira
q will put pressure on Iraqis to arrive at the political settlement that is needed and allow us to redeploy additional troops in 
Afghanistan and elsewhere in the region, as well as bring some back home. The forces redeployed elsewhere in the region could the
n help to prevent the conflict in Iraq from becoming a wider war, something that every international observer is beginning to wor
ry about. It will also reassure our allies in the Gulf. It will allow our troops to strike directly at al-Qaida wherever it may e
xist and demonstrate to international terrorist organizations that they have not driven us from the region.My plan would couple t
his phased redeployment with an enhanced effort to train Iraqi security forces and would expand the number of our personnel--espe
cially special forces--who are deployed with Iraqis as unit advisers and would finally link continued economic aid in Iraq with t
he existence of tangible progress toward reducing sectarian violence and reaching a political settlement.One final aspect of this
 plan that I believe is critical is it would call for engagement by the United States in a regional conference with other countri
es that are involved in the Middle East--particularly our allies, but including Syria and Iran--to find a solution to the war in 
Iraq. We have to realize that neither Iran nor Syria wants to see the security vacuum in Iraq filled with chaos, terrorism, refug
ees, and violence, as it could have a destabilizing effect throughout the entire region and within their own countries. So as odi
ous as the behavior of those regimes may be at times, it is important that we include them in a broader conversation about how we
 can stabilize Iraq.In closing, let me say this: I have been a consistent and strong opponent of this war. I have also tried to a
ct responsibly in that opposition to ensure that, having made the decision to go into Iraq, we provide our troops, who perform va
liantly, the support they need to complete their mission. I have also stated publicly that I think we have both strategic interes
ts and humanitarian responsibilities in ensuring that Iraq is as stable as possible under the circumstances.Finally, I said publi
cly that it is my preference not to micromanage the Commander-in-Chief in the prosecution of war. Ultimately, I do not believe th
at is the ideal role for Congress to play. But at a certain point, we have to draw a line. At a certain point, the American peopl
e have to have some confidence that we are not simply going down this blind alley in perpetuity.When it comes to the war in Iraq,
 the time for promises and assurances, for waiting and patience is over. Too many lives have been lost and too many billions have
 been spent for us to trust the President on another tried-and-failed policy, opposed by generals and experts, opposed by Democra
ts and Republicans, opposed by Americans and even the Iraqis themselves. It is time to change our policy. It is time to give Iraq
is their country back, and it is time to refocus America's effort on the wider struggle against terror yet to be won. Floor State
ment of Support for Stem Cell Research TOPIC: Healthcare & Health Issues July 17, 2006 Statement of Support for Stem Cell Researc
h Complete Text Mr. President, a few weeks ago I was visited by two of my constituents-- Mary Schneider and her son Ryan.When Rya
n was just two years old, his parents and doctors noted severe delays in his motor and speech development, and he was diagnosed w
ith cerebral palsy. His parents were devastated, as the prognosis for many children with cerebral palsy is quite grim, and given 
the severity of Ryan's condition, his doctors didn't have much hope for his improvement.Yet, his parents had hope. Because when R
yan was born, his parents had saved his cord blood, a viable but limited source of stem cells. They found a doctor at Duke Univer
sity who was willing to perform an experimental infusion with these cells to see if they might improve his condition.They did. In
 fact, they seem to have cured him.Within months of the infusion, Ryan was able to speak, use his arms, and eat normally, just li
ke any other child - a miracle his family had once only dreamed of.Ryan's story exemplifies the power and the promise of stem cel
ls to treat and cure the millions of Americans who are suffering from catastrophic, debilitating and life-threatening diseases an
d health conditions.Each year, 100,000 Americans will develop Alzheimer's disease. Over 1 million adults will be diagnosed with d
iabetes this year, which can lead to complications such as blindness, damaged nerves and loss of kidney function. And there are f
ar too many individuals with spinal cord injuries who are struggling to maintain mobility and independence.For most of our histor
y, medicine has offered little hope of recovery to individuals affected by these and other devastating illnesses and injuries.Unt
il now.Recent developments in stem cell research may hold the key to improved treatments, if not cures, for those affected by Alz
heimer's disease, diabetes, spinal cord injury and countless other conditions.Many men, women and children who are cancer survivo
rs are already familiar with the life-saving applications of adult stem cell research. Patients with leukemia or lymphoma often u
ndergo bone marrow transplants, a type of stem cell transplant, which can significantly prolong life, or permanently get rid of t
he cancer. This therapy has been used successfully for decades, and is saving lives everyday.Yet this breakthrough has its seriou
s limitations. Adult stem cells, such as those used in bone marrow transplants, can only be collected in small quantities, may no
t be a match for the patient, and have limited ability to transform into specialized cells.Cord blood, like the kind Ryan used, h
as limitations as well. If, for example, young Ryan's condition should deteriorate or he should develop another illness, there si
mply are not enough cord blood cells left for a second use. His mother has told us that the few remaining cells would have to be 
cloned to get enough cells for future use, or they would have to obtain stem cells from another source.These and other difficulti
es are the reasons why scientists have started to explore other types and other sources for stem cells, including embryonic stem 
cell research.Embryonic stem cells can be obtained from a number of sources, including in vitro fertilization. At this very momen
t, there are over 400,000 embryos being stored in over 400 facilities throughout the United States. The majority of these are res
erved for infertile couples. However, many of these embryos will go unused, destined for permanent storage in a freezer or dispos
al. We should expand and accelerate research using these embryos, just as we should continue to explore the viability of adult st
em cell use and cord blood use.All over the country, exciting progress is being made in the area of embryonic stem cell research.
 At the University of Illinois, they're finding that stem cells have the potential to treat blood disorders, lung diseases, and h
eart damage.At Johns Hopkins, researchers were able to use mouse embryonic stem cells to repair damaged nerves and restore mobili
ty in paralyzed rats. One can't help but think that it's a matter of when, not if, this research will be able to one day help tho
se who have lost the ability to walk.For these reasons, I'm proud to be a long-term supporter of greater stem cell research. Whil
e I was a member of the Illinois Senate, I was the chief cosponsor of the Ronald Reagan Biomedical Research Act, which would spec
ifically permit embryonic stem cell research in Illinois, and establish review of this research by the Illinois Department of Pub
lic Health.And I'm proud to be a cosponsor of the stem cell bill before us today. This bill embodies the innovative thinking that
 we as a society demand and medical advancement requires. By expanding scientific access to embryonic stem cells which would be o
therwise discarded, this bill will help our nation's scientists and researchers develop treatments and cures to help people who s
uffer from illnesses and injuries for which there are currently none. But the bill is not without limits; it requires that scient
ific research also be subject to rigorous oversight.I realize there are moral and ethical issues surrounding this debate. But I a
lso realize that we're not talking about harvesting cells that would've been used to create life and we're not talking about clon
ing humans. We're talking about using stem cells that would have otherwise been discarded and lost forever - and we're talking ab
out using those stem cells to possibly save the lives of millions of Americans.Democrats want this bill to pass. Conservative, pr
o-life Republicans want this bill to pass. By large margins, the American people want this bill to pass. It is only the White Hou
se standing in the way of progress - standing in the way of so many potential cures.I would only ask that the President thinks ab
out this before he picks up his pen to deliver his first veto in six years. I would ask that he thinks about Ryan Schneider and h
is parents, and all the other families who are sitting and waiting and praying for a cure - hoping that somewhere, a researcher o
r scientist will find the answer.There was a time in the middle of the last century when America watched helplessly as a mysterio
us disease left thousands - especially children - disabled for life. The medical community worked tirelessly to try and find a cu
re, but they needed help - they needed funding to make their research possible.With a world war raging and the country still emer
ging from depression, the federal government could have ignored their plight or told them to find a cure on their own.But that di
dn't happen. Instead, Franklin Delano Roosevelt helped galvanize a community of compassion and organize the March of Dimes to fin
d the cure for polio. And while Roosevelt knew that his own polio would never be cured by the discovery of a vaccine, he also kne
w that at its best, government can be used as a force to accomplish together what we cannot achieve on our own.And so the people 
began to care and the dimes piled up and the funding started to flow, and fifty years ago, Jonas Salk discovered the polio vaccin
e.Americans are looking for that kind of leadership today. All over the country, patients and their families are waiting today fo
r Congress and the President to open the door to the cures of tomorrow. At the dawn of the 21st century, we should approach this 
research with the same passion and commitment that have led to so many cures and saved so many lives throughout our history.I urg
e my colleagues to support this bill. Thank you. National Women's Law Center TOPIC: Civil Rights November 10, 2005 Remarks of Sen
ator Barack Obama National Women's Law Center National Complete Text Thank you Duffy for that generous introduction, and I also w
ant to thank you and Marcia and the National Women's Law Center for inviting me here.As I was thinking about tonight's dinner and
 all the progress the women's movement has made in the last century, the first thing that came to mind wasn't all the legal cases
 won or the legislation passed; it wasn't the issues debated or even the individual rights secured.I thought about my daughters.I
 thought about the world that Sasha and Malia will grow up in, about the chances they'll have and the challenges they'll face. An
d I thought about my hopes for them - that they'll be able to dream without limit, achieve without constraint, and be free to see
k their own happiness.At its heart, this has always been the essence of the women's movement in America - the quest to ensure tha
t our daughters will have the same opportunities as our sons.Now, I realize that one day, my girls will discover that this journe
y is not over - that there are doors left to be open and glass ceilings yet to be shattered.But if they ever come to me and ask w
hether change is possible - whether it's worth trying - then the people in this room and all those who've come before will have g
iven me an inspiring story to tell.I'll tell my daughters that there was a time when no one asked a young woman what she wanted t
o be when she grew up because everyone already knew the answer.But then women stood up and changed that answer.I'll tell them the
re was a time when women were routinely passed over for jobs that went to less qualified men; when they'd lose their jobs for the
 crime of becoming pregnant; when female athletes would lose out on thousands in college scholarships - a time when all of this w
as sanctioned by the law.But then women stood up and changed those laws.I'll tell them there was a time when women could be openl
y harassed and demeaned and abused right in the place where they worked or went to school.But then brave Americans like Anne Ladk
y and Nancy Kreiter stood up and women everywhere were protected.And when my daughters ask me whether change is possible, I'll te
ll them that there was a time when a woman who graduated third in her class at one of the most prestigious law schools in the cou
ntry couldn't find a single firm in America that would hire her. And that with all her talent and brilliance, she had to start he
r career as an unpaid assistant to a legal secretary at a county attorney's office in Arizona.But I'll also mention that years la
ter, the progress made by the women's movement made it possible for Sandra Day O'Connor to leave Arizona and become the first fem
ale justice of the United States Supreme Court. And today, if they want to find a female lawyer in a position of prominence, they
 need look no further than the one they call Mom.I will tell them all of this not to understate the challenges women face in this
 new century - challenges to choice and about pay and violence and employment and family - but to illustrate that in all the stru
ggles of past generations, one of the most remarkable achievements of this very American movement has been to forge a consensus a
round this ideal of equal opportunity - around the notion that discrimination based on gender has no place in our society or in o
ur laws.The result of this consensus is that today, if you ask any number of men, women, Democrats, Republicans, liberals or cons
ervatives, "Do you believe that your daughters should have the same opportunities as your sons?", the answer you would hear most 
frequently is "Of course." And when you say "of course," it becomes harder to argue that women shouldn't get equal pay for an equ
al day's work, or that they shouldn't get the support they need to be good workers and good parents at the same time.The other si
de knows this - they know that equal opportunity has always been a winning argument for us. And that's why those who don't want t
o make it a reality choose to fight on other terms. They make sure that in any given campaign or debate, the only woman's issue t
hat ever comes up is not equal pay or health care or family leave, but the narrowest, most divisive issues like late-term abortio
n.Now, the ability for a woman to make decisions about how many children to have and when - without interference from the governm
ent - is one of the most fundamental freedoms we have. We all know, becoming a parent is one of the most - if not the most - impo
rtant jobs there is. No one should make that decision for a woman and her family but them. And we must keep defending their right
 to make this choice in the years to come.But even as we defend this right, it's important for us to acknowledge the moral dimens
ion to the choice that's made. Too often in our advocacy, we forget that. And yet we know that many women who make the choice may
 never forget the difficulty that accompanies it. I noticed that when Hillary Clinton acknowledged this in a speech earlier this 
year, some criticized her. But she was merely recognizing an important moral reality for many.I also think that whenever possible
, we need frame choice within the broader context of equality and opportunity for women. Because when we argue big, we win. But w
hen the entire struggle for opportunity is narrowed, it plays into the hands of those who thrive on the politics of division; who
 win by fueling culture wars.A few weeks ago, I was in Nebraska speaking at the local chapter of Girls, Inc. As many of you know,
 this is an organization that, for over a century, has helped young women gain self-esteem and opportunity through programs that 
build job and educational skills, encourage health awareness, and send women to college on scholarships. Recently, the American G
irl doll company decided to help out Girls, Inc. by selling special bracelets and donating the proceeds to the organization - a g
esture that seems both harmless and well-intentioned.Unless, of course, you're the conservative right, in which case the most sen
sible response is to call for a boycott of American Girl. Because apparently, even though it's an issue they don't discuss much a
nd barely mention on their website, Girls, Inc. happens to believe in a woman's right to choose and support for girls regardless 
of their sexual orientation. And so just like that, an organization dedicated to expanding horizons and providing new opportunity
 for young women is turned into a front for "abortion-on-demand."This is what they do. But we don't have to let them drag us into
 it. There's too much still at stake for women on too many different issues for us to keep fighting on their terms. Here at NWLC,
 you work on child care and education and health care and welfare and employment - and there's no reason that work should be drow
ned out by a cultural jihad.In the coming weeks, many will be scouring the record of Judge Alito to find out exactly where he sta
nds on choice. Since he would replace a pivotal swing vote on the Court, this makes sense. But Sandra Day O'Connor was an indepen
dent voice on a host of important women's issues - and her story exemplifies the equality of opportunity at the heart of the wome
n's movement.Whether Samuel Alito will put the law on the side of upholding this ideal for every American should be at the center
 of our inquiry into his judicial philosophy, and I know that NWLC will be leading the way on this.It's time to find strength in 
this movement's roots of opportunity. At a time where the forces of globalization are transforming the way we work and live, this
 means taking a new look at the way government can help create economic opportunity for all Americans. In this debate, which has 
only just begun, it's women who have the most at stake, and women who should be the strongest voices.The social contract between 
Americans and their government - the bargain that says if you're willing to work hard for your country then your country will mak
e it easier for you to get ahead and raise a family - was made for a time when most women stayed home with the kids and most work
ers stayed with one company for their entire lives.But even though this time is long past - even though the vast majority of wome
n with children today are working, including single mothers - we still have social policies designed around the old model of the 
male breadwinner.And so women still earn 76% of what men do. They receive less in health benefits, less in pensions, less in Soci
al Security. They receive little help for the rising cost of child care. They make up 71% of all Medicaid beneficiaries, and a fu
ll two-thirds of all the Americans who lost their health care this year. When women go on maternity leave, America is the only co
untry in the industrialized world to let them go unpaid. When their children become sick and are sent home from school, many moth
ers are forced to choose between caring for their child and keeping their job.In short, when it comes to making your way in a twe
nty-first century economy, our daughters still do not have the same opportunities as our sons.The Administration's answer to this
 would only exacerbate the problem for women. The idea here is to give everyone one big refund on their government - divvy it up 
into some tax breaks, hand them out, and encourage everyone to use their share to go buy their own health care, their own retirem
ent plan, their own unemployment insurance, education, and so forth.But for the single mom who's already making less than her mal
e counterpart - the mom who had to go without a paycheck for three months when her daughter was born, who's now facing skyrocketi
ng child care costs and an employer who doesn't provide health care coverage for part-time work - for this mom, getting a few hun
dred bucks off the next tax bill won't solve the problem, will it?In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society. But in our
 past there has been another term for it - Social Darwinism, every man and woman for him or herself. It allows us to say to those
 whose health care or tuition may rise faster than they can afford - tough luck. It allows us to say to the women who lose their 
jobs when they have to care for a sick child - life isn't fair. It let's us say to the child born into poverty - pull yourself up
 by your bootstrapsBut there is a problem. It won't work. It ignores our history. Our economic dominance has depended on individu
al initiative and belief in the free market; but it has also depended on our sense of mutual regard for each other, the idea that
 everybody has a stake in the country, that we're all in it together and everybody's got a shot at opportunityAnd so if we're ser
ious about this opportunity, if we truly value families and don't think it's right to penalize parenting, then we need to start a
cting like it. We need to update the social contract in this country to include the realities faced by working women.When a paren
t takes parental leave, we shouldn't act like caring for a newborn baby is a three-month break - we should let them keep their sa
lary. When parents are working and their children need care, we should make sure that care is affordable, and we should make sure
 our kids can go to school earlier and longer so they have a safe place to learn while their parents are at work. When a mom or a
 dad has to leave work to care for a sick child, we should make sure it doesn't result in a pink slip. When a woman does lose a j
ob, she should get unemployment insurance even if the job loss was due to a family emergency and even if she's looking for a part
-time job. And in an economy where health and pension coverage are shrinking, where people switch jobs multiple times and women d
on't always depend on their husbands for benefits, we should have portable health care plans and pensions that any individual can
 take with them to any part-time or full-time job and Medicaid that's there when you need it.These are ideas that you've all been
 fighting for here at NWLC; ideas that go beyond the culture wars we're used to and should be able to get support on both sides o
f the aisle. Ideas that - at their core - are about expanding opportunity for our daughters.The other day, I was reading through 
Jonathan Kozol's new book, Shame of a Nation, which tells of his travels to underprivileged schools across America.At one point, 
Kozol tells about his trip to Fremont High School in Los Angeles, where he met a girl who tells him that she'd taken hairdressing
 twice, because there were actually two different levels offered by the high school. The first was in hairstyling; the other in b
raiding.Another girl, Mireya, listened as her friend told this story. And she began to cry. When asked what was wrong, she said, 
"I don't want to take hairdressing. I did not need sewing either. I knew how to sew. My mother is a seamstress in a factory. I'm 
trying to go to college. I don't need to sew to go to college. My mother sews. I hoped for something else."I hoped for something 
elseFrom the first moment a woman dared to speak that hope - dared to believe that the American Dream was meant for her too - ord
inary women have taken on extraordinary odds to give their daughters the chance for something else; for a life more equal, more f
ree, and filled with more opportunity than they ever had. In so many ways we have succeeded, but in so many areas we have much wo
rk left to do. The National Women's Law Center has been at the forefront of this journey, and I look forward to working with you 
as you continue to spread hope and expand opportunity for young women in the years to come. Thank you. Martin Luther King Jr. Nat
ional Memorial Groundbreaking TOPIC: Civil Rights November 13, 2006 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. National Memorial Groundbreaking C
eremony Complete Text THIS PARAGRAGH IS SPOKEN BEFORE THE VIDEO BEGINS: I want to thank first of all the King family, we would no
t be here without them, I want to thank Mr. Johnson and the foundation for allowing me to share this day with all of you. I wish 
to recognize as well my colleagues in the United States Senate who have helped make today possible. Senators Paul Sarbanes and Jo
hn Warner, who wrote the bill for this memorial. Senators Thad Cochran and Robert Byrd who appropriated the money to help build i
t. Thank you all.I have two daughters, ages five and eight. And when I see the plans for this memorial, I think about what it wil
l like when I first bring them here upon the memorial's completion. I imagine us walking down to this tidal basin, between one me
morial dedicated to the man who helped give birth to a nation, and another dedicated to the man who preserved it. I picture us wa
lking beneath the shadows cast by the Mountain of Despair, and gazing up at the Stone of Hope, and reading the quotes on the wall
 together as the water falls like rain.And at some point, I know that one of my daughters will ask, perhaps my youngest, will ask
, "Daddy, why is this monument here? What did this man do?"How might I answer them? Unlike the others commemorated in this place,
 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was not a president of the United States - at no time in his life did he hold public office. He was n
ot a hero of foreign wars. He never had much money, and while he lived he was reviled at least as much as he was celebrated. By h
is own accounts, he was a man frequently racked with doubt, a man not without flaws, a man who, like Moses before him, more than 
once questioned why he had been chosen for so arduous a task - the task of leading a people to freedom, the task of healing the f
estering wounds of a nation's original sin.And yet lead a nation he did. Through words he gave voice to the voiceless. Through de
eds he gave courage to the faint of heart. By dint of vision, and determination, and most of all faith in the redeeming power of 
love, he endured the humiliation of arrest, the loneliness of a prison cell, the constant threats to his life, until he finally i
nspired a nation to transform itself, and begin to live up to the meaning of its creed.Like Moses before him, he would never live
 to see the Promised Land. But from the mountain top, he pointed the way for us - a land no longer torn asunder with racial hatre
d and ethnic strife, a land that measured itself by how it treats the least of these, a land in which strength is defined not sim
ply by the capacity to wage war but by the determination to forge peace - a land in which all of God's children might come togeth
er in a spirit of brotherhood.We have not yet arrived at this longed for place. For all the progress we have made, there are time
s when the land of our dreams recedes from us - when we are lost, wandering spirits, content with our suspicions and our angers, 
our long-held grudges and petty disputes, our frantic diversions and tribal allegiances.And yet, by erecting this monument, we ar
e reminded that this different, better place beckons us, and that we will find it not across distant hills or within some hidden 
valley, but rather we will find it somewhere in our hearts.In the Book of Micah, Chapter 6, verse 8, the prophet says that God ha
s already told us what is good."What doth the Lord require of thee, the verse tells us, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and 
to walk humbly with thy God?"The man we honor today did what God required. In the end, that is what I will tell my daughters - I 
will leave it to their teachers and their history books to tell them the rest. As Dr. King asked to be remembered, I will tell th
em that this man gave his life serving others. I will tell them that this man tried to love somebody. I will tell them that becau
se he did these things, they live today with the freedom God intended, their citizenship unquestioned, their dreams unbounded. An
d I will tell them that they too can love. That they too can serve. And that each generation is beckoned anew, to fight for what 
is right, and strive for what is just, and to find within itself the spirit, the sense of purpose, that can remake a nation and t
ransform a world. Thank you very much. NAACP FIGHT FOR FREEDOM FUND DINNERTOPIC: Civil Rights May 1st, 2005 NAACP Fight for Freed
om Fund Dinner Detroit, MI Complete Text Thank you. Half a century after the first few hundred people sat for justice and equalit
y at these tables, I am honored to be here with this crowd of thousands at the 50th NAACP Fight for Freedom Fund Dinner.Founded a
t a time when we were constantly reminded how the world around us was separate and unequal...when the idea of legal rights for bl
ack folks was almost a contradiction in terms...when lunch counters and bus seats and water fountains were luxuries you had to fi
ght for and march for, the 50th anniversary of the Fight for Freedom Dinner reminds us of just how far our struggle has come.I wa
s reminded of this last month, when I had the honor of going to Atlanta to speak at John Lewis's 65th birthday celebration. Many 
of the luminaries of the Civil Rights Movement were down there, and I had the great honor of sitting between Ethel Kennedy and Co
retta Scott King, who both turned to me and said "we're really looking forward to hearing you speak." Now that's a really intimid
ating thing!And as I stood up there next to John Lewis, not a giant in stature, but a giant of compassion and courage, I thought 
to myself, never in a million years would I have guessed that I'd be serving in Congress with John Lewis.And then I thought, you 
know, there was once a time when John Lewis might never have guessed that he'd be serving in Congress. And there was a time not l
ong before that when people might never have guessed that someday, black folks would be able to go to the polls, pick up a ballot
, make their voice heard, and elect that Congress.But we can, and many of us are here, because people like John Lewis believed. B
ecause people feared nothing and risked everything for those beliefs. Because they saw injustice and endured pain in order to rig
ht what was wrong. We're here tonight because of them, and to them we owe the deepest gratitude.The road we have taken to this po
int has not been easy. But then again, the road to change never is.Some of you might know that I taught Constitutional Law at the
 Chicago Law school for awhile. And one of the courses I taught was a course in race and law, where we chronicled the history of 
race in this country and people's struggle to achieve freedom in the courts and on the streets. And often times my students would
 come up to me and say things like, "Boy I wish I could've been around at the height of the Civil Rights Movement. Because things
 seemed so clear at the time. And while there may have been room for debate on some things, the clarity of the cause and the need
 for the movement were crystal clear, and you didn't have the ambiguities you have today.Because it's one thing to know that ever
yone has a seat at the lunch counter, but how do we figure out how everyone can pay for the meal? It was easy to figure out that 
blacks and whites should be able to go to school together, but how do we make sure that every child is equipped and ready to grad
uate? It was easy to talk about dogs and fire hoses, but how do we talk about getting drugs and guns off the streets?" This is wh
at they told me.And of course, I reminded them that it wasn't very easy at all. That the moral certainties we now take for grante
d - that separate can never be equal, that the blessings of liberty enshrined in our Constitution belong to all of us, that our c
hildren should be able to go to school together and play together and grow up together - were anything but certain in 1965.I remi
nded them that even within the African-American community, there was disagreement about how much to stir things up. We have a chu
rch in Chicago that's on what use to be known as State Park Way. After Dr. King's assassination, the street was renamed to Martin
 Luther King Jr. Drive. But the pastor of the church - a prominent African-American in the community - hated Dr. King so bad that
 he actually changed the address of the church.And so it's never been clear. And it's never been easy. To get to where we are tod
ay it took struggle and sacrifice, discipline and tremendous courage.And sometimes, when I reflect on those giants of the Civil R
ights movement, I wonder - where did you find that courage? John Lewis, where did you find that courage? Dorothy Height, where di
d you find that courage? Rosa Parks, where did you find that courage?When you're facing row after row of state troopers on horseb
ack armed with billy clubs and tear gas...when they're coming toward you spewing hatred and violence, how do you simply stop, kne
el down, and pray to the Lord for salvation?Where do you find that courage?I don't know. But I do know that it's worth examining 
because the challenges we face today are going to require this kind of courage. The battle lines may have shifted and the barrier
s to equality may be new, but what's not new is the need for everyday heroes to stand up and speak out for what they believe is r
ight.Fifty years ago this country decided that Linda Brown shouldn't have to walk miles and miles to school every morning when th
ere was a white school just four blocks away because when it comes to education in America, separate can never be equal.Now that 
ruling came about because the NAACP was willing to fight tirelessly and risk its reputation; because everyday Americans - black a
nd white - were willing to take to the streets and risk their freedom. Because people showed courage.Fifty years later, what kind
 of courage are we showing to ensure that our schools are foundations of opportunity for our children?In a world where kids from 
Detroit aren't just competing with kids from Macomb for middle-class jobs, but with kids from Malaysia and New Delhi, ensuring th
at every American child gets the best education possible is the new civil rights challenge of our time.A student today armed with
 only a high school diploma will earn an average of only $25,000 a year - if you're African-American, it's 14% less than that. Me
anwhile, countries like China are graduating twice as many students with a college degree as we do. We're falling behind, and if 
want our kids to have the same chances we had in life, we must work harder to catch up.So what are we doing about it?When we see 
that America has one of the highest high school dropout rates in the industrialized world - even higher for African-Americans and
 Hispanics, what are we doing about it?When we see that our high school seniors are scoring lower on their math and science tests
 than almost any other students in the world at a time when expertise in these areas is the ticket to a high-wage job, what are w
e doing about it?When we see that for every hundred students who enter ninth grade, only eighteen - eighteen - will earn any kind
 of college degree within six years of graduating high school, what are we doing about it?And when we see broken schools, old tex
tbooks, and classrooms bursting at the seams, what are we doing about that?I'll tell you what they've been doing in Washington. I
n Washington, they'll talk about the importance of education one day and sign big tax cuts that starve our schools the next. They
'll talk about Leaving No Child Behind but then say nothing when it becomes obvious that they've left the money behind. In the bu
dget they passed this week in Congress, they gave out over $100 billion in tax cuts, on top of the trillions they've already give
n to the wealthiest few and most profitable corporations.One hundred billion dollars. Think about what that could do for our kids
 if we invested that in our schools. Think of how many new schools we could build, how many great teachers we could recruit, what
 kind of computers and technology we could put in our classrooms. Think about how much we could invest in math and science so our
 kids could be prepared for the 21st century economy. Think about how many kids we could send to college who've worked hard, stud
ied hard, but just can't afford the tuition.Think about all that potential and all that opportunity. Think about the choice Washi
ngton made instead. And now think about what you can do about it.I believe we have a mutual responsibility to make sure our schoo
ls are properly funded, our teachers are properly paid, and our students have access to an affordable college education. And if w
e don't do something about all that, than nothing else matters.But I also believe we have an individual responsibility as well.Ou
r grandparents use to tell us that being Black means you have to work twice as hard to succeed in life. And so I ask today, can w
e honestly say our kids are working twice as hard as the kids in India and China who are graduating ahead of us, with better test
 scores and the tools they need to kick our butts on the job market? Can we honestly say our teachers are working twice as hard, 
or our parents?One thing's for sure, I certainly know that Washington's not working twice as hard - and that's something each of 
us has a role in changing. Because if we want change in our education system - if we want our schools to be less crowded and fund
ed more equitably; if we want our children to take the courses that will get them ready for the 21st century; if we want our teac
hers to be paid what they're worth and armed with the tools they need to prepare our kids; than we need to summon the same courag
e today that those giants of the Civil Rights movement summoned half a century ago.Because more than anything else, these anniver
saries - of the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act and Fight for Freedom Fund Dinner - they remind us that in America, or
dinary citizens can somehow find in their hearts the courage to do extraordinary things. That change is never easy, but always po
ssible. And it comes not from violence or militancy or the kind of politics that pits us against each other and plays on our wors
t fears; but from great discipline and organization, and from a strong message of hope.And when we look at these challenges and t
hink, how can we do this? How can we cut through the apathy and the partisanship and the business-as-usual culture in Washington?
 When we wonder this, we need to rediscover the hope that people have been in our shoes before and they've lived to cross those b
ridges.Personally, I find that hope in thinking about a trip I took during my campaign for the U.S. Senate.About a week after the
 primary, Dick Durbin and I embarked on a nineteen city tour of Southern Illinois. And one of the towns we went to was a place ca
lled Cairo, which, as many of you might know, achieved a certain notoriety during the late 60s and early 70s as having one of the
 worst racial climates in the country. You had an active white citizen's council there, you had cross burnings, Jewish families w
ere being harassed, you had segregated schools, race riots, you name it - it was going on in Cairo.And we're riding down to Cairo
 and Dick Durbin turns to me and says, "Let me tell you about the first time I went to Cairo. It was about 30 years ago. I was 23
 years old and Paul Simon, who was Lieutenant Governor at the time, sent me down there to investigate what could be done to impro
ve the racial climate in Cairo."And Dick tells me how he diligently goes down there and gets picked up by a local resident who ta
kes him to his motel. And as Dick's getting out of the car, the driver says "excuse me, let me just give you a piece of advice. D
on't use the phone in your motel room because the switchboard operator is a member of the white citizen's council, and they'll re
port on anything you do."Well, this obviously makes Dick Durbin upset, but he's a brave young man, so he checks in to his room, u
npacks his bags and a few minutes later he hears a knock on the door. He opens up the door and there's a guy standing there who j
ust stares at Dick for a second, and then says, "What the hell are you doing here?" and walks away.Well, now Dick is really feeli
ng concerned and so am I because as he's telling me this story, we're pulling in to Cairo. So I'm wondering what kind of receptio
n we're going to get. And we wind our way through the town and we go past the old courthouse, take a turn and suddenly we're in a
 big parking lot and about 300 people are standing there. About a fourth of them are black and three fourths are white and they a
ll are about the age where they would have been active participants in the epic struggle that had taken place thirty years earlie
r.And as we pull closer, I see something. All of these people are wearing these little buttons that say "Obama for U.S. Senate." 
And they start smiling. And they start waving. And Dick and I looked at each other and didn't have to say a thing. Because if you
 told Dick thirty years ago that he - the son of Lithuania immigrants born into very modest means in east St. Louis - would be re
turning to Cairo as a sitting United States Senator, and that he would have in tow a black guy born in Hawaii with a father from 
Kenya and a mother from Kansas named Barack Obama, no one would have believed it.But it happened. And it happened because John Le
wis and scores of brave Americans stood on that bridge and lived to cross it.You know, two weeks after Bloody Sunday, when the ma
rch finally reached Montgomery, Martin Luther King Jr. spoke to the crowd of thousands and said "The arc of the moral universe is
 long, but it bends towards justice." He's right, but you know what? It doesn't bend on its own. It bends because we help it bend
 that way. Because people like John Lewis and Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks and thousands of ordinary Americans with extraord
inary courage have helped bend it that way. And as their examples call out to us from across the generations, we continue to prog
ress as a people because they inspire us to take our own two hands and bend that arc.Congratulations to all of you here at the NA
ACP who are busy bending that arc. Thank you. Network Neutrality - Podcast TOPIC: Technology June 8, 2006 Network Neutrality Snow
e and Dorgan's legislation to protect network neutrality Complete Transcript Hello, this is Senator Barack Obama and today is Thu
rsday, June 8th, 2006.The topic today is net neutrality. The internet today is an open platform where the demand for websites and
 services dictates success. You've got barriers to entry that are low and equal for all comers. And it's because the internet is 
a neutral platform that I can put on this podcast and transmit it over the internet without having to go through some corporate m
edia middleman. I can say what I want without censorship. I don't have to pay a special charge. But the big telephone and cable c
ompanies want to change the internet as we know it. They say they want to create high-speed lanes on the internet and strike excl
usive contractual arrangements with internet content-providers for access to those high-speed lanes. Those of us who can't pony u
p the cash for these high-speed connections will be relegated to the slow lanes.Allowing the Bells and cable companies to act as 
gatekeepers with control over internet access would make the internet like cable. A producer-driven market with barriers to entry
 for website creators and preferential treatment for specific sites based not on merit, the number of hits, but on relationships 
with the corporate gatekeeper. If there were four or more competitive providers of broadband service to every home, then cable an
d telephone companies would not be able to create a bidding war for access to the high-speed lanes. But here's the problem. More 
than 99 percent of households get their broadband services from either cable or a telephone company.So here's my view. We can't h
ave a situation in which the corporate duopoly dictates the future of the internet and that's why I'm supporting what is called n
et neutrality. In the House, the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Judiciary Committee reached different conclusions on netwo
rk neutrality. Judiciary Committee members voted to protect net neutrality and commerce voted with the Bells and cable. That deba
te is going to hit the House floor this Friday. In the Senate, Senators Snowe and Dorgan are leading the fight for net neutrality
 and I've joined in that effort. Senator Inouye, the ranking Democrat of the Commerce Committee, has joined us in this effort as 
well and he's working with Senator Stevens to put strong network neutrality into any Senate bill that comes before us. There is w
idespread support among consumer groups, leading academics and the most innovative internet companies, including Google and Yahoo
, in favor of net neutrality. And part of the reason for that is companies like Google and Yahoo might never have gotten started 
had they not been in a position to easily access the internet and do so on the same terms as the big corporate companies that wer
e interested in making money on the internet.I know if you are listening to this podcast that you are going to take an intense in
terest in this issue as well. Congress is going to need to hear your voice because the Bell and cable companies are going to be d
edicating millions of dollars to defeating network neutrality. So I'll keep you updated on this important issue and I look forwar
d to talking to you guys again next week. Bye-bye. Improving Chemical Plant Security - Podcast Transcript TOPIC: Homeland Securit
y March 29, 2006 Improving Chemical Plant Security Senator Barack Obama Complete Transcript Hello, this is Senator Barack Obama a
nd today is Wednesday, March 29, 2006.You know, there has obviously been a lot of talk about homeland security since the tragedy 
of 9/11. We have recently seen the debate flair up around the issue or ports and the nation of Dubai bidding to take over some of
 our critical port infrastructure. In this whole discussion, I think that many of you may not be aware of the degree to which we 
have utterly failed to deal with what may be one of the most significant potential terror threats to this country and that is how
 we protect our chemical plants across the nation.The 9/11 Commission focused specifically on the dangers of our chemical plants,
 how exposed they are. Industrial chemicals such as chlorine, ammonia, phosgene, methyl bromide, hydrochloric and various other a
cids are routinely stored near cities in multi-ton quantities. These chemicals are extraordinarily hazardous. Several are identic
al to those that were used as weapons during the First World War. Today they are 111 facilities in the country where a catastroph
ic chemical release could threaten more than one million people. These plants represent some of the most attractive targets for t
errorists looking to cause wide spread death and destruction. Despite this fact, security at our chemical plants is voluntary. It
's left to the individual plant owners. While many chemical plant owners have taken steps to beef up security, there are a lot wh
o haven't. We are still hearing reports of chemical plants with lap-dated fences, under-sized guard forces, and unprotected tanks
 of hazardous chemicals.Basically these plants are stationary weapons of mass destruction spread all across the country. Their se
curity is light, their facilities are easily entered, and their contents are deadly. Now, five years after 9/11, the federal gove
rnment has done virtually nothing to secure these chemical plants. It's a travesty that the 9/11 Commission, in looking at what h
as been done over the last five years gave us basically an "F" when it came to chemical plant security. So what I've done working
 with Senator Frank Lautenberg from New Jersey, is to introduce legislation that would protect our communities from this potentia
l threat but in a balanced way. There are features in this bill that I think have to be part of any chemical security legislation
 passed by this Congress, and Congress has to go ahead and actually act on legislation in this area.So, here are a couple things 
that the bill does. Number one: it establishes a general duty to improve security at facilities storing threshold amounts of chem
icals. What that means is that chemical facilities would have to take steps to improve security including improving barriers, con
tainment, mitigation, safety training, and where possible, use safer technology. That is known as Inherent Safer Technology, or "
IST," what that means is essentially, plants should use less toxic chemicals, and employ safer procedures where possible.Second t
hing it does is it identifies high priority chemical facilities. It directs the Department of Homeland Security to work with the 
EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency, as well as state and local agencies to identify those areas that need special attention
 either because they are close to population centers, the type or amount of chemicals that are involved, their threat to national
 security and critical infrastructure.Third thing: it requires high priority facilities to conduct vulnerability assessments and 
develop and implement response plans. That's something that is not currently done.Fourth thing it does is it says that if states 
decide to create laws that are more stringent than the national standard, they are not preempted; states can make decisions that 
they want even better protection for our chemical plants.Next, it protects whistle-blowers. It protects employees who report dang
erous gaps in security to the Homeland Security Department.Finally, it protects security information from disclosure under the Fr
eedom of Information Act and other state and local disclosure laws, so you don't have chemical plant security measures on the net
 for terrorists to tap into.These are some common sense provisions; unfortunately, the chemical lobby is one of the most powerful
 ones in Washington. It spends more money than just about any other lobby, including the pharmaceutical industry. They have dragg
ed their feet, in terms of wanting to move this issue forward. I understand that there is no company out there that wants to be r
egulated, companies are generally allergic to any intrusion in their business decisions, but this is something of such great impo
rtance that we can't afford to rely solely on voluntary measures.It's overdue; it's time that we acted. My hope is that the Laute
nberg-Obama Chemical Security and Safety Act moves in this Congress and I would urge all of you to contact your legislators to su
ggest that this is in fact something that you guys strongly support.I appreciate your time, and I look forward to talking to you 
next week. Bye bye. Xavier University Commencement Address - New Orleans TOPIC: Commencement and Katrina & Gulf Recovery August 1
1, 2006 Xavier University Commencement Address New Orleans, Louisiana Complete Text Good afternoon President Francis, the Board o
f Trustees, faculty, parents, family, friends, and the Class of 2006.I want to start by thanking you all for allowing me to share
 in your miracle today. Over the past year there has been no shortage of doubts about whether this college would live to see anot
her commencement - and doubts remain still about the future of this great city. But on this summer's day in New Orleans, less tha
n one year after the worst storm in American history beat down your door, I look out at the largest class to ever graduate from t
his college and know that one thing is certain - Xavier University is back.I have to say that I'm pretty humbled to be here. Each
 year there are hundreds of commencements in this country. All are hopeful, some are inspiring, and most of you probably won't ev
en remember who your speaker was ten years from now. As a rule, they usually involve an old guy like me giving young folks like y
ou advice about what to expect in the real world - advice about the challenges you'll face and the obstacles you'll have to overc
ome.But this is different. In the last month, I have walked among New Orleans' battered homes and empty streets and scattered deb
ris that prove armies aren't the only ones who can wage wars on cities. I have seen pictures of Xavier after the storm - the subm
erged classrooms and the shattered windows and the dorm rooms that were left with books sitting open on desks and clothes still u
npacked on the bed. And I have heard the story of nearly 400 students and faculty who were trapped on campus in the days after Ka
trina - waiting on the roof to be rescued with a sign that simply read "Help Us."And as I thought about all of this, it dawned on
 me that when it comes to giving advice about challenges and obstacles, it's you who could probably teach the rest of us a thing 
or two about what it takes to overcome.I could give you a lecture on courage, but some of you know what it is to wait huddled in 
the dark without electricity or running water, wondering if a helicopter or boat will come for you before the gunshots get closer
 or the food runs out or the waters rise.I could talk at length about perseverance, but this is a class that was forced to scatte
r to schools across the country at the beginning of your senior year, leaving everything you knew behind while you waited to find
 out if you could ever come back.And I could go on and on about the importance of community - about what it means to care for eac
h other - but this is a school where so many sacrificed so much in order to open your doors in January; a triumph that showed the
 rest of America that there are those who refuse to desert this city and its people no matter what.Yours has been an education th
at cannot simply be measured in the tests you've taken or the diploma you're about to receive. For it has also been an education 
in humanity, brought about by a force of nature - a lesson in both our capacity for good and in the imperfections of man; in our 
ability to rise to great challenges and our tendency to sometimes fall short of our obligations to one another.Some will take an 
entire lifetime to experience these lessons - others never will. But as some of Katrina's youngest survivors, you've had a front 
row seat.So what does this mean for you?Well, lessons can be just as easily unlearned as they are learned. Time may heal, but it 
can also cloud the memory and remove us further from that initial core of concern.And so what this all means is that today and ev
ery day, you have a responsibility to remember what happened here in New Orleans. To make it a part of who you are. To let its le
ssons guide you as face your own challenges.After all, Katrina may well be the most dramatic test you face in life, but it will b
y no means be the last. There will be quiet tests of character - the shoulder you lend a friend during their time of need; the wa
y you raise your children; the care you give a loved one who's sick or dying; the integrity and honesty with which you carry your
self.There will be powerful personal tests - the profession you choose, the legacy you leave, your ability to handle failure and 
disappointment.And of course, there are the tests you will face as citizen - whether you use your voice to rage against injustice
; whether you use your time to give back to your community; whether you use your passion to commit yourself to a cause larger tha
n yourself. In most of these tests, there are two different paths you can take.One is easy. After graduating from a great school 
like Xavier, you'll pretty much be able to punch your own ticket - which means you can take your diploma, walk off this stage, le
ave this city, and go chasing after the big house and the large salary and the nice suits and all the other things that our money
 culture says you should buy.You can live in neighborhoods with people who are exactly like yourself, and send your kids to the s
ame schools, and narrow your concerns to what's going in your own little circle.And when you turn on the TV or open the newspaper
 and hear about all the trouble in the world, there will be pundits and politicians who'll tell you that it's someone else's faul
t and someone else's problem to fix.They'll tell you that the Americans who sleep in the streets and beg for food got there becau
se they're all lazy or weak of spirit. That the immigrants who risk their lives to cross a desert have nothing to contribute to t
his country and no desire to embrace our ideals. That the inner-city children who are trapped in dilapidated schools can't learn 
and won't learn and so we should just give up on them entirely. That the innocent people being slaughtered and expelled from thei
r homes in Darfur are somebody else's problem to take care of.And when you hear all this, the easiest thing in the world will be 
to do nothing at all. To turn off the TV, put down the paper, and walk away from the stories about Iraq or poverty or violence or
 joblessness or hopelessness. To go about your busy lives - to remain detached; to remain indifferent; to remain safe.But if you 
should ever think about taking this path, I ask you first to remember.Remember witnessing the pain that neglect and indifference 
can cause - how entire neighborhoods in this city were left to drown because no one thought to make sure that every person had th
e means to escape. Remember what happens when responsibilities are ignored and bucks are passed - when the White House blames FEM
A and FEMA blames the state of Louisiana and pretty soon no one's fixing the problem because everyone thought somebody else would
. And whenever you're tempted to view the poor or the ill or the persecuted as "those people" - people in their own world with th
eir own problems - remember always your neighbors in places like the 9th ward; men and women and children who, just like you, wan
ted desperately to escape to somewhere better.And if you remember all of this - if you remember what happened here in New Orleans
 - if you allow it to change you forever - know that there is another path you can take.This one is more difficult. It asks more 
of you. It asks you to leave here and not just pursue your own individual dreams, but to help perfect our collective dream as a n
ation. It asks you to realize there is more to life than being rich, thin, young, famous, safe, and entertained. It asks you to r
ecognize that there are people out there who need you.You know, there's a lot of talk in this country about the federal deficit. 
But I think we should talk more about our empathy deficit - the ability to put ourselves in someone else's shoes; to see the worl
d through the eyes of those who are different from us - the child who's hungry, the steelworker who's been laid-off, the family w
ho lost the entire life they built together when the storm came to town.When you think like this - when you choose to broaden you
r ambit of concern and empathize with the plight of others, whether they are close friends or distant strangers - it becomes hard
er not to act; harder not to help.For each of you, this desire to do for others and serve your communities will come even easier 
if you allow yourself to remember what you saw here in New Orleans.Because aside from all the bad that came from Katrina - the fa
ilures and the neglect, the incompetence and the apathy - you were also witness to a good that many forgot was even possible.You 
saw people from every corner of this country drop what they were doing, leave their homes, and come to New Orleans - Americans wh
o didn't know a soul in the entire city who found their own piece of driftwood, built their own make-shift raft, and waded throug
h the streets of this city, saving anyone they could. You saw the doctors and the nurses who refused to leave their city and thei
r patients even when they were told time and again by local officials that it was no longer safe - even when helicopters were wai
ting to take them away. Men and women who stayed to care for the sick and dying long after their medical equipment and electricit
y were gone.And after the storm had passed, you saw a spirit of generosity that spanned an entire globe, with billions upon billi
ons in donations coming from tiny, far-off nations like Qatar and Sri Lanka. Think about that. These are places a lot of folks co
uldn't even identify on a map. Sri Lanka was still recovering from the devastation caused by last year's Tsunami. And yet, they h
eard about our tragedy, and they gave.Remember always this goodness. Remember always that while many in Washington and on all lev
els of government failed New Orleans, there were plenty of ordinary people who displayed extraordinary humanity during this city'
s hour of need.In the years to come, return this favor to those who are forced to weather their own storms - be it the loss of a 
job or a slide into poverty; an unexpected illness or an unforeseen eviction. And in returning these favors, seek also to make th
is a nation of no more Katrinas. Make this a nation where we never again leave behind any American by ensuring that every America
n has a job that can support a family and health care in case they get sick and a good education for their child and a secure ret
irement they can count on. Make this a nation where we are never again caught unprepared to meet the challenges of our time - whe
re we free ourselves from a dependence on oil and protect our cities from both forces of terror and nature.Make this a nation tha
t is worthy of the sacrifices of so many of its citizens, and in doing so, make real the observation made by a visitor to our cou
ntry so many centuries ago: "America is great because Americans are good."I ask you to take this second path - this harder path -
 not because you have an obligation to those who are less fortunate, although you do have that obligation. Not because you have a
 debt to all of those who helped you get to where you are, although you do have that debt.I ask you to take it because you have a
n obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on our collective salvation. And because it's only when you hi
tch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you will realize your true potential.It is said that faith is a belief in t
hings not seen, and miracles, by their nature, are inexplicable gifts from God.But sometimes, if we look hard enough at the momen
ts we triumph against the greatest of odds, we can see His will at work in the people He loves.It's now well-known in this commun
ity that when your President, Norman Francis, promised to re-open this school by January, he joked that his decision would be rec
orded by history as either "crazy and stupid" or "bold and visionary."And when I heard that, I wondered where you find the courag
e to make such a crazy, visionary promise - and where you find the commitment to keep it.And I thought, Norman Francis is someone
 who remembers - remembers where he came from, remembers the lessons he learned, remembers the opportunities he's had, and lives 
his life according to those memories.Born in Lafayette before Civil Rights and Voting Rights were even a possibility, this is a m
an who was raised in poverty, earning extra money for his parents as a child by shining shoes. He studied hard through high schoo
l, put himself through Xavier by working long hours in the library, and became the first ever African American to be accepted int
o Loyola's Law School.He graduated that law school and could've gone anywhere and made any amount of money - but Norman Francis w
anted to help people learn because he remembered all the people who helped him.And so he came back to Xavier, and he worked his w
ay up through the ranks, and he became the first ever African-American president of this school at just thirty-six years old.Sinc
e that day he has had many accolades and many chances to do whatever he wished with his life. He has been an advisor to four U.S.
 Presidents, served on a commission to the Vatican, and as President of the United Negro College Fund.But through all of this, he
 decided to stay here in New Orleans, and build this university.And so when Katrina tried to tear it down, you can understand why
 he refused to let that happen - why he put aside tending to the damage in his own house so that he could work on rebuilding this
 one - why he believed more than anything in his promise that these doors would open in January.Norman Francis has helped make to
day's miracle because he has seen miracles at work in his own life. Now that you have seen one in yours, it's your turn to live a
 life committed to others, devoted to the impossible, and ever aware of the lessons you learned in New Orleans.I've noticed that 
in the rebuilding effort throughout this city, one of the last things to come back, and yet the easiest to notice, is the greener
y that makes any community seem alive. And as I saw a newly planted tree on my last trip here, I thought of a passage from the bo
ok of Job:"There is hope for a tree if it be cut down that it will sprout again, and that its tender branch will not cease."Katri
na was not the end of the tough times for New Orleans, and you will continue to face your own tests and challenges in the years t
o come. But if someone were to ask me how the tree stands on this August day, I would tell them that the seeds have sprouted, the
 roots are strong, and I just saw more than 500 branches that are ready to grow again. Congratulations on your graduation.Thank y
ou. The American Promise Acceptance Speech at the Democratic Convention Mile High Stadium, Denver Colorado August 28, 2008To Chai
rman Dean and my great friend Dick Durbin; and to all my fellow citizens of this great nation; With profound gratitude and great 
humility, I accept your nomination for the presidency of the United States. Let me express my thanks to the historic slate of can
didates who accompanied me on this journey, and especially the one who traveled the farthest - a champion for working Americans a
nd an inspiration to my daughters and to yours -- Hillary Rodham Clinton. To President Clinton, who last night made the case for 
change as only he can make it; to Ted Kennedy, who embodies the spirit of service; and to the next Vice President of the United S
tates, Joe Biden, I thank you. I am grateful to finish this journey with one of the finest statesmen of our time, a man at ease w
ith everyone from world leaders to the conductors on the Amtrak train he still takes home every night. To the love of my life, ou
r next First Lady, Michelle Obama, and to Sasha and Malia - I love you so much, and I'm so proud of all of you. Four years ago, I
 stood before you and told you my story - of the brief union between a young man from Kenya and a young woman from Kansas who wer
en't well-off or well-known, but shared a belief that in America, their son could achieve whatever he put his mind to. It is that
 promise that has always set this country apart - that through hard work and sacrifice, each of us can pursue our individual drea
ms but still come together as one American family, to ensure that the next generation can pursue their dreams as well. That's why
 I stand here tonight. Because for two hundred and thirty two years, at each moment when that promise was in jeopardy, ordinary m
en and women - students and soldiers, farmers and teachers, nurses and janitors -- found the courage to keep it alive. We meet at
 one of those defining moments - a moment when our nation is at war, our economy is in turmoil, and the American promise has been
 threatened once more. Tonight, more Americans are out of work and more are working harder for less. More of you have lost your h
omes and even more are watching your home values plummet. More of you have cars you can't afford to drive, credit card bills you 
can't afford to pay, and tuition that's beyond your reach. These challenges are not all of government's making. But the failure t
o respond is a direct result of a broken politics in Washington and the failed policies of George W. Bush. America, we are better
 than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. This country is more decent than one where a woman in Ohio, on t
he brink of retirement, finds herself one illness away from disaster after a lifetime of hard work. This country is more generous
 than one where a man in Indiana has to pack up the equipment he's worked on for twenty years and watch it shipped off to China, 
and then chokes up as he explains how he felt like a failure when he went home to tell his family the news. We are more compassio
nate than a government that lets veterans sleep on our streets and families slide into poverty; that sits on its hands while a ma
jor American city drowns before our eyes. Tonight, I say to the American people, to Democrats and Republicans and Independents ac
ross this great land - enough! This moment - this election - is our chance to keep, in the 21st century, the American promise ali
ve. Because next week, in Minnesota, the same party that brought you two terms of George Bush and Dick Cheney will ask this count
ry for a third. And we are here because we love this country too much to let the next four years look like the last eight. On Nov
ember 4th, we must stand up and say: "Eight is enough." Now let there be no doubt. The Republican nominee, John McCain, has worn 
the uniform of our country with bravery and distinction, and for that we owe him our gratitude and respect. And next week, we'll 
also hear about those occasions when he's broken with his party as evidence that he can deliver the change that we need. But the 
record's clear: John McCain has voted with George Bush ninety percent of the time. Senator McCain likes to talk about judgment, b
ut really, what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush has been right more than ninety percent of the time? I
 don't know about you, but I'm not ready to take a ten percent chance on change. The truth is, on issue after issue that would ma
ke a difference in your lives - on health care and education and the economy - Senator McCain has been anything but independent. 
He said that our economy has made "great progress" under this President. He said that the fundamentals of the economy are strong.
 And when one of his chief advisors - the man who wrote his economic plan - was talking about the anxiety Americans are feeling, 
he said that we were just suffering from a "mental recession," and that we've become, and I quote, "a nation of whiners." A natio
n of whiners? Tell that to the proud auto workers at a Michigan plant who, after they found out it was closing, kept showing up e
very day and working as hard as ever, because they knew there were people who counted on the brakes that they made. Tell that to 
the military families who shoulder their burdens silently as they watch their loved ones leave for their third or fourth or fifth
 tour of duty. These are not whiners. They work hard and give back and keep going without complaint. These are the Americans that
 I know. Now, I don't believe that Senator McCain doesn't care what's going on in the lives of Americans. I just think he doesn't
 know. Why else would he define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year? How else could he propose hundr
eds of billions in tax breaks for big corporations and oil companies but not one penny of tax relief to more than one hundred mil
lion Americans? How else could he offer a health care plan that would actually tax people's benefits, or an education plan that w
ould do nothing to help families pay for college, or a plan that would privatize Social Security and gamble your retirement? It's
 not because John McCain doesn't care. It's because John McCain doesn't get it. For over two decades, he's subscribed to that old
, discredited Republican philosophy - give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyon
e else. In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society, but what it really means is - you're on your own. Out of work? Tough
 luck. No health care? The market will fix it. Born into poverty? Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps - even if you don't hav
e boots. You're on your own. Well it's time for them to own their failure. It's time for us to change America. You see, we Democr
ats have a very different measure of what constitutes progress in this country. We measure progress by how many people can find a
 job that pays the mortgage; whether you can put a little extra money away at the end of each month so you can someday watch your
 child receive her college diploma. We measure progress in the 23 million new jobs that were created when Bill Clinton was Presid
ent - when the average American family saw its income go up $7,500 instead of down $2,000 like it has under George Bush. We measu
re the strength of our economy not by the number of billionaires we have or the profits of the Fortune 500, but by whether someon
e with a good idea can take a risk and start a new business, or whether the waitress who lives on tips can take a day off to look
 after a sick kid without losing her job - an economy that honors the dignity of work. The fundamentals we use to measure economi
c strength are whether we are living up to that fundamental promise that has made this country great - a promise that is the only
 reason I am standing here tonight. Because in the faces of those young veterans who come back from Iraq and Afghanistan, I see m
y grandfather, who signed up after Pearl Harbor, marched in Patton's Army, and was rewarded by a grateful nation with the chance 
to go to college on the GI Bill. In the face of that young student who sleeps just three hours before working the night shift, I 
think about my mom, who raised my sister and me on her own while she worked and earned her degree; who once turned to food stamps
 but was still able to send us to the best schools in the country with the help of student loans and scholarships. When I listen 
to another worker tell me that his factory has shut down, I remember all those men and women on the South Side of Chicago who I s
tood by and fought for two decades ago after the local steel plant closed. And when I hear a woman talk about the difficulties of
 starting her own business, I think about my grandmother, who worked her way up from the secretarial pool to middle-management, d
espite years of being passed over for promotions because she was a woman. She's the one who taught me about hard work. She's the 
one who put off buying a new car or a new dress for herself so that I could have a better life. She poured everything she had int
o me. And although she can no longer travel, I know that she's watching tonight, and that tonight is her night as well. I don't k
now what kind of lives John McCain thinks that celebrities lead, but this has been mine. These are my heroes. Theirs are the stor
ies that shaped me. And it is on their behalf that I intend to win this election and keep our promise alive as President of the U
nited States. What is that promise?It's a promise that says each of us has the freedom to make of our own lives what we will, but
 that we also have the obligation to treat each other with dignity and respect. It's a promise that says the market should reward
 drive and innovation and generate growth, but that businesses should live up to their responsibilities to create American jobs, 
look out for American workers, and play by the rules of the road. Ours is a promise that says government cannot solve all our pro
blems, but what it should do is that which we cannot do for ourselves - protect us from harm and provide every child a decent edu
cation; keep our water clean and our toys safe; invest in new schools and new roads and new science and technology. Our governmen
t should work for us, not against us. It should help us, not hurt us. It should ensure opportunity not just for those with the mo
st money and influence, but for every American who's willing to work. That's the promise of America - the idea that we are respon
sible for ourselves, but that we also rise or fall as one nation; the fundamental belief that I am my brother's keeper; I am my s
ister's keeper. That's the promise we need to keep. That's the change we need right now. So let me spell out exactly what that ch
ange would mean if I am President. Change means a tax code that doesn't reward the lobbyists who wrote it, but the American worke
rs and small businesses who deserve it. Unlike John McCain, I will stop giving tax breaks to corporations that ship jobs overseas
, and I will start giving them to companies that create good jobs right here in America. I will eliminate capital gains taxes for
 the small businesses and the start-ups that will create the high-wage, high-tech jobs of tomorrow. I will cut taxes - cut taxes 
- for 95% of all working families. Because in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle-clas
s. And for the sake of our economy, our security, and the future of our planet, I will set a clear goal as President: in ten year
s, we will finally end our dependence on oil from the Middle East. Washington's been talking about our oil addiction for the last
 thirty years, and John McCain has been there for twenty-six of them. In that time, he's said no to higher fuel-efficiency standa
rds for cars, no to investments in renewable energy, no to renewable fuels. And today, we import triple the amount of oil as the 
day that Senator McCain took office. Now is the time to end this addiction, and to understand that drilling is a stop-gap measure
, not a long-term solution. Not even close. As President, I will tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology, a
nd find ways to safely harness nuclear power. I'll help our auto companies re-tool, so that the fuel-efficient cars of the future
 are built right here in America. I'll make it easier for the American people to afford these new cars. And I'll invest 150 billi
on dollars over the next decade in affordable, renewable sources of energy - wind power and solar power and the next generation o
f biofuels; an investment that will lead to new industries and five million new jobs that pay well and can't ever be outsourced. 
America, now is not the time for small plans.Now is the time to finally meet our moral obligation to provide every child a world-
class education, because it will take nothing less to compete in the global economy. Michelle and I are only here tonight because
 we were given a chance at an education. And I will not settle for an America where some kids don't have that chance. I'll invest
 in early childhood education. I'll recruit an army of new teachers, and pay them higher salaries and give them more support. And
 in exchange, I'll ask for higher standards and more accountability. And we will keep our promise to every young American - if yo
u commit to serving your community or your country, we will make sure you can afford a college education. Now is the time to fina
lly keep the promise of affordable, accessible health care for every single American. If you have health care, my plan will lower
 your premiums. If you don't, you'll be able to get the same kind of coverage that members of Congress give themselves. And as so
meone who watched my mother argue with insurance companies while she lay in bed dying of cancer, I will make certain those compan
ies stop discriminating against those who are sick and need care the most. Now is the time to help families with paid sick days a
nd better family leave, because nobody in America should have to choose between keeping their jobs and caring for a sick child or
 ailing parent. Now is the time to change our bankruptcy laws, so that your pensions are protected ahead of CEO bonuses; and the 
time to protect Social Security for future generations. And now is the time to keep the promise of equal pay for an equal day's w
ork, because I want my daughters to have exactly the same opportunities as your sons. Now, many of these plans will cost money, w
hich is why I've laid out how I'll pay for every dime - by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens that don't help America gro
w. But I will also go through the federal budget, line by line, eliminating programs that no longer work and making the ones we d
o need work better and cost less - because we cannot meet twenty-first century challenges with a twentieth century bureaucracy. A
nd Democrats, we must also admit that fulfilling America's promise will require more than just money. It will require a renewed s
ense of responsibility from each of us to recover what John F. Kennedy called our "intellectual and moral strength." Yes, governm
ent must lead on energy independence, but each of us must do our part to make our homes and businesses more efficient. Yes, we mu
st provide more ladders to success for young men who fall into lives of crime and despair. But we must also admit that programs a
lone can't replace parents; that government can't turn off the television and make a child do her homework; that fathers must tak
e more responsibility for providing the love and guidance their children need. Individual responsibility and mutual responsibilit
y - that's the essence of America's promise. And just as we keep our keep our promise to the next generation here at home, so mus
t we keep America's promise abroad. If John McCain wants to have a debate about who has the temperament, and judgment, to serve a
s the next Commander-in-Chief, that's a debate I'm ready to have. For while Senator McCain was turning his sights to Iraq just da
ys after 9/11, I stood up and opposed this war, knowing that it would distract us from the real threats we face. When John McCain
 said we could just "muddle through" in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources and more troops to finish the fight against the 
terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11, and made clear that we must take out Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants if we have 
them in our sights. John McCain likes to say that he'll follow bin Laden to the Gates of Hell - but he won't even go to the cave 
where he lives. And today, as my call for a time frame to remove our troops from Iraq has been echoed by the Iraqi government and
 even the Bush Administration, even after we learned that Iraq has a $79 billion surplus while we're wallowing in deficits, John 
McCain stands alone in his stubborn refusal to end a misguided war. That's not the judgment we need. That won't keep America safe
. We need a President who can face the threats of the future, not keep grasping at the ideas of the past. You don't defeat a terr
orist network that operates in eighty countries by occupying Iraq. You don't protect Israel and deter Iran just by talking tough 
in Washington. You can't truly stand up for Georgia when you've strained our oldest alliances. If John McCain wants to follow Geo
rge Bush with more tough talk and bad strategy, that is his choice - but it is not the change we need. We are the party of Roosev
elt. We are the party of Kennedy. So don't tell me that Democrats won't defend this country. Don't tell me that Democrats won't k
eep us safe. The Bush-McCain foreign policy has squandered the legacy that generations of Americans -- Democrats and Republicans 
- have built, and we are here to restore that legacy. As Commander-in-Chief, I will never hesitate to defend this nation, but I w
ill only send our troops into harm's way with a clear mission and a sacred commitment to give them the equipment they need in bat
tle and the care and benefits they deserve when they come home. I will end this war in Iraq responsibly, and finish the fight aga
inst al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. I will rebuild our military to meet future conflicts. But I will also renew the tou
gh, direct diplomacy that can prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and curb Russian aggression. I will build new partnersh
ips to defeat the threats of the 21st century: terrorism and nuclear proliferation; poverty and genocide; climate change and dise
ase. And I will restore our moral standing, so that America is once again that last, best hope for all who are called to the caus
e of freedom, who long for lives of peace, and who yearn for a better future. These are the policies I will pursue. And in the we
eks ahead, I look forward to debating them with John McCain. But what I will not do is suggest that the Senator takes his positio
ns for political purposes. Because one of the things that we have to change in our politics is the idea that people cannot disagr
ee without challenging each other's character and patriotism. The times are too serious, the stakes are too high for this same pa
rtisan playbook. So let us agree that patriotism has no party. I love this country, and so do you, and so does John McCain. The m
en and women who serve in our battlefields may be Democrats and Republicans and Independents, but they have fought together and b
led together and some died together under the same proud flag. They have not served a Red America or a Blue America - they have s
erved the United States of America. So I've got news for you, John McCain. We all put our country first. America, our work will n
ot be easy. The challenges we face require tough choices, and Democrats as well as Republicans will need to cast off the worn-out
 ideas and politics of the past. For part of what has been lost these past eight years can't just be measured by lost wages or bi
gger trade deficits. What has also been lost is our sense of common purpose - our sense of higher purpose. And that's what we hav
e to restore. We may not agree on abortion, but surely we can agree on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies in this countr
y. The reality of gun ownership may be different for hunters in rural Ohio than for those plagued by gang-violence in Cleveland, 
but don't tell me we can't uphold the Second Amendment while keeping AK-47s out of the hands of criminals. I know there are diffe
rences on same-sex marriage, but surely we can agree that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters deserve to visit the person th
ey love in the hospital and to live lives free of discrimination. Passions fly on immigration, but I don't know anyone who benefi
ts when a mother is separated from her infant child or an employer undercuts American wages by hiring illegal workers. This too i
s part of America's promise - the promise of a democracy where we can find the strength and grace to bridge divides and unite in 
common effort. I know there are those who dismiss such beliefs as happy talk. They claim that our insistence on something larger,
 something firmer and more honest in our public life is just a Trojan Horse for higher taxes and the abandonment of traditional v
alues. And that's to be expected. Because if you don't have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare the voters. If y
ou don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about s
mall things.And you know what - it's worked before. Because it feeds into the cynicism we all have about government. When Washing
ton doesn't work, all its promises seem empty. If your hopes have been dashed again and again, then it's best to stop hoping, and
 settle for what you already know. I get it. I realize that I am not the likeliest candidate for this office. I don't fit the typ
ical pedigree, and I haven't spent my career in the halls of Washington. But I stand before you tonight because all across Americ
a something is stirring. What the nay-sayers don't understand is that this election has never been about me. It's been about you.
 For eighteen long months, you have stood up, one by one, and said enough to the politics of the past. You understand that in thi
s election, the greatest risk we can take is to try the same old politics with the same old players and expect a different result
. You have shown what history teaches us - that at defining moments like this one, the change we need doesn't come from Washingto
n. Change comes to Washington. Change happens because the American people demand it - because they rise up and insist on new idea
s and new leadership, a new politics for a new time. America, this is one of those moments.I believe that as hard as it will be, 
the change we need is coming. Because I've seen it. Because I've lived it. I've seen it in Illinois, when we provided health care
 to more children and moved more families from welfare to work. I've seen it in Washington, when we worked across party lines to 
open up government and hold lobbyists more accountable, to give better care for our veterans and keep nuclear weapons out of terr
orist hands. And I've seen it in this campaign. In the young people who voted for the first time, and in those who got involved a
gain after a very long time. In the Republicans who never thought they'd pick up a Democratic ballot, but did. I've seen it in th
e workers who would rather cut their hours back a day than see their friends lose their jobs, in the soldiers who re-enlist after
 losing a limb, in the good neighbors who take a stranger in when a hurricane strikes and the floodwaters rise. This country of o
urs has more wealth than any nation, but that's not what makes us rich. We have the most powerful military on Earth, but that's n
ot what makes us strong. Our universities and our culture are the envy of the world, but that's not what keeps the world coming t
o our shores. Instead, it is that American spirit - that American promise - that pushes us forward even when the path is uncertai
n; that binds us together in spite of our differences; that makes us fix our eye not on what is seen, but what is unseen, that be
tter place around the bend. That promise is our greatest inheritance. It's a promise I make to my daughters when I tuck them in a
t night, and a promise that you make to yours - a promise that has led immigrants to cross oceans and pioneers to travel west; a 
promise that led workers to picket lines, and women to reach for the ballot. And it is that promise that forty five years ago tod
ay, brought Americans from every corner of this land to stand together on a Mall in Washington, before Lincoln's Memorial, and he
ar a young preacher from Georgia speak of his dream. The men and women who gathered there could've heard many things. They could'
ve heard words of anger and discord. They could've been told to succumb to the fear and frustration of so many dreams deferred. B
ut what the people heard instead - people of every creed and color, from every walk of life - is that in America, our destiny is 
inextricably linked. That together, our dreams can be one. "We cannot walk alone," the preacher cried. "And as we walk, we must m
ake the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn back." America, we cannot turn back. Not with so much work to be 
done. Not with so many children to educate, and so many veterans to care for. Not with an economy to fix and cities to rebuild an
d farms to save. Not with so many families to protect and so many lives to mend. America, we cannot turn back. We cannot walk alo
ne. At this moment, in this election, we must pledge once more to march into the future. Let us keep that promise - that American
 promise - and in the words of Scripture hold firmly, without wavering, to the hope that we confess. Thank you, and God Bless the
 United States of America. CONFIRMATION OF JUDGE JOHN ROBERTS TOPIC: Confirmations Remarks of Senator Barack Obama Confirmation o
f Judge John Roberts Complete Text First of all, let me congratulate Senator Specter and Senator Leahy for moving the process of 
confirming the nomination of Judge Roberts along with such civility, a civility that I believe speaks well of the Senate.Let me a
lso say that I remain distressed that the White House during this confirmation process, which overall went smoothly, failed to pr
ovide critical documents as part of the record that could have provided us with a better basis to make our judgment with respect 
to the nomination. This White House continues to stymie efforts on the part of the Senate to do its job. I hope with the next nom
inee who comes up for the Supreme Court that the White House recognizes that in fact it is its duty not just to the Senate but to
 the American people to make sure we can thoroughly and adequately evaluate the record of every single nominee who comes before u
s.Having said that, the decision with respect to Judge Roberts' nomination has not been an easy one for me to make. As some of yo
u know, I have not only argued cases before appellate courts but for 10 years was a member of the University of Chicago Law Schoo
l faculty and taught courses in constitutional law. Part of the culture of the University of Chicago Law School faculty is to mai
ntain a sense of collegiality between those people who hold different views. What engenders respect is not the particular outcome
 that a legal scholar arrives at but, rather, the intellectual rigor and honesty with which he or she arrives at a decision.Given
 that background, I am sorely tempted to vote for Judge Roberts based on my study of his resume, his conduct during the hearings,
 and a conversation I had with him yesterday afternoon.There is absolutely no doubt in my mind Judge Roberts is qualified to sit 
on the highest court in the land. Moreover, he seems to have the comportment and the temperament that makes for a good judge. He 
is humble, he is personally decent, and he appears to be respectful of different points of view. It is absolutely clear to me tha
t Judge Roberts truly loves the law. He couldn't have achieved his excellent record as an advocate before the Supreme Court witho
ut that passion for the law, and it became apparent to me in our conversation that he does, in fact, deeply respect the basic pre
cepts that go into deciding 95 percent of the cases that come before the Federal court -- adherence to precedence, a certain mode
sty in reading statutes and constitutional text, a respect for procedural regularity, and an impartiality in presiding over the a
dversarial system. All of these characteristics make me want to vote for Judge Roberts.The problem I face -- a problem that has b
een voiced by some of my other colleagues, both those who are voting for Mr. Roberts and those who are voting against Mr. Roberts
 -- is that while adherence to legal precedent and rules of statutory or constitutional construction will dispose of 95 percent o
f the cases that come before a court, so that both a Scalia and a Ginsburg will arrive at the same place most of the time on thos
e 95 percent of the cases -- what matters on the Supreme Court is those 5 percent of cases that are truly difficult. In those cas
es, adherence to precedent and rules of construction and interpretation will only get you through the 25th mile of the marathon. 
That last mile can only be determined on the basis of one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on ho
w the world works, and the depth and breadth of one's empathy.In those 5 percent of hard cases, the constitutional text will not 
be directly on point. The language of the statute will not be perfectly clear. Legal process alone will not lead you to a rule of
 decision. In those circumstances, your decisions about whether affirmative action is an appropriate response to the history of d
iscrimination in this country or whether a general right of privacy encompasses a more specific right of women to control their r
eproductive decisions or whether the commerce clause empowers Congress to speak on those issues of broad national concern that ma
y be only tangentially related to what is easily defined as interstate commerce, whether a person who is disabled has the right t
o be accommodated so they can work alongside those who are nondisabled -- in those difficult cases, the critical ingredient is su
pplied by what is in the judge's heart.I talked to Judge Roberts about this. Judge Roberts confessed that, unlike maybe professio
nal politicians, it is not easy for him to talk about his values and his deeper feelings. That is not how he is trained. He did s
ay he doesn't like bullies and has always viewed the law as a way of evening out the playing field between the strong and the wea
k.I was impressed with that statement because I view the law in much the same way. The problem I had is that when I examined Judg
e Roberts' record and history of public service, it is my personal estimation that he has far more often used his formidable skil
ls on behalf of the strong in opposition to the weak. In his work in the White House and the Solicitor General's Office, he seeme
d to have consistently sided with those who were dismissive of efforts to eradicate the remnants of racial discrimination in our 
political process. In these same positions, he seemed dismissive of the concerns that it is harder to make it in this world and i
n this economy when you are a woman rather than a man.I want to take Judge Roberts at his word that he doesn't like bullies and h
e sees the law and the Court as a means of evening the playing field between the strong and the weak. But given the gravity of th
e position to which he will undoubtedly ascend and the gravity of the decisions in which he will undoubtedly participate during h
is tenure on the Court, I ultimately have to give more weight to his deeds and the overarching political philosophy that he appea
rs to have shared with those in power than to the assuring words that he provided me in our meeting.The bottom line is this: I wi
ll be voting against John Roberts' nomination. I do so with considerable reticence. I hope that I am wrong. I hope that this reti
cence on my part proves unjustified and that Judge Roberts will show himself to not only be an outstanding legal thinker but also
 someone who upholds the Court's historic role as a check on the majoritarian impulses of the executive branch and the legislativ
e branch. I hope that he will recognize who the weak are and who the strong are in our society. I hope that his jurisprudence is 
one that stands up to the bullies of all ideological stripes.Let me conclude with just one more comment about this confirmation p
rocess. I was deeply disturbed by some statements that were made by largely Democratic advocacy groups when ranking member Senato
r Leahy announced that he would support Judge Roberts. Although the scales have tipped in a different direction for me, I am deep
ly admiring of the work and the thought that Senator Leahy has put into making his decision. The knee-jerk unbending and what I c
onsider to be unfair attacks on Senator Leahy's motives were unjustified. Unfortunately, both parties have fallen victim to this 
kind of pressure.I believe every Senator on the other side of the aisle, if they were honest, would acknowledge that the same uny
ielding, unbending, dogmatic approach to judicial confirmation has in large part been responsible for the kind of poisonous atmos
phere that exists in this Chamber regarding judicial nominations. It is tempting, then, for us on this side of the aisle to go ti
t for tat.But what I would like to see is for all of us to recognize as we move forward to the next nominee that in fact the issu
es that are confronted by the Supreme Court are difficult issues. That is why they get up to the Supreme Court. The issues facing
 the Court are rarely black and white, and all advocacy groups who have a legitimate and profound interest in the decisions that 
are made by the Court should try to make certain that their advocacy reflects that complexity. These groups on the right and left
 should not resort to the sort of broad-brush dogmatic attacks that have hampered the process in the past and constrained each an
d every Senator in this Chamber from making sure that they are voting on the basis of their conscience.Thank you very much. EMILY
'S List Annual Luncheon - Women in Politics TOPIC: Civil Rights May 11, 2006 Remarks of Senator Barack Obama Emily's List Annual 
Luncheon Complete Text Thank you for inviting me here today and thank you to EMILY's List for all you've done to forever change t
he face of women in politics. Your efforts haven't just sent women to Congress, you've sent champions - champions for the right t
o choose, for the right to equality, for the millions of women who ask only that their voices are heard too.And we all owe the bi
ggest thanks to the woman who hasn't just believed in that change, but who's done more to actually affect it, who's helped send m
ore Democratic women to Congress over the last two decades than anyone in politics today. Ellen Malcolm, we are in debt to you, w
e are in awe of you, and we continue to be inspired by your example and your commitment to women everywhere. Thank you.We meet he
re today at a time where we find ourselves at a crossroads in America's history.It's a time where you can go to any town hall or 
street corner or coffee shop and hear people express the same anxiety about the future; hear them convey the same uncertainty abo
ut the direction we're headed as a country. Whether it's the war or Katrina or their health care or their jobs, you hear people s
ay that we've finally arrived at a moment where something must change.These are Americans who still believe in an America where a
nything's possible - they just don't think their leaders do. These are Americans who still dream big dreams -they just sense thei
r leaders have forgotten how.I remember when I first ran for the state Senate - my very first race. A seat had opened up, and som
e friends asked me if I'd be interested in running. Well, I thought about it, and then I did what every wise man does when faced 
with a difficult decision: I prayed, and I asked my wife.And after consulting with these higher powers, I threw my hat in the rin
g and I did what every person on a campaign does - I talked to anyone who'd listen.I went to bake sales and barber shops and if t
here were two guys standing on the corner I'd pull up and hand them literature. And everywhere I went I'd get two questions:First
, they'd ask, "Where'd you get that funny name, Barack Obama?" Because people just couldn't pronounce it. They'd call me "Alabama
," or they'd call me "Yo Mama." And I'd have to explain that I got the name from my father, who was from Kenya.And the second thi
ng people would ask me was, "You seem like a nice young man. You teach law school, you're a civil rights attorney, you organize v
oter registration, you're a family man - why would you wanna go into something dirty and nasty like politics?"And I understood th
e question because it revealed the cynicism people feel about public life today. That even though we may get involved out of civi
c obligation every few years, we don't always have confidence that government can make a difference in our lives.So I understand 
the cynicism. But whenever I get in that mood, I think about something that happened to me on the eve of my election to the Unite
d States Senate.We had held a large rally the night before in the Southside of Chicago. And in the midst of this rally, someone c
omes up to me and says that there's a woman who'd like to meet you, and she's traveled a long way and she wants to take a picture
 and shake your hand.And so I said fine, and I met her, and we talked. And all of this would have been unremarkable except for th
e fact that this woman, Marguerite Lewis, was born in 1899 and was 105 years old.And ever since I met this frail, one-hundred-and
-five-year-old African-American woman who came all the way to this rally, I've thought about all she's seen in her life.I've thou
ght about the fact that when she was born, there weren't cars on the road, and no airplanes in the sky. That she was born under t
he cloud of Jim Crow, at a time for black folks when lynchings were common, but voting was forbidden.I've thought about how she l
ived to see a world war and a Great Depression and a second world war.I thought about how she saw women finally win the right to 
vote. How she watched FDR lift this nation out of its own fear. How she saw unions rise up and watched immigrants leave distant s
hores in search of an idea known as America.She believed in this idea and she saw all this progress and she had faith that someda
y it would be her turn. And when she finally saw hope break through the horizon in the Civil Rights Movement, she thought, "Maybe
 it's my turn."And at last - at last - she saw the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. And she saw people 
lining up to vote for the first time - and she got in that line - and she never forgot it. She kept on voting in each and every e
lection because she believed. She believed that over a span of three centuries, she had seen enough to know that there is no chal
lenge too great, no injustice too crippling, no destiny too far out of reach for America.She believed that we don't have to settl
e for equality for some or opportunity for the lucky or freedom for the few.And she knew that during those moments in history whe
re it looked like we might give up hope or settle for less, there have always been Americans who refused. Who said we're going to
 keep on dreaming, and we're going to keep on building, and we're going to keep on marching, and we're going to keep on working b
ecause that's who we are. Because we've always fought to bring all of our people under the blanket of the American Dream.And I th
ink that we face one of those moments today. In a century just five years old, our faith has already been shaken by war and terro
r, disaster and despair, threats to the middle-class dream, and scandal and corruption in our government.The world has changed. N
o longer can we assume that a high-school education is enough to compete for a job that could easily go to a college-educated stu
dent in Bangalore or Beijing. No more can we count on employers to provide health care and pensions and job training when their b
ottom-lines know no borders. Never again can we expect the oceans that surround America to keep us safe from attacks on our own s
oil.But while the world has changed around us, too often our government has stood still. Our faith has been shaken, but the peopl
e running Washington aren't willing to make us believe again.It's the timidity - the smallness - of our politics that's holding u
s back right now. The idea that some problems are just too big to handle, and if you just ignore them, sooner or later, they'll g
o away. That if you give a speech where you rattle off statistics about the stock market being up and orders for durable goods be
ing on the rise, no one will notice the single mom whose two jobs won't pay the bills or the student who can't afford his college
 dreams. That if you say the words "plan for victory" and point to the number of schools painted and roads paved and cell phones 
used in Iraq, no one will notice the more than 2,300 flag-draped coffins that have arrived at Dover Air Force base.Well it's time
 we finally said we notice, and we care, and we're not gonna settle anymore.You know, you probably never thought you'd hear this 
at an Emily's List luncheon, but Newt Gingrich made a great point a few weeks back. He was talking about what an awful job his ow
n party has done governing this country, and he said that with all the mistakes and misjudgments the Republicans have made over t
he last six years, the slogan for the Democrats should come down to just two words:Had enough?I don't know about you, but I think
 old Newt is onto something here. Because I think we've all had enough. Enough of the broken promises. Enough of the failed leade
rship. Enough of the can't-do, won't-do, won't-even-try style of governance.Four years after 9/11, I've had enough of being told 
that we can find the money to give Paris Hilton more tax cuts, but we can't find enough to protect our ports or our railroads or 
our chemical plants or our borders.I've had enough of the closed-door deals that give billions to the HMOs when we're told that w
e can't do a thing for the 45 million uninsured or the millions more who can't pay their medical bills.I've had enough of being t
old that we can't afford body armor for our troops and health care for our veterans. I've had enough of that.I've had enough of g
iving billions away to the oil companies when we're told that we can't invest in the renewable energy that will create jobs and l
ower gas prices and finally free us from our dependence on the oil wells of Saudi Arabia.I've had enough of our kids going to sch
ools where the rats outnumber the computers. I've had enough of Katrina survivors living out of their cars and begging FEMA for t
railers. And I've had enough of being told that all we can do about this is sit and wait and hope that the good fortune of a few 
trickles on down to everyone else in this country.You know, we all remember that George Bush said in 2000 campaign that he was ag
ainst nation-building. We just didn't know he was talking about this one.So yes, I've had enough. And if you've had enough too, t
hen we got some work to do. If you've had enough, then we have some checks to write, and some calls to make, and some doors to kn
ock on. And if we do this, then in November, we're gonna have a U.S. House with people like Tammy Duckworth in it, and Melissa Be
an, and Betty Sutton, and Dianne Farrell and Lois Murphy. And we're gonna have a U.S. Senate with Amy Klobuchar and Claire McCask
ill and Maria Cantwell and Debbie Stabenow. And we're gonna change business-as-usual in Washington, and we're gonna set this coun
try in a new direction.Now, let me say this - I don't think that George Bush is a bad man. I think he loves his country. I don't 
think this administration is full of stupid people - I think there are a lot of smart folks in there. The problem isn't that thei
r philosophy isn't working the way it's supposed to - it's that it is. It's that it's doing exactly what it's supposed to do.The 
reason they don't believe government has a role in solving national problems is because they think government is the problem. Tha
t we're better off if we dismantle it - if we divvy it up into individual tax breaks, hand 'em out, and encourage everyone to go 
buy your own health care, your own retirement security, your own child care, their own schools, your own private security force, 
your own roads, their own levees...It's called the Ownership Society in Washington. But in our past there has been another term f
or it - Social Darwinism - every man or women for him or herself. It allows us to say to those whose health care or tuition may r
ise faster than they can afford - life isn't fair. It allows us to say to the child who didn't have the foresight to choose the r
ight parents or be born in the right suburb - pick yourself up by your bootstraps. It lets us say to the guy who worked twenty or
 thirty years in the factory and then watched his plant move out to Mexico or China - we're sorry, but you're on your own.It's a 
bracing idea. It's a tempting idea. And it's the easiest thing in the world.But there's just one problem. It doesn't work. It ign
ores our history. Yes, our greatness as a nation has depended on individual initiative, on a belief in the free market. But it ha
s also depended on our sense of mutual regard for each other, of mutual responsibility. The idea that everybody has a stake in th
e country, that we're all in it together and everybody's got a shot at opportunity.Americans know this. We know that government c
an't solve all our problems - and we don't want it to. But we also know that there are some things we can't do on our own. We kno
w that there are some things we do better together.We know that we've been called in churches and mosques, synagogues and Sunday 
schools to love our neighbors as ourselves; to be our brother's keeper; to be our sister's keeper. That we have individual respon
sibility, but we also have collective responsibility to each other.That's what America is.And so I am eager to have this argument
 not just with the President, but the entire Republican Party over what this country is about.Because I think that this is our mo
ment to lead.The time for our party's identity crisis is over. Don't let anyone tell you we don't know what we stand for and don'
t doubt it yourselves. We know who we are and we know what our legacy is.We're the party of Jefferson who first believed that eve
ry child in America should be educated regardless of wealth and birth and circumstance. That's who we are.We're the party of Roos
evelt who lifted this nation out of its own fear and sent workers to the factories and veterans to college and families to new ho
mes and seniors to a comfortable retirement. That's who we are.We're the party that stood up to fascism and defended freedom acro
ss the globe during World War II.We're the party of civil rights, and workers' rights, and women's rights who believes that that 
every member of the American family deserves a shot at the American Dream. That's who we are.We're the party of new frontiers and
 bold horizons - the party that put man on the moon and fueled the research that unlocked the secrets of the human genome. That's
 who we are.And let me tell you about the party I see in the future.In a globalized economy with bigger risks and greater rewards
 - a world where we are at once more connected and more competitive - let it be said that we are the party of opportunity. The pa
rty that guarantees every American an affordable, world-class, top-notch, life-long education - from early childhood to high scho
ol, from college to on-the-job training.Let it be said that we are the party that equips every worker with what they need to succ
eed in a 21st century economy - wage supports and pensions, child care and health care that will stay with them no matter where t
hey work or what they do.Let it be said that we are the party of innovation and discovery - willing to blaze a trail toward energ
y independence or invest in the research that could create whole new industries and save thousands of lives.And in a world where 
evil lurks and terrorists plot, let it be said that we will conduct a smart foreign policy that matches the might of our military
 with the power of our diplomacy. And when we do go to war, let us always be honest with the American people about why we are the
re and how we will win.If we do all this, if we can be trusted to lead, this will not be a Democratic Agenda, it will be an Ameri
can agenda. Because in the end, we may be proud Democrats, but we are prouder Americans. We're tired of being divided, tired of r
unning into ideological walls and partisan roadblocks, tired of appeals to our worst instincts and greatest fears.Americans every
where are desperate for leadership. They are longing for direction. And they want to believe again.You know, as I was thinking ab
out today's luncheon and all the progress EMILY's List has made over the years, the first thing that came to mind wasn't all the 
politics or the campaigns; it wasn't even all the issues debated or the legislation passed.I thought about my daughters.I thought
 about the world that Sasha and Malia will grow up in, about the chances they'll have and the challenges they'll face. And I thou
ght about my hopes for them - that they'll be able to dream without limit, achieve without constraint, and be free to seek their 
own happiness.And I wondered - if they are lucky enough to live as long as 105-year-old Marguerite Lewis, if they someday have th
e chance to look back across the twenty-first century, what will they see? Will they see a country that is freer and kinder, more
 tolerant and more just than the one they grew up in? Will they see greater opportunities for every citizen of this country? Will
 all her of my hopes for my girls be fulfilled?We are here today because we believe that in this country, we have it within our p
ower to say "yes" to those questions - to forge our own destiny - to begin the world anew.We are here because we believe that thi
s is our time.Our time to make a mark on history.Our time to write a new chapter in the American story.And then someday, someday,
 if our kids get the chance to stand where we are and look back at the beginning of the 21st century, they can say that this was 
the time when America renewed its purpose.They can say that this was the time when America found its way.They can say that this w
as the time when America learned to dream again.Thank you. Amendment to Stop No-Bid Contracts for Gulf Coast Recovery and Reconst
ruction TOPIC: Katrina & Gulf Coast Recovery May 2, 2006 His Amendment to Stop No-Bid Contracts for Gulf Coast Recovery and Recon
struction Complete Text Mr. President, after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, millions of Americans opened their hearts, the
ir homes, and their wallets to help the victims in the Gulf Coast. Even before Katrinas winds and rains died down, Americans acro
ss the country called national hotlines and pledged their hard-earned dollars, their time, and their prayers to the relief effort
.But they didnt just pledge ? they also delivered. They delivered to the tune of $3.5 billion dollars. Many of these donations ca
me from working-class families who didnt have much to give, but they gave what they could.Like the American people, President Bus
h made a pledge after the disaster. He pledged that he would provide the Gulf Coast with the federal assistance it needed to get 
back on its feet. With the bill now before us, the total amount of federal funding for hurricane recovery will exceed $100 billio
n, and its safe to say that more money will be needed in the months and years to come.But in order to make good on the Presidents
 pledge, we need to do more. We need to pledge to be responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars. We owe this to the Americans who d
onated their own funds to hurricane relief efforts and who trust us each day with the tax money they send to Washington.Unfortuna
tely, we havent done a very good job so far of delivering on this pledge.Yesterday, Senator Coburn and I came to the floor to det
ail the numerous instances of waste, fraud, and abuse in the use of Katrina funds. We know that FEMA spent nearly $880 million in
 taxpayer money on 25,000 temporary housing trailers stored around the country, including 11,000 that are rusting away in a field
 in Arkansas. There are reports of prime contractors charging upwards of $30 per cubic yard for debris removal ? work that actual
ly costs subcontractors as little as $6 per cubic yard. And, as the Washington Post reported, four large companies are charging a
 1,500% mark-up to cover damaged roofs with plastic tarps. Senator Coburn and I have tried to address these problems by offering 
a sensible package of amendments to ensure fiscal accountability and transparency. We have proposed the appointment of a chief fi
nancial officer to oversee the spending of federal funding. We have proposed limits on the amount of overhead expenses that a con
tractor can charge the federal government. And we have proposed that the details of all large Katrina contracts be posted on the 
Internet.Unfortunately, these amendments are not germane now that cloture has been invoked.That is unfortunate. Its unfortunate b
ecause the interests of the American taxpayer are not being well-served by the U.S. Senate. Even though we will have appropriated
 well over $100 billion by the end of this week for Katrina relief and recovery, we havent put any accountability systems in plac
e to ensure that the money is well-spent.I know Im new to this body, but Im troubled that Senate rules are getting in the way of 
sound policy. I understand thats how the Senate works, so Senator Coburn and I are here to offer one modest amendment to protect 
taxpayer dollars. Our amendment addresses no-bid contracting and is germane to the underlying bill.Immediately after the hurrican
e, FEMA awarded four $100 million no-bid contracts to four large companies. $400 million taxpayer dollars, without full and open 
competition.Acting FEMA Director David Paulison was asked about these contracts when he testified before the Senate Homeland Secu
rity and Governmental Affairs Committee on October 6, 2005. He said the following: "I've been a public servant for a long time, a
nd I've never been a fan of no-bid contracts. Sometimes you have to do them because of the expediency of getting things done. And
 I can assure that you we are going to look at all of those contracts very carefully. All of those no-bid contracts, we are going
 to go back and rebid." Senator Coburn and I expected Director Paulison to stick to his word and rebid these contracts. But a mon
th and a half passed, and the contracts still had not been rebid. So last November, we introduced an amendment to the tax reconci
liation bill expressing the Sense of the Senate that FEMA should immediately rebid these contracts. Our colleagues agreed and pas
sed this amendment by unanimous consent.After our amendment passed, both Senator Coburn and I met with Director Paulison, and aga
in he assured us that these contracts would be rebid.Yet, these contracts still have not been rebid. And to add insult to injury,
 FEMA said in March that the contracts would not be rebid after all. In fact, the contracts actually have been extended, despite 
the fact that GAO found that three of these four firms had wasted millions of dollars in taxpayer funds.The abuse doesnt stop wit
h these four contracts. We learned just two weeks ago that the Army Corps of Engineers missed an opportunity to negotiate a lower
 price on a $40 million contract for portable classrooms in Mississippi. Instead, a no-bid and overpriced contract was awarded to
 an out-of-state firm.Ive often heard it said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and ex
pecting different results. Frankly, what were doing with Katrina funding borders on insanity ? we in Congress just keep trusting 
FEMA to enter into competitive contracts even though theres no evidence that it has any intention of doing so.So the amendment we
re offering today is our effort to say enough is enough. Our amendment requires all federal agencies to follow competitive biddin
g procedures for any Katrina-related contracts exceeding $500,000. This is a common sense amendment. Eight months after Katrina, 
theres no longer any emergency that justifies a no-bid contract that might have been entered into the days after Katrina.The Amer
ican people deserve the benefits of competition on government contracts. Competition is good for American business and its good f
or the government. It helps to ensure high quality and low costs. Thats what the American people have a right to expect, and that
s what our amendment seeks to deliver.Before we spend another dollar in the Gulf Coast, lets make sure that we have some transpar
ency and accountability systems in place to ensure that federal money is helping those people most in need, instead of lining the
 pockets of a contractor.In our rush to get money to the Gulf Coast eight months ago, we didnt do that, and the American taxpayer
s ? and more importantly, the victims of Katrina ? paid a heavy price. Lets not repeat that mistake again.I urge my colleagues to
 support Senator Coburn and me in this effort. Energy Independence and the Safety of Our Planet TOPIC: Oil & Alternative Fuels Ap
ril 3, 2006 Energy Independence and the Safety of Our Planet Complete Text In April of 2005, Elizabeth Kolbert did a series of ar
ticles for The New Yorker about climate change. In one of those articles, she tells a very interesting story about some of the ef
fects we're already seeing from global warming.About fifteen years ago, in the furthest reaches of Alaska, the people of a small,
 thousand-year-old, oceanfront hunting village noticed something odd. The ice that surrounded and protected the village, which is
 only twenty feet above sea level, began to grow slushy and weak. Soon, it began to freeze much later in the fall and melt much e
arlier in the spring.As the ice continued to melt away at an alarming pace during the 1990s, the village began to lose the protec
tion it offered and became more vulnerable to storm surges. In 1997, the town completely lost a hundred-twenty-five-foot-wide str
ip of land at its northern edge. In 2001, a storm with twelve-foot waves destroyed dozens of homes. And finally, in the summer of
 2002, with the storms intensifying, the ice melting, and the land shrinking all around them, the residents of Shishmaref were fo
rced to move their entire town miles inland - abandoning their homes forever.The story of the Village That Disappeared is by no m
eans isolated. And it is by no means over.All across the world, in every kind of environment and region known to man, increasingl
y dangerous weather patterns and devastating storms are abruptly putting an end to the long-running debate over whether or not cl
imate change is real. Not only is it real, it's here, and its effects are giving rise to a frighteningly new global phenomenon: t
he man-made natural disaster.For decades, we've been warned by legions of scientists and mountains of evidence that this was comi
ng - that we couldn't just keep burning fossil fuels and contribute to the changing atmosphere without consequence. And yet, for 
decades, far too many have ignored the warnings, either dismissing the science as a hoax or believing that it was the concern of 
enviros looking to save polar bears and rainforests.But today, we're seeing that climate change is about more than a few unseason
ably mild winters or hot summers. It's about the chain of natural catastrophes and devastating weather patterns that global warmi
ng is beginning to set off around the world - the frequency and intensity of which are breaking records thousands of years old.In
 Washington, issues come and go with the political winds. And they are generally covered through that prism: Who's up and who's d
own? Which party benefits? Which party loses?But in these superficial exchanges, we often lose sight of the real and lasting mean
ing of the decisions we make and those we defer.The issue of climate change is one that we ignore at our own peril. There may sti
ll be disputes about exactly how much we're contributing to the warming of the earth's atmosphere and how much is naturally occur
ring, but what we can be scientifically certain of is that our continued use of fossil fuels is pushing us to a point of no retur
n. And unless we free ourselves from a dependence on these fossil fuels and chart a new course on energy in this country, we are 
condemning future generations to global catastrophe.Just think about some of the trends we've seen.Since 1980, we've experienced 
nineteen of the twenty hottest years on record - with 2005 being the hottest ever.These high temperatures are drying up already d
ry land, causing unprecedented drought that's ruining crops, devastating farmers and spreading famine to already poor parts of th
e world. Over the last four decades, the percentage of the Earth's surface suffering drought has more than doubled. In the United
 States, the drought we experienced in 2002 was the worst in forty years. And in Africa, more rivers are beginning to dry up, thr
eatening the water supply across the continent.As more land becomes parched, more forests are starting to burn. Across Indonesia,
 throughout Alaska, and in the Western United States, wildfires have raged in recent years like never before. A new record was se
t in 2002, as more than 7 million acres burned from Oregon down to Arizona.And while the situation on the land may look ugly, wha
t's going on in the oceans is even worse. Hurricanes and typhoons thrive in warm water, and as the temperature has risen, so has 
the intensity of these storms. In the last thirty-five years, the percentage of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes has doubled, and the 
wind speed and duration of these storms has jumped 50%. A hurricane showed up in the South Atlantic recently when scientists said
 it could never happen. Last year, Japan set a new record when it suffered its tenth typhoon and the United States set a record f
or the most tornadoes we've ever had. And at one point, Hurricane Wilma was the most powerful storm ever measured.These are all f
rightening situations, but perhaps none more so than what is beginning to occur at the North and South Poles. There, a satellite 
image from space or a trip to the region shows indisputable evidence that the polar ice caps are melting. But it's not just a slo
w, steady thaw that's been occurring over centuries, it's a rapidly accelerating meltdown that may eventually dump enough water i
nto the ocean to annihilate coastal regions across the globe.In 1996, a melting Greenland dumped about 22 cubic miles of water in
to the sea. Today, just ten years later, it's melting twice as fast. In real terms, this means that every single month, Greenland
 is dumping into the ocean an amount of water 54 times greater than the city of Los Angeles uses in an entire year. All in all, G
reenland has enough ice to raise the global sea level 23 feet, making a New Orleans out of nearly every coastal city imaginable.I
ndeed, the Alaskan village of Shishmaref could be just the beginning.And yet, despite all the ominous harbingers of things to com
e, we do not have to stand by helplessly and accept this future. In fact, we can't afford to. Climate change may be unleashing th
e forces of nature, but we can't forget that this has been accelerated by man and can be slowed by man too.By now, the culprit of
 this climate change is a familiar one, as is the solution. Last September, when I gave my first speech on energy, I talked about
 how our dependence on oil is hurting our economy, decimating our auto industry, and costing us millions of jobs. A few months ag
o, I discussed how the oil we import is jeopardizing our national security by keeping us tied to the world's most dangerous and u
nstable regimes. And when it comes to climate change, it's the fossil fuels we insist on burning - particularly oil - that are th
e single greatest cause of global warming and the damaging weather patterns that have been its result.You'd think by now we'd get
 the point on energy dependence. Never has the failure to take on a single challenge so detrimentally affected nearly every aspec
t of our well-being as a nation. And never have the possible solutions had the potential to do so much good for so many generatio
ns to come.Of course, many Americans have gotten this point, and it's true that the call for energy independence is now coming fr
om an amazingly diverse coalition of interests. From farmers and businesses, military leaders and CIA officials, scientists and E
vangelical Christians, auto executives and unions, and politicians of almost every political persuasion, people are realizing tha
t an oil future is not a secure future for this country.And yet, when it comes to finding a way to end our dependence on fossil f
uels, the greatest vacuum in leadership, the biggest failure of imagination, and the most stubborn refusal to admit the need for 
change is coming from the very people who are running the country.By now, the Bush Administration's record on climate change is a
lmost legendary. This is the administration that commissioned government experts and scientists to do a study on global warming, 
only to omit the part from the final report that said it was caused by humans. This is the administration that didn't try to impr
ove the Kyoto Treaty by trying to include oil guzzlers like China and India, but walked away from the entire global effort to ste
m climate change. And just recently, this is the administration that tried to silence a NASA scientist for letting the rest of us
 know that yes, climate change is a pretty big deal.Meanwhile, it's pretty tough to make any real progress on this issue in Congr
ess when the Chairman of the committee in charge of the environment thinks that, in the face of literally thousands of scientists
 and studies that say otherwise, global warming is the "greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people." And you know it's
 bad when the star witness at his global warming hearing is a science fiction writer.Now, after the President's last State of the
 Union, when he told us that America was addicted to oil, there was a brief moment of hope that he'd finally do something on ener
gy.I was among the hopeful. But then I saw the plan.His funding for renewable fuels is at the same level it was the day he took o
ffice. He refuses to call for even a modest increase in fuel-efficiency standards for cars. And his latest budget funds less then
 half of the energy bill he himself signed into law - leaving hundreds of millions of dollars in under-funded energy proposals.Th
is is not a serious effort. Saying that America is addicted to oil without following a real plan for energy independence is like 
admitting alcoholism and then skipping out on the 12-step program. It's not enough to identify the challenge - we have to meet it
.See, there's a reason that some have compared the quest for energy independence to the Manhattan Project or the Apollo moon land
ing. Like those historic efforts, moving away from an oil economy is a major challenge that will require a sustained national com
mitment.During World War II, we had an entire country working around the clock to produce enough planes and tanks to beat the Axi
s powers. In the middle of the Cold War, we built a national highway system so we had a quick way to transport military equipment
 across the country. When we wanted to pull ahead of the Russians into space, we poured millions into a national education initia
tive that graduated thousands of new scientists and engineers.America now finds itself at a similar crossroads. As gas prices kee
p rising, the Middle East grows ever more unstable, and the ice caps continue to melt, we face a now-or-never, once-in-a-generati
on opportunity to set this country on a different course.Such a course is not only possible, it's already being pursued in other 
places around the world. Countries like Japan are creating jobs and slowing oil consumption by churning out and buying millions o
f fuel-efficient cars. Brazil, a nation that once relied on foreign countries to import 80% of its crude oil, will now be entirel
y self-sufficient in a few years thanks to its investment in biofuels.So why can't we do this? Why can't we make energy security 
one of the great American projects of the 21st century?The answer is, with the right leadership, we can. We can do it by partneri
ng with business, not fighting it. We can do it with technology we already have on the shelf. And we can do it by investing in th
e clean, cheap, renewable fuels that American farmers grow right here at home.To deal directly with climate change, something we 
failed to do in the last energy bill, we should use a market-based strategy that gradually reduces harmful emissions in the most 
economical way. John McCain and Joe Lieberman are continuing to build support for legislation based on this approach, and Senator
s Bingaman and Domenici are also pursuing proposals that will cut carbon emissions. Right here in Chicago, the Chicago Climate Ex
change is already running a legally binding greenhouse gas trading system.The idea here is simple: if you're a business that can'
t yet meet the lower cap we'll put on harmful carbon emissions, you can either purchase credits from other companies that have ac
hieved more than their emissions goal, or you can temporarily purchase a permit from the government, the money from which will go
 towards investments in clean energy technology. As Fred Krupp, the president of Environmental Defense has said, "Once you put a 
value on carbon reductions, you make winners out of innovators."Any strategy for reducing carbon emissions must also deal with co
al, which is actually the most abundant source of energy in this country. To keep using this fossil fuel, I believe we need to in
vest in the kind of advanced coal technology that will keep our air cleaner while still keeping our coal mines in business. Over 
the next two decades, power companies are expected to build dozens of new coal-fired power plants, and countries like India and C
hina will build hundreds. If they use obsolete technology, these plants will emit over 60 billion tons of heat-trapping pollution
 into the atmosphere. We need to act now and make the United States a leader in puting in place the standards and incentives that
 will ensure that these plants use available technology to capture carbon dioxide and dispose of it safely underground. But of co
urse, one of the biggest contributors to our climate troubles and our energy dependence is oil, and so any plan for the future mu
st drastically reduce our addiction to this dirty, dangerous, and ultimately finite source of energy.We can do this by focusing o
n two things: the cars we drive and the fuels we use.The President's energy proposal would reduce our oil imports by 4.5 million 
barrels per day by 2025. Not only can we do better than that, we must do better than that if we hope to make a real dent in our o
il dependency. With technology we have on the shelves right now and fuels we can grow right here in America, by 2025 we can reduc
e our oil imports by over 7.5. million barrels per day - an amount greater than all the oil we are expected to import from the en
tire Middle East.For years, we've hesitated to raise fuel economy standards as a nation in part because of a very legitimate conc
ern - the impact it would have on Detroit. The auto industry is right when they argue that transitioning to more hybrid and fuel-
efficient cars would require massive investment at a time when they're struggling under the weight of rising health care costs, s
agging profits, and stiff competition.But it's precisely because of that competition that they don't have a choice. China now has
 a higher fuel economy standard than we do, and Japan's Toyota is doubling production of the popular Prius to sell 100,000 in the
 U.S. this year.There is now no doubt that fuel-efficient cars represent the future of the auto industry. If American car compani
es hope to be a part of that future - if they hope to survive - they must start building more of these cars. This isn't just abou
t energy - this is about the ability to create millions of new jobs and save an entire American industry.But that's not to say we
 should leave the industry to face the transition costs on its own. Yes, we should raise fuel economy standards by 3% a year over
 the next fifteen years, starting in 2008. With the technology they already have, this should be an achievable goal for automaker
s. But we can help them get there.Right now, one of the biggest costs facing auto manufacturers isn't the cars they make, it's th
e health care they provide. Health care costs make up $1,500 of the price of every GM car that's made - more than the cost of ste
el. Retiree health care alone cost the Big 3 automakers nearly $6.7 billion just last year.I believe we should make the auto comp
anies a deal that could solve this problem. It's a piece of legislation I introduced called "Health Care for Hybrids," and it wou
ld allow the federal government to pick up part of the tab for the auto companies' retiree health care costs. In exchange, the au
to companies would then use some of that savings to build and invest in more fuel-efficient cars. It's a win-win proposal for the
 industry - their retirees will be taken care of, they'll save money on health care, and they'll be free to invest in the kind of
 fuel-efficient cars that are the key to their competitive future.But building cars that use less oil is only one side of the equ
ation. The other involves replacing the oil we use with the home-grown biofuels that will finally slow the warming of the planet.
 In fact, one study shows that using cellulosic ethanol fuel instead of oil can reduce harmful emissions by up to 75%.Already, th
ere are hundreds of fueling stations that use a blend of ethanol and gasoline known as E85, and there are millions of cars on the
 road with the flexible-fuel tanks necessary to use this fuel - including my own right here in Illinois.But the challenge we face
 with these biofuels is getting them out of the labs, out of the farms, and onto the wider commercial market.The federal governme
nt can help in a few ways here, and recently, I introduced the American Fuels Act with Senator Dick Lugar to get us started.First
, this legislation would reduce the risk of investing in renewable fuels by providing loan guarantees and venture capital to thos
e entrepreneurs with the best plans to develop and sell biofuels on a commercial market.Second, it would let the private sector k
now that there will always be a market for renewable fuels by creating an alternative diesel standard in this country that would 
blend millions of more gallons of renewable fuels into the petroleum supply each year.Third, it would help make sure that every s
ingle new car in America is a flexible-fuel vehicle within a decade. Currently it costs manufacturers just $100 to add these tank
s to each car. But we can do them one better. If they install flexible-fuel tanks in their cars before the decade's up, we will p
rovide them a $100 tax credit to do it - so there's no excuse for delay. And we'd also give consumers a bargain by offering a 35 
cents tax credit for every gallon of E85 they use.Fourth, this legislation calls for a Director of Energy Security to oversee all
 of our efforts. Like the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the National Intelligence Director, this person would be an advisor to
 the National Security Council and have the full authority to coordinate America's energy policy across all levels of government.
 He or she would approve all major budget decisions and provide a full report to Congress and the country every year detailing th
e progress we're making toward energy independence.Finally, while it's not in the bill, we should also make sure that every singl
e automobile the government purchases is a flexible-fuel vehicle - starting today. When it becomes possible in the coming years, 
we should also make sure that every government car is the type of hybrid that you can plug-in to an outlet and recharge.As the la
st few residents of Shishmaref pack up their homes and leave their tiny seaside village behind, I can't help but think that right
 now, history is testing our generation.Will we let this happen all over the world? Will we stand by while drought and famine, st
orms and floods overtake our planet? Or will we look back at today and say that this was the moment when we took a stand? That th
is was the moment when we began to turn things around?The climate changes we are experiencing are already causing us harm. But in
 the end, it will not be us who deal with its most devastating effects. It will be our children, and our grandchildren.I have two
 daughters, aged three and seven. And I can't help but think that they are the reason I wanted to make a difference in this count
ry in the first place - to give them a better, more hopeful world to raise their children.This is our generation's chance to give
 them that world. It's a chance that will not last much longer, but if we work together and seize this moment, we can change the 
course of this nation forever. I hope we can start today. Thank you. Campus Progress Annual Conference TOPIC: Our Past, Our Futur
e & Vision for America July 12, 2006 Campus Progress Annual Conference Complete Text I want to congratulate all of you at Campus 
Progress for the work you've been doing to build a new generation of progressive leadership in this country. At a time when too m
any in the media have written off your generation as apathetic or uninvolved, you're proving not only that you care very deeply a
bout the future of this country, but that you're willing to do something about it.I could stand up here today and talk about that
 future - about our vision for America - but I know that we share similar views on this and that you're pretty well-versed on the
 issues anyway.So instead I'd like to talk a bit about what comes next for all of you - what happens after you leave the confines
 of college and head out into the real world.It's a scary thought, I know, but I also remember that by the end of my four years i
n college, I may have had a vague idea that I wanted to go into community organizing, but no clue how I would go about doing that
 or whether it was even the right choice for me.I have a feeling that many of you might be in a similar boat when it comes to pol
itics and organizing and activism after college, and so today I'd just like to offer you a few pieces of advice that might be abl
e to help you on your way.The first is to take risks.When I told people that after college, I planned on being a community organi
zer and working in low-income neighborhoods, they thought I was crazy.My mother and grandparents thought I should go to law schoo
l. My friends had applied for jobs on Wall Street. But I went ahead and wrote letters to every organization in the country that I
 could think of. And finally, this small group of churches on the south side of Chicago wrote back and gave me a job organizing n
eighborhoods devastated by steel-plant closings in the early 80s.The churches didn't have much money - so they offered me a grand
 sum of $12,000 a year plus $1,000 to buy a car. And I got ready to move to Chicago - a place I had never been and where I didn't
 know a living soul.Even people who didn't know me were skeptical of my decision. I remember having a conversation with an older 
man I had met before I arrived in Chicago. I told him about my plans, and he looked at me and said, "Let me tell something. You l
ook like a nice clean-cut young man, and you've got a nice voice. So let me give you a piece of advice - forget this community or
ganizing business. You can't change the world, and people won't appreciate you trying. What you should do is go into television b
roadcasting. I'm telling you, you've got a future."I could've taken my mother's advice and I could've taken my grandparents advic
e. I could've taken the path my friends traveled. And objectively speaking, that TV thing might have made some sense.But I knew t
here was something in me that wanted to try for something bigger. And so I went.This is harder than it sounds - and it will be fo
r all of you. With all the work you've done and the organizations you've been involved in, you'll have boundless opportunities wh
en you graduate. And it's very easy to just take that diploma, forget about all this progressive politics stuff, and go chasing a
fter the big house and the large salary and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should buy.Bu
t I hope you don't. Focusing your life solely on making a buck shows a poverty of ambition. It asks too little of yourself. And i
t will leave you unfulfilled.So don't let people talk you into doing the safe thing. Listen to what's inside of you and decide wh
at it is that you care about so much that you're willing to risk it all. The next piece of advice comes from a lesson that I lear
ned once I got to Chicago.I had spent weeks organizing our very first community meeting around the issue of gang violence. We inv
ited the police; we made phone calls, went to churches, and passed out flyers.I had been warned of the turf battles and bad polit
ics between certain community leaders, but I ignored them, confident that I knew what I was doing.The night of the meeting we arr
anged rows and rows of chairs in anticipation of the crowd. And we waited. And we waited. And finally, a group of older people wa
lk in to the hall. And they sit down. And this little old lady raises her hand and asks, "Is this where the bingo game is?"Thirte
en people showed up that night. The police never came. And the meeting was a complete disaster.Later, the volunteers I worked wit
h told me they were quitting - that they had been doing this for two years and had nothing to show for it.I was tired too. But at
 that point, I looked outside and saw some young boys playing in a vacant lot across the street, tossing stones at boarded-up apa
rtment building. And I turned to the volunteers, and I asked them, "Before you quit, I want you to answer one question. What's go
nna happen to those boys? Who will fight for them if not us? Who will give them a fair shot if we leave?"And at that moment, we w
ere all reminded of an important lesson:Persevere.Making your mark on the world is hard. If it were easy, everybody would do it. 
But it's not. It takes patience, it takes commitment, and it comes with plenty of failure along the way. The real test is not whe
ther you avoid this failure, because you won't. it's whether you let it harden or shame you into inaction, or whether you learn f
rom it; whether you choose to persevere.After my little speech that day, one by one, the volunteers decided not to quit. We went 
back to those neighborhoods, and we kept at it, sustaining ourselves with the small victories. And over time, a community changed
. And so had we.The last piece of advice is to cultivate a sense of empathy.There's a lot of talk in this country about the feder
al deficit. But I think we should talk more about our empathy deficit - the ability to put ourselves in someone else's shoes; to 
see the world through those who are different from us - the child who's hungry, the laid-off steelworker, the immigrant woman cle
aning your dorm room.The fact that you're here and participating in Campus Progress means that most of you have already done this
 better than most ever will. But as you go on in life, cultivating this quality of empathy will become harder, not easier. There'
s no community service requirement in the real world; no one forcing you to care. You'll be free to live in neighborhoods with pe
ople who are exactly like yourself, and send your kids to the same schools, and narrow your concerns to what's going in your own 
little circle.Not only that - we live in a culture that discourages empathy. A culture that too often tells us our principle goal
 in life is to be rich, thin, young, famous, safe, and entertained. A culture where those in power too often encourage these self
ish impulses.They will tell you that the Americans who sleep in the streets and beg for food got there because they're all lazy o
r weak of spirit. That the inner-city children who are trapped in dilapidated schools can't learn and won't learn and so we shoul
d just give up on them entirely. That the innocent people being slaughtered and expelled from their homes half a world away are s
omebody else's problem to take care of.I hope you don't listen to this. I hope you choose to broaden, and not contract, your ambi
t of concern. Not because you have an obligation to those who are less fortunate, although you do have that obligation. Not becau
se you have a debt to all of those who helped you get to where you are, although you do have that debt.It's because you have an o
bligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. And because it's only when you hitch you
r wagon to something larger than yourself that you will realize your true potential - and become full-grown.As I think about all 
of the good each of you has the potential to do in this world, I'm reminded of this image. It's the image of young Americans - te
enagers and college kids not much older than you - from all over the country, watching the Civil Rights Movement unfold before th
em on their television sets. I imagine that they would've seen the marchers and heard the speeches, but they also probably saw th
e dogs and the fire hoses, or the footage of innocent people being beaten within an inch of their lives, or maybe they would've h
eard the news the day those four little girls died when someone threw a bomb into their church.Instinctively, they knew that it w
as safer and smarter to stay at home; to watch the movement from afar. But somewhere in their hearts, they also understood that t
hese people in Georgia and Alabama and Mississippi were their brothers and sisters; that what was happening was wrong; and that t
hey had an obligation to make it right. And so when the buses pulled up for a Freedom Ride down South, they got on. And they rode
. Thousands of them. And they changed the world.We need you to do the same. As Robert F. Kennedy once told a crowd of South Afric
ans no older than you, "The world demands the qualities of youth; not a time of life but a state of mind, a temper of the will, a
 quality of the imagination, a predominance of courage over timidity, of the appetite for adventure over the love of ease."Today,
 I want thank each of you for demonstrating these qualities through your service to the people of this nation, and I wish all of 
you a future that is hopeful, dedicated, and ever youthful. Thank you. Obamas Opening Statement - Floor Debate on Ethics Reform T
OPIC: Ethics & Lobbying Reform March 7, 2006 Senator Obama's Opening Statement Floor Debate on Ethics Reform Complete Text Mr. Pr
esident. Over one hundred years ago, at the dawn of the last century, the Industrial Revolution was beginning to take hold of Ame
rica, creating unimaginable wealth in sprawling metropolises all across the country.As factories multiplied and profits grew, the
 winnings of the new economy became more and more concentrated in the hands of a few robber barons, railroad tycoons and oil magn
ates. In the cities, power was maintained by a corrupt system of political machines and ward bosses. And in the state of New York
, there was a young governor who was determined to give government back to the people.In just his first year, he had already begu
n to antagonize the state's political machine by attacking its system of favors and corporate giveaways. He also signed a workers
' compensation bill, and even fired the superintendent of insurance for taking money from the very industry he was supposed to be
 regulating.None of this sat too well with New York's powerful party boss, who finally plotted to get rid of the reform-minded go
vernor by making sure he was nominated for the Vice Presidency that year.What no one could have expected is that soon after the e
lection, when President William McKinley was assassinated, the greatest fears of the corrupt machine bosses and powerbrokers came
 true when that former governor became President of the United States and went on to bust trusts, break up monopolies, and return
 the government to its people.His name, of course, was Theodore Roosevelt. He was a Republican. And throughout his public life, h
e demonstrated a willingness to put party and politics aside in order to battle corruption and give people an open, honest govern
ment that would fight for their interests and uphold their values.Today, we face a similar crisis of corruption. And I believe th
at we need similar leadership from those in power as well.The American people are tired of a Washington that's only open to those
 with the most cash and the right connections. They're tired of a political process where the vote you cast isn't as important as
 the favors you can do. And they're tired of trusting us with their tax dollars when they see them spent on frivolous pet project
s and corporate giveaways.It's not that the games that are played in this town are new or surprising to the public.People are not
 naive to the existence of corruption and they know it has worn the face of both Republicans and Democrats over the years.Moreove
r, the underlying issue of how extensively money influences politics is the original sin of everyone who's ever run for office - 
myself included. In order to get elected, we need to raise vast sums of money by meeting and dealing with people who are dispropo
rtionately wealthy. This is a problem that predates Jack Abramoff.I agree with those on both sides of the aisle who believe that 
we shouldn't let half-measures and partisan posturing on campaign finance reform derail our current efforts on ethics and lobbyin
g, but I also think this is an issue and a conversation we must have in the months to come.Yet, while people know that both parti
es are vulnerable to these problems, I do think it's fair to say that the scandals we've seen under the current White House and C
ongress - both legal and illegal - are far worse than most of us could have imagined.Think about it. In the past several months, 
we've seen the head of the White House procurement office arrested. We've seen some of our most powerful leaders of both the Hous
e and the Senate under federal investigation. We've seen the indictment of Jack Abramoff and his cronies. And of course, last wee
k, we saw a member of Congress sentenced to eight years in prison for bribery.Now, some have dismissed these scandals by saying t
hat "everybody does it." Well, not everybody does it. And people shouldn't lump together those of us who have to raise funds to r
un campaigns but do so in a legal and ethical way with those who invite lobbyists in to write bad legislation. Those aren't equiv
alent, and we're not being partisan by pointing that out.The fact is, since our federal government has been controlled by one pol
itical party, this kind of scandal has become the regular order of business in this town.For years now, some on the other side of
 the aisle have openly bragged about stocking K Street lobbying firms with former staffers to increase their power in Washington,
 a practice that should stop today and never happen again.But what's truly offensive to the American people about all of this goe
s far beyond people like Jack Abramoff. It's bigger than how much time he'll spend in jail or how many members of Congress he'll 
turn in. Bigger than the K Street project and golf junkets to Scotland and lavish gifts for lawmakers.What's truly offensive abou
t these scandals is that they don't just lead to morally offensive conduct on the part of politicians; they lead to morally offen
sive legislation that hurts hardworking Americans.When big oil companies are invited into the White House for secret energy meeti
ngs, it's no wonder they end up with billions in tax breaks while most working people struggle to fill up their gas tanks and hea
t their homes.When a Committee Chairman negotiates a Medicare bill one day and then negotiates for a job with the drug industry t
he next, it's hardly a surprise that that industry gets taxpayer-funded giveaways in the same bill that forbids seniors from barg
aining for better drug prices.When the people running Washington are accountable only to the special interests that fund their ca
mpaigns, it's not shocking that the American people find their tax dollars being spent with reckless abandon.Since George Bush to
ok office, we've seen the number of registered lobbyists in Washington double. In 2004, over $2.1 billion was spent lobbying Cong
ress. That amounts to over $4.8 million per Member of Congress.How much do you think the American people were able to spend on th
eir Senators or Representatives last year? How much money could the folks who can't fill up their gas tanks spend? How much could
 the seniors forced to choose between their medications and their groceries spend?Not $4.8 million. Not even close.This is the bi
gger story here. The American people believe that the well-connected CEOs and hired guns on K Street who've helped write our laws
 have gotten what they paid for. They got all the tax breaks and loopholes and access they could ever want. But outside this city
, the people who can't afford the high-priced lobbyists and don't want to break the law are wondering, "When is it our turn? When
 will someone in Washington stand up for me?"We need to answer that call. Because while only some are to blame for the corruption
 that has plagued this city, all are responsible for fixing it.As you know, I'm from Chicago - a city that hasn't always had the 
cleanest reputation when it comes to politics in this country. But during my first year in the Illinois State Senate, I helped le
ad the fight to pass Illinois' first ethics reform bill in twenty-five years. I hope we can do something like that here.But we ha
ve to pass a serious bill, and it has to go a long way towards correcting some of the most egregious offenses of the last few yea
rs and preventing future offenses as well. This is not a time for window-dressing or putting a band-aid on a problem just to scor
e political points. This is a time for real reform. I think the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, which has 41 cosponsor
s, established the right marker for reform, and I commend Senator Harry Reid and his staff for their hard work in putting it toge
ther.Real reform means making sure that Members of Congress and senior Administration officials wait until they leave office befo
re pursuing jobs with industries they're responsible for regulating.Billy Tauzin may say he wasn't negotiating for a job with the
 drug industry at the same time he was negotiating the Medicare bill, but the fact is this: while he was a Member of Congress, he
 was negotiating for lobbying jobs with not one, but two different industries that he was responsible for regulating: the drug in
dustry and the motion picture association. That's wrong, and that shouldn't happen anymore.Real reform means ensuring that a ban 
on lobbying after members of Congress leave office is real and includes the behind the scenes coordination and supervision activi
ties now used to skirt the ban.Real reform means giving the public access to now-secret conference committee meetings and posting
 all bills on the Internet at least a day before they're voted on, so the public can scrutinize what's in them.Real reform means 
passing a bill that eliminates all gifts and meals from lobbyists, not just the expensive ones.And real reform must mean real enf
orcement. Because no matter how many new rules we pass, it will mean very little unless you have a system to enforce them.I comme
nd Senators Lieberman and Collins for their efforts to create such an enforcement mechanism through an independent Office of Publ
ic Integrity. While this proposal doesn't go quite as far as my proposal for an outside ethics fact-finding commission, it's stil
l very good, and I will work with them to try to get it included in this bill.But to truly earn back the people's trust - to show
 them that we're working for them and looking out for their interests - we have to do more than just pass a good bill this week. 
We have to fundamentally change the way we do business around here.That means instead of meeting with lobbyists, it's time to sta
rt meeting with some of the 45 million Americans with no health care.Instead of finding cushy political jobs for unqualified budd
ies, it's time to start finding good-paying jobs for hardworking Americans trying to raise a family.Instead of hitting up the big
 firms on K Street, it's time to start visiting the workers on Main Street who wonder how they'll send their kids to college or w
hether their pension will be around when they retire.All these people have done to earn access and gain influence is cast their b
allot. But in this democracy, it's all anyone should have to do.A century ago, that young, reform-minded governor of New York who
 later became our twenty-sixth President gave us words about our country everyone in this town would do well to listen to today. 
Teddy Roosevelt said that,"No republic can permanently endure when its politics are corrupt and base...we can afford to differ on
 the currency, the tariff, and foreign policy, but we cannot afford to differ on the question of honesty. There is a soul in the 
community, a soul in the nation, just exactly as there is a soul in the individual; and exactly as the individual hopelessly mars
 himself if he lets his conscience be dulled by the constant repetition of unworthy acts, so the nation will hopelessly blunt the
 popular conscience if it permits its public men continually to do acts which the nation in its heart of hearts knows are acts wh
ich cast discredit upon our whole public life."I hope that this week, we in the Senate will take the first step towards strengthe
ning this nation's soul and bringing credit back to our public life.Thank you. AFSCME National Convention - Challenge for Labor T
OPIC: Economy & Labor August 7, 2006 AFSCME National Convention Complete Text Thank you, and welcome to Chicago.We meet here at a
 challenging time for labor and a challenging time for America. All across the country, from nurses in Chicago to correctional of
ficers in Atlanta to sanitation workers in L.A., Americans have been looking to the future with more anxiety than hope. As transf
ormations in technology and communication have ushered in a global economy with new rules and new risks, they've watched their go
vernment do its best to try and shift those risks onto the backs of the American worker. And they wonder how they will ever keep 
up.In coffee shops and town meetings, in VFW halls and right here in this room, the questions are all the same. Will I be able to
 leave my children a better world than I was given? Will I be able to save enough to send them to college or plan for a secure re
tirement? Will my job even be there tomorrow? Who will stand up for me in this new world?In this time of change and uncertainty, 
these questions are expected - but I want you to know today they are by no means unique. Throughout our history, they have been a
sked and then answered by Americans who have stood in your shoes and shared your concerns.In the middle of the last century, on t
he restless streets of Memphis, it was a group of AFSCME sanitation workers who took up this charge. For years they had served th
eir city without complaint, picking up other people's trash for little pay and even less respect. Passers-by would call them "wal
king buzzards," and in the segregated South, most were forced to use separate drinking fountains and bathrooms.But as the civil r
ights movement gained steam and they watched the marches and saw the boycotts and heard about the passage of voting rights, the w
orkers in Memphis decided that they'd had enough, and in 1968, over 1,000 went on strike.Their demands were simple. Recognition o
f their union. The right to bargain. A few cents more an hour.But the opposition was fierce. Their vigils were met with handcuffs
. Their protests turned back with mace. One march was interrupted by police gunfire and tear gas, and when the smoke cleared, 280
 had been arrested, 60 were wounded, and one 16-year old boy lay dead.And still, the city would not give in.Now, the workers coul
d have gone home, or they could've gone back to work, or they could've waited for someone else to help them, but they didn't. The
y kept marching. They drew ministers and high school students and civil rights activists to their cause, and at the beginning of 
the third straight month, Dr. King himself came down to Memphis.At this point, the story of the sanitation workers merges with th
e larger saga of the Civil Rights Movement. On April 3rd, we know that King gave his "I've Been to the Mountaintop" sermon. On Ap
ril 4th, he was shot and killed by James Earl Ray as he stood on the balcony of the Lorraine hotel. And on April 8th, a day befor
e he was buried, his wife Coretta led the sanitation workers on one final march through the city of Memphis - a march that would 
culminate in the union contract that the workers had sought for so long.This is the legacy you inherit today. It's a legacy of co
urage, a legacy of action, a legacy of achieving the greatest triumphs amidst the greatest odds. It's a story as American as any 
- that at the edge of despair, in the shadow of hopelessness, ordinary people make the extraordinary decision that if we stand to
gether, we rise together.What those workers made real in Memphis - and what we have to make real today - is the idea that in this
 country, we value the labor of every American. That we're willing to respect that labor and reward it with a few basic guarantee
s - wages that can raise a family, health care if we get sick, a retirement that's dignified, working conditions that are safe.Th
e struggle to secure these guarantees has always been at the heart of the labor movement - and the opposition has always been pow
erful. But today, we're facing a challenge like none we've seen before.At the very moment that globalization is changing the rule
s of the game on the American worker - making it harder to compete with cheaper, highly-skilled workers all over the world - the 
people running Washington are responding with a philosophy that says government has no role in solving these problems; that the s
ervices you all provide every day are better left to the whims of the private sector.They're telling us we're better off if we di
smantle government - if we divvy it up into individual tax breaks, hand 'em out, and encourage everyone to go buy your own health
 care, your own retirement security, your own child care, their own schools, your own private security force, your own roads, the
ir own levees...It's called the Ownership Society in Washington. But in our past there has been another term for it - Social Darw
inism - every man or women for him or herself.It allows us to say to those whose health care or tuition may rise faster than they
 can afford - life isn't fair. It allows us to say to the child who didn't have the foresight to choose the right parents or be b
orn in the right suburb - pick yourself up by your bootstraps. It lets us say to the guy who worked twenty or thirty years in the
 factory and then watched his plant move out to Mexico or China - we're sorry, but you're on your own.It's a bracing idea. It's a
 tempting idea. And it's the easiest thing in the world.But there's just one problem. It doesn't work. It ignores our history. It
 ignores the fact that it has been government research and investment that made the railways and the internet possible. It has be
en the creation of a massive middle class, through decent wages and benefits and public schools - that has allowed all of us to p
rosper. And it has been the ability of working men and women to join together in unions that has allowed our rising tide to lift 
every boat.Yes, our greatness as a nation has depended on individual initiative, on a belief in the free market. But it has also 
depended on our sense of mutual regard for each other, of mutual responsibility. The idea that everybody has a stake in the count
ry, that we're all in it together and everybody's got a shot at opportunity.Americans know this. We know that government can't so
lve all our problems - and we don't want it to.But we also know that there are some things we can't do on our own. We know that t
here are some things we do better together.We know that we've been called in churches and mosques, synagogues and Sunday schools 
to love our neighbors as ourselves; to be our brother's keeper; to be our sister's keeper. That we have individual responsibility
, but we also have collective responsibility to each other.That's what America is. That's what those workers in Memphis fought fo
r. And that's what we fight for today.Some of what we need to do is clear. When you have a Republican Congress that says "no" to 
organizing rights, "no" to overtime pay, "no" to a higher minimum wage, "no" to Social Security, and "no" to Medicaid, it's time 
to say "no" to that Congress and put Democrats in charge come November.But if we really want to lead - if we really hope to convi
nce the country that our vision of government is better than theirs - we're gonna need more than just "no." We're gonna need to t
ell the country what our plan is for the 21st century worker - what we'll do to give every American the chance to get ahead and r
aise their family.I won't stand up here and say that coming up with this strategy will be easy, or pretend to know all the answer
s.But there's a few places we can start.We can start by fixing our schools to make sure every child in America has the education 
and the skills they need to compete. We can start by making sure that college is affordable for every American who wants to go. A
nd by giving unions a real role in creating a real system of lifelong learning so that workers who lose a job really can retrain 
for other high-wage jobs.In this new economy, we can start giving our workers a chance by making sure that no matter where you wo
rk or how many times you switch jobs, you will have health care and a pension you can take with you always.We'll never rise toget
her if we allow medical bills to swallow family budgets or let people retire penniless after a lifetime of hard work, and so we c
an start by demanding that when it comes to commitments made to working men and women on health care and pensions, a promise made
 is a promise kept.And in a world where two-income households are trying to juggle work and family, we can start giving workers a
 chance with policies that give families a chance. When a parent takes parental leave, we shouldn't act like caring for a newborn
 baby is a three-month break - we should let them keep their salary. When parents are working and their children need care, we sh
ould make sure that care is affordable, and that our kids can go to school earlier and longer so they have a safe place to learn 
while their parents are at work. And when a mom or a dad has to leave work to care for a sick child, we should make sure it doesn
't result in a pink slip.Our vision of America is not one where a big government runs our lives; it's one that gives every Americ
an the opportunity to make the most of their lives. It's not one that tells us we're on our own, it's one that realizes that we r
ise or fall together as one people.And yet, we also know that, in the end, neither policy nor politics can replace heart and cour
age in the struggle you now face. Because in the brief history of the American experiment, it has been the ability of ordinary Am
ericans to act on both that has allowed our nation to achieve extraordinary things.Nearly forty years ago, the strike in Memphis 
came to an end.But today, the march goes on.Every year, on April 4th, the sanitation workers of Local 1733 gather again to march 
the route that led them to justice so long ago. Sometimes they walk the whole way, other years a bus comes to carry them the last
 few miles.They march to remember, but they also march because they know our journey isn't complete - they know we have fights le
ft to win; that we have dreams still unfulfilled.A few years back, one of these workers, a man named Malcolm Pryor, told a report
er, "You have to remind people: We are not free yet. As long as I march, Dr. King's soul is still rejoicing that people are still
 trying."And so today I ask you to keep marching.As long as there are those who are jobless, I ask you to keep marching for jobs.
As long as there are those who struggle to raise a family on low wages and few benefits, I ask you to keep marching for opportuni
ty.As long as there are those who can't organize or unionize or bargain for a better life, I ask you to keep marching for solidar
ity.And as long as there are those who try to privatize our government and decimate our social programs and peddle a philosophy o
f trickle-down and on-your-own, I ask you to keep marching for a vision of America where we rise or fall as one nation under God.
My friends, it's time again to march for freedom. Time again to march for hope. Time again to march towards the tomorrow that so 
many have reached for so many times in our past. I know we can get there, and I can't wait to try. Thank you, and good luck. AP A
nnual Luncheon Washington, DC April 14, 2008 Editors note: The week before this speech, Obama was caught in an uncharacteristic m
oment of loose language. Referring to working-class voters in old industrial towns impacted by job losses, the presidential hopef
ul said: "They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment
 or anti-trade sentiment, as a way to explain their frustrations."Good afternoon. I know I kept a lot of you guys busy this weeke
nd with the comments I made last week. Some of you might even be a little bitter about that. As I said yesterday, I regret some o
f the words I chose, partly because the way that these remarks have been interpreted have offended some people and partly because
 they have served as one more distraction from the critical debate that we must have in this election season.I'm a person of deep
 faith, and my religion has sustained me through a lot in my life. I even gave a speech on faith before I ever started running fo
r President where I said that Democrats, "make a mistake when we fail to acknowledge the power of faith in people's lives." I als
o represent a state with a large number of hunters and sportsmen, and I understand how important these traditions are to families
 in Illinois and all across America. And, contrary to what my poor word choices may have implied or my opponents have suggested, 
I've never believed that these traditions or people's faith has anything to do with how much money they have.But I will never wal
k away from the larger point that I was trying to make. For the last several decades, people in small towns and cities and rural 
areas all across this country have seen globalization change the rules of the game on them. When I began my career as an organize
r on the South Side of Chicago, I saw what happens when the local steel mill shuts its doors and moves overseas. You don't just l
ose the jobs in the mill, you start losing jobs and businesses throughout the community. The streets are emptier. The schools suf
fer.I saw it during my campaign for the Senate in Illinois when I'd talk to union guys who had worked at the local Maytag plant f
or twenty, thirty years before being laid off at fifty-five years old when it picked up and moved to Mexico; and they had no idea
 what they're going to do without the paycheck or the pension that they counted on. One man didn't even know if he'd be able to a
fford the liver transplant his son needed now that his health care was gone. I've heard these stories almost every day during thi
s campaign, whether it was in Iowa or Ohio or Pennsylvania. And the people I've met have also told me that every year, in every e
lection, politicians come to their towns, and they tell them what they want to hear, and they make big promises, and then they go
 back to Washington when the campaign's over, and nothing changes. There's no plan to address the downside of globalization. We d
on't do anything about the skyrocketing cost of health care or college or those disappearing pensions. Instead of fighting to rep
lace jobs that aren't coming back, Washington ends up fighting over the latest distraction of the week.And after years and years 
and years of this, a lot of people in this country have become cynical about what government can do to improve their lives. They 
are angry and frustrated with their leaders for not listening to them; for not fighting for them; for not always telling them the
 truth. And yes, they are bitter about that. Now, Senator McCain and the Republicans in Washington are already looking ahead to t
he fall and have decided that they plan on using these comments to argue that I'm out of touch with what's going on in the lives 
of working Americans. I don't blame them for this -- that's the nature of our political culture, and if I had to carry the banner
 for eight years of George Bush's failures, I'd be looking for something else to talk about too. But I will say this. If John McC
ain wants to turn this election into a contest about which party is out of touch with the struggles and the hopes of working Amer
ica, that's a debate I'm happy to have. In fact, I think that's a debate we need to have. Because I believe that the real insult 
to the millions of hard-working Americans out there would be a continuation of the economic agenda that has dominated Washington 
for far too long.I may have made a mistake last week in the words that I chose, but the other party has made a much more damaging
 mistake in the failed policies they've chosen and the bankrupt philosophy they've embraced for the last three decades. It's a ph
ilosophy that says there's no role for government in making the global economy work for working Americas; that we have to just si
t back watch those factories close and those jobs disappear; that there's nothing we can do or should do about workers without he
alth care, or children in crumbling schools, or families who are losing their homes, and so we should just hand out a few tax bre
aks and wish everyone the best of luck.Ronald Reagan called this trickle-down economics. George Bush called it the Ownership Soci
ety. But what it really means is that you're on your own. If your premiums or your tuition is rising faster than you can afford, 
you're on your own. If you're that Maytag worker who just lost his pension, tough luck. If you're a child born into poverty, you'
ll just have to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps. This philosophy isn't just out-of-touch - it's put our economy out-of-wh
ack. Years of pain on Main Street have finally trickled up to Wall Street and sent us hurtling toward recession, reminding us tha
t we're all connected - that we can't prosper as a nation where a few people are doing well and everyone else is struggling. John
 McCain is an American hero and a worthy opponent, but he's proven time and time again that he just doesn't understand this. It t
ook him three tries in seven days just to figure out that the home foreclosure crisis was an actual problem. He's had a front row
 seat to the last eight years of disastrous policies that have widened the income gap and saddled our children with debt, and now
 he's promising four more years of the very same thing. He's promising to make permanent the Bush tax breaks for the wealthiest f
ew who didn't need them and didn't ask for them - tax breaks that are so irresponsible that John McCain himself once said they of
fended his conscience. He's promising four more years of trade deals that don't have a single safeguard for American workers - th
at don't help American workers compete and win in a global economy. He's promising four more years of an Administration that will
 push for the privatization of Social Security - a plan that would gamble away people's retirement on the stock market; a plan th
at was already rejected by Democrats and Republicans under George Bush. He's promising four more years of policies that won't gua
rantee health insurance for working Americans; that won't bring down the rising cost of college tuition; that won't do a thing fo
r the Americans who are living in those communities where the jobs have left and the factories have shut their doors. And yet, de
spite all this, the other side is still betting that the American people won't notice that John McCain is running for George Bush
's third term. They think that they'll forget about all that's happened in the last eight years; that they'll be tricked into bel
ieving that it's either me or our party is the one that's out of touch with what's going on in their lives. Well I'm making a dif
ferent bet. I'm betting on the American people. The men and women I've met in small towns and big cities across this country see 
this election as a defining moment in our history. They understand what's at stake here because they're living it every day. And 
they are tired of being distracted by fake controversies. They are fed up with politicians trying to divide us for their own poli
tical gain. And I believe they'll see through the tactics that are used every year, in every election, to appeal to our fears, or
 our biases, or our differences - because they've never wanted or needed change as badly as they do now. The people I've met duri
ng this campaign know that government cannot solve all of our problems, and they don't expect it to. They don't want our tax doll
ars wasted on programs that don't work or perks for special interests who don't work for us. They understand that we cannot stop 
every job from going overseas or build a wall around our economy, and they know that we shouldn't.But they believe it's finally t
ime that we make health care affordable and available for every single American; that we bring down costs for workers and for bus
inesses; that we cut premiums, and stop insurance companies from denying people care or coverage who need it most. They believe i
t's time we provided real relief to the victims of this housing crisis; that we help families refinance their mortgage so they ca
n stay in their homes; that we start giving tax relief to the people who actually need it - middle-class families, and seniors, a
nd struggling homeowners.They believe that we can and should make the global economy work for working Americans; that we might no
t be able to stop every job from going overseas, but we certainly can stop giving tax breaks to companies who send them their and
 start giving tax breaks to companies who create good jobs right here in America. We can invest in the types of renewable energy 
that won't just reduce our dependence on oil and save our planet, but create up to five million new jobs that can't be outsourced
. They believe we can train our workers for those new jobs, and keep the most productive workforce the most competitive workforce
 in the world if we fix our public education system by investing in what works and finding out what doesn't; if we invest in earl
y childhood education and finally make college affordable for everyone who wants to go; if we stop talking about how great our te
achers are and start rewarding them for their greatness. They believe that if you work your entire life, you deserve to retire wi
th dignity and respect, which means a pension you can count on, and Social Security that's always there. This is what the people 
I've met believe about the country they love. It doesn't matter if they're Democrats or Republicans; whether they're from the sma
llest towns or the biggest cities; whether they hunt or they don't; whether they go to church, or temple, or mosque, or not. We m
ay come from different places and have different stories, but we share common hopes, and one very American dream. That is the dre
am I am running to help restore in this election. If I get the chance, that is what I'll be talking about from now until November
. That is the choice that I'll offer the American people - four more years of what we had for the last eight, or fundamental chan
ge in Washington.People may be bitter about their leaders and the state of our politics, but beneath that, they are hopeful about
 what's possible in America. That's why they leave their homes on their day off, or their jobs after a long day of work, and trav
el - sometimes for miles, sometimes in the bitter cold - to attend a rally or a town hall meeting held by Senator Clinton, or Sen
ator McCain, or myself. Because they believe that we can change things. Because they believe in that dream. I know something abou
t that dream. I wasn't born into a lot of money. I was raised by a single mother with the help my grandparents, who grew up in sm
all-town Kansas, went to school on the GI Bill, and bought their home through an FHA loan. My mother had to use food stamps at on
e point, but she still made sure that through scholarships, I got a chance to go to some of the best schools around, which helped
 me get into some of the best colleges around, which gave me loans that Michelle and I just finished paying not all that many yea
rs ago.In other words, my story is a quintessentially American story. It's the same story that has made this country a beacon for
 the world-a story of struggle and sacrifice on the part of my forebearers and a story overcoming great odds. I carry that story 
with me each and every day, It's why I wake up every day and do this, and it's why I continue to hold such hope for the future of
 a country where the dreams of its people have always been possible. Thank you. Floor Statement - Employment Verification Amendme
nt TOPIC: Immigration May 23, 2006 Floor Statement by Senator Barack Obama Employment Verification Amendment for the Immigration 
Bill Complete Text Mr. President. I come to the floor today to discuss the bipartisan employment verification system amendment th
at Senators Grassley, Kennedy, Kyl, and I have introduced.One of the central components of immigration reform is enforcement, and
 this bill contains a number of important provisions to beef up border security. But that's not enough. Real enforcement also mea
ns drying up the pool of jobs that encourages illegal immigration. And that can only happen if employers don't hire illegal worke
rs. Unfortunately, our current employer enforcement system does little to nothing to deter illegal immigrants from finding work.O
verall, the number of workplace arrests of illegal immigrants fell from 17,552 in 1997 to 451 in 2002, even as illegal immigratio
n grew during that time. Moreover, between 25% to 40% of all undocumented immigrants are people who have overstayed their visas. 
And the only way to effectively deter overstays is to reduce access to employment.When Congress last passed an immigration bill i
n 1986, we didn't provide a meaningful way for employers to check legal eligibility to work. Currently, employees can prove their
 legal status by showing a variety of documents, and employers are supposed to record their inspection of such documents by filli
ng out an I-9 form for each employee. As a result, the market for fraudulent documents -- fake Social Security cards, driver's li
censes, birth certificates - has exploded.But, with more than 100 million employees in more than 6 million workplaces, and only a
bout 788 Wage and Hour investigators, employer sanctions have become merely a nuisance requirement to maintain records, not a ser
ious risk of penalties. As a result, the number of "intent to fine" notices issued to employers for hiring undocumented workers d
ropped from 417 in 1999 to just three in 2004.Understandably, employers cannot always detect forged documents. And employers who 
reject workers with questionable documents risk an employment discrimination suit.That's why we need a better alternative. We nee
d an electronic verification system that can effectively detect the use of fraudulent documents, significantly reduce the employm
ent of illegal workers, and give employers the confidence that their workforce is legal.When Congress first considered comprehens
ive immigration reform in April, the legislation on the floor addressed this problem by creating a national employment eligibilit
y verification system. Senators Grassley, Kyl, and I all thought that was a good idea in theory, but we had concerns with the des
ign of the system.Senators Grassley and Kyl proposed that the verification system be implemented nationally within 18 months.Sena
tors Kennedy and I proposed that the system be phased in over five years but that it also include additional accuracy and privacy
 standards, as well as strict prohibitions on use of the system to discriminate against workers.For the past few weeks, our staff
s have worked together in a bipartisan effort to negotiate a substitute that took the concerns of both proposals into considerati
on. I'm pleased that we've reached an agreement.Under our compromise amendment, all employers would have to participate 18 months
 after the Department of Homeland Security receives the appropriations needed to fund the system. All new employees hired would h
ave to be run through the system, and a series of privacy and accuracy standards would protect citizens and legal immigrants from
 errors in the system and breaches of private information.And to make sure that employers take the system seriously, we strengthe
n civil penalties for employers who hire unauthorized workers, and we establish criminal penalties for repeat violators.We've wor
ked in a constructive, bipartisan manner to design an employment verification system that is fair to legal workers and tough on i
llegal workers. This is a good amendment, and I urge my colleagues to support it.Thank you. Northwestern University Commencement 
Address TOPIC: Commencement June 16, 2006 Northwestern University Commencement Address Complete Text Good morning President Biene
n, the Board of Trustees, faculty, parents, family, friends, and the Class of 2006. Congratulations on your graduation, and thank
 you for allowing me the honor to be a part of it.A few months ago, I came across an article in your student newspaper by Elaine 
Meyer.Elaine, give me a little wave if you're out there. There she is. Glad to see you made it to graduation.So, Elaine wrote thi
s article entitled, "Challenge us, Senator Obama." I thought this seemed like a fair request, so I kept reading. And I noticed th
at Elaine set out a few expectations for this speech.According to the article, I'm supposed to be inspirational, but not contrive
d. I'm supposed to be hopeful, but not cheesy. I should be political, but not too political. I should be better than John McCain,
 but not so good that I have to spend the day with Jerry Falwell.To further illustrate what she was looking for, Elaine then very
 kindly quoted at length from the commencement address I gave at Knox College in Galesburg last year - which then completely ruin
ed my plan to recycle that speech for this year.Left with no speech and a lot of pressure, I turned to who else but Elaine for he
lp. And what she wrote next is precisely what I'd like to talk you about today. She said,"When people say they don't want to hear
 about politics in a commencement address, they are in part speaking of not wanting to hear about the outside world and its probl
ems. We students have been insulated enough for the past four years that it shouldn't hurt us to be challenged for thirty minutes
, especially on a day that marks our commencement into the 'real' world."That struck me as an important statement. And it called 
to mind a passage from scriptures that some of you may know:Corinthians 13:11: "When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I felt as
 a child, I thought as a child. Now that I have become a man, I have put away childish things."I bring this up because there's an
 assumption in rites of passage like this that growing up is just a function of age; that becoming an adult is an inevitable and 
natural progression.But in fact, I know a whole lot of thirty year olds and forty year olds and fifty year olds who are not yet f
ull-grown. And if you talk to my wife, she'll tell you that there are times when I do not put aside childish things; when I conti
nually struggle to rise above the selfish or the petty or the small.So even today, as a U.S. Senator, I have to remind myself of 
certain lessons from my own youth - lessons about growing up and being true to my values and ideals.The first lesson came during 
my first year in college. Back then I had a tendency, in my mother's words, to act a bit casual about my future. I rebelled, angr
y in the way that many young men in general, and young black man in particular, are angry, thinking that responsibility and hard 
work were old-fashioned conventions that didn't apply to me. I partied a little too much and studied just enough to get by.And on
ce, after a particularly long night of partying, we had spilled a little too much beer, broke a few too many bottles, and trashed
 a little too much of the dorm. And the next day, the mess was so bad that when one of the cleaning ladies saw it, she began to t
ear up. And when a girlfriend of mine heard about this, she said to me, "That woman could've been my grandmother, Barack. She spe
nt her days cleaning up after somebody else's mess."Which drove home for me the first lesson of growing up: The world doesn't jus
t revolve around you. There's a lot of talk in this country about the federal deficit. But I think we should talk more about our 
empathy deficit - the ability to put ourselves in someone else's shoes; to see the world through those who are different from us 
- the child who's hungry, the laid-off steelworker, the immigrant woman cleaning your dorm room.As you go on in life, cultivating
 this quality of empathy will become harder, not easier. There's no community service requirement in the real world; no one forci
ng you to care. You'll be free to live in neighborhoods with people who are exactly like yourself, and send your kids to the same
 schools, and narrow your concerns to what's going in your own little circle.Not only that - we live in a culture that discourage
s empathy. A culture that too often tells us our principle goal in life is to be rich, thin, young, famous, safe, and entertained
. A culture where those in power too often encourage these selfish impulses.They will tell you that the Americans who sleep in th
e streets and beg for food got there because they're all lazy or weak of spirit. That the inner-city children who are trapped in 
dilapidated schools can't learn and won't learn and so we should just give up on them entirely. That the innocent people being sl
aughtered and expelled from their homes half a world away are somebody else's problem to take care of.I hope you don't listen to 
this. I hope you choose to broaden, and not contract, your ambit of concern. Not because you have an obligation to those who are 
less fortunate, although you do have that obligation. Not because you have a debt to all of those who helped you get to where you
 are, although you do have that debt.It's because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on
 collective salvation. And because it's only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you will realize yo
ur true potential - and become full-grown.The second lesson I learned after college, when I had this crazy idea that I wanted to 
be a community organizer and work in low-income neighborhoods.My mother and grandparents thought I should go to law school. My fr
iends had applied for jobs on Wall Street. But I went ahead and wrote letters to every organization in the country that I could t
hink of. And finally, this small group of churches on the south side of Chicago wrote back and gave me a job organizing neighborh
oods devastated by steel-plant closings in the early 80s.The churches didn't have much money - so they offered me a grand sum of 
$12,000 a year plus $1,000 to buy a car. And I got ready to move to Chicago - a place I had never been and where I didn't know a 
living soul.Even people who didn't know me were skeptical of my decision. I remember having a conversation with an older man I ha
d met before I arrived in Chicago. I told him about my plans, and he looked at me and said, "Let me tell something. You look like
 a nice clean-cut young man, and you've got a nice voice. So let me give you a piece of advice - forget this community organizing
 business. You can't change the world, and people won't appreciate you trying. What you should do is go into television broadcast
ing. I'm telling you, you've got a future."I could've taken my mother's advice and I could've taken my grandparents advice. I cou
ld've taken the path my friends traveled. And objectively speaking, that TV thing might have made some sense.But I knew there was
 something in me that wanted to try for something bigger.So the second lesson is this: Challenge yourself. Take some risks in you
r life.This may be difficult for all of you because one of the great things about graduating from Northwestern is that you can no
w punch your own ticket. You can take your diploma, walk off this stage, and go chasing after the big house and the large salary 
and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should buy.But I hope you don't. Focusing your life s
olely on making a buck shows a poverty of ambition. It asks too little of yourself. And it will leave you unfulfilled.I often thi
nk about the young Americans - teenagers and college kids not much older than you - from all over the country, watching the Civil
 Rights Movement unfold before them on their television sets.I imagine that they would've seen the marchers and heard the speeche
s, but they also probably saw the dogs and the fire hoses, or the footage of innocent people being beaten within an inch of their
 lives; or heard the news the day those four little girls died when someone threw a bomb into their church.Instinctively, they kn
ew that it was safer and smarter to stay at home; to watch the movement from afar. But they also understood that these people in 
Georgia and Alabama and Mississippi were their brothers and sisters; that what was happening was wrong; and that they had an obli
gation to make it right. When the buses pulled up for a Freedom Ride down South, they got on. They took a risk. And they changed 
the world.So don't let people talk you into doing the safe thing. Listen to what's inside of you and decide what it is that you c
are about so much that you're willing to risk it all.The third lesson is one that I learned once I got to Chicago. I had spent we
eks organizing our very first community meeting around the issue of gang violence. We invited the police; we made phone calls, we
nt to churches, and passed out flyers. I had been warned of the turf battles and bad politics between certain community leaders, 
but I ignored them, confident that I knew what I was doing.The night of the meeting we arranged rows and rows of chairs in antici
pation of the crowd. And we waited. And we waited. And finally, a group of older people walk in to the hall. And they sit down. A
nd this little old lady raises her hand and asks, "Is this where the bingo game is?"Thirteen people showed up that night. The pol
ice never came. And the meeting was a complete disaster. Later, the volunteers I worked with told me they were quitting - that th
ey had been doing this for two years and had nothing to show for it.I was tired too. But at that point, I looked outside and saw 
some young boys playing in a vacant lot across the street, tossing stones at boarded-up apartment building. And I turned to the v
olunteers, and I asked them, "Before you quit, I want you to answer one question. What's gonna happen to those boys? Who will fig
ht for them if not us? Who will give them a fair shot if we leave?" And at that moment, we were all reminded of a third lesson in
 growing up: Persevere.Making your mark on the world is hard. If it were easy, everybody would do it. But it's not. It takes pati
ence, it takes commitment, and it comes with plenty of failure along the way. The real test is not whether you avoid this failure
, because you won't. it's whether you let it harden or shame you into inaction, or whether you learn from it; whether you choose 
to persevere.After my little speech that day, one by one, the volunteers decided not to quit. We went back to those neighborhoods
, and we kept at it, sustaining ourselves with the small victories. And over time, a community changed. And so had we. Cultivatin
g empathy, challenging yourself, persevering in the face of adversity - these are the qualities that I've found to be important i
n my own life.But what's true for individuals can also be true for nations.For what America needs right now, more than ever, is a
 sense of purpose to guide us through the challenges that lie ahead; a maturity that we seem to have lost somewhere along the way
; a willingness to engage in a sober, adult conversation about our future.When we measure our greatness as a nation by how far th
e stock market rises or falls instead of how many opportunities we've opened up for America's children, we're displaying a prefer
ence for the childish. When we believe that force is the only way to accomplish our ends in the world, when our leaders exaggerat
e or fudge the truth, we haven't set aside childish things. When we run our budget into red ink for things that we want instead o
f things that we need, we're indicating that we're not yet full-grown.For a brief moment, there was the hope that this kind of po
litics would've ended after 9/11. There was a sense of unity born from the rubble of those buildings - young people signing up to
 serve; political leaders of both parties working together; people asking new questions about our world, hungry for the answers.B
ut at some point, we began to drift. Republican and Democrat alike went back to procrastinating about problems that we now have t
o face. We sent young Americans to fight a war without asking anyone back home to sacrifice their time or their tax cut. We argue
 about the inconsequential, and caricature our opponents to score cheap political points. Our media returned to covering the sens
ational and feeding our ever-shortening attention span.And in the meantime, our problems are left to fester.We have a global econ
omy that's forcing us to compete like never before. In today's world a job can now travel anywhere there's an internet connection
 and a worker who's smart and skilled. And if China and India keep educating their kids better and longer than we are, that's whe
re the jobs will go.We can meet this challenge if we fix our schools, if we make college affordable, if we train our workers, if 
we invest more in research and technology. We know what needs to be done. What's lacking is the political will.We have a health c
are crisis in this country that's left 46 million Americans uninsured; that's left millions unable to deal with rising co-payment
s; that's left businesses near bankruptcy.We can meet this challenge if we modernize our health care system, if we improve qualit
y, if we pool our resources to bargain for affordable insurance. What's been lacking is the political will.We have an energy cris
is that's keeping gas prices high; destroying our climate, and forcing us to send billions of dollars to the very countries who w
ant to cause us harm.We can meet this challenge if we harness alternative fuels and build cars that go further on a tank of gas. 
But we need to find the will to make it happen.We need new strategies to fight the war on terror. In a world where terrorists can
 hide and blend into any city on the planet, we can't just believe - as Bill Clinton says - that we can kill or jail every single
 one of our enemies.We can meet this challenge if we realize this isn't just battle of armies but also of ideas; if we rebuild ou
r institutions and strengthen our alliances as Truman and Acheson and Keenan and Marshall did after World War II; if we bring hop
e to those pockets of desperation where a jihad is a better bet than a job.But what's lacking is that political will.Each and eve
ry one of these challenges call for an America that is more purposeful, more grown-up than the America that we have today. An Ame
rica that reflects the lessons that have helped so many of its people mature in their own lives. An America that's about not just
 each of us, but all of us. An America that takes great risks in the face of greater odds. An America that, above all, perseveres
.Over one hundred and fifty classes have sat where you sit today, some in good times, others in bad. Some were years that just ro
lled into the next, and others would mark a turning point in our nation.The class of 1860 would find their country torn apart by 
civil war in less than a year. Many of them would listen to their President tell them that a house divided cannot stand, and they
 would answer the call to save a union and free a people.The class of 1932 would look out a nation in mired in depression; a nati
on ill-fed, ill-clothed, and ill-housed. They would hear a man who could not lift himself from his wheelchair lift a nation by te
lling us that it was only fear itself standing in our way. And they would answer the call to conquer that fear.The class of 1960 
would find themselves at the beginning of a decade where social and racial strife threatened to tear apart the very fabric of the
 nation. They would hear a young President urge them to ask what they could do for their country. And they would answer the call 
to sit at lunch counters and take those Freedom Rides; they would march for justice and live for equality.And now it is 2006. And
 here you sit facing challenges as great as any in the past. And the choice is yours. Will the years pass with barely a whisper f
rom your generation? Or will we look back on this time as the moment where you took a stand and changed the world?Time will tell.
 You will be tested by the challenges of this new century, and at times you will fail. But know that you have it within your powe
r to try. That generations who have come before you faced these same fears and uncertainties in their own time. And that if we're
 willing to shoulder each other's burdens, to take great risks, and to persevere through trial, America will continue on its magn
ificent journey towards that distant horizon, and a better day.Thank you so much to the class of 2006, congratulations on your gr
aduation, and Elaine - I hope I did okay. NATIONAL PRESS CLUB APRIL 2005 TOPIC: Economic Issues April 26th, 2005 National Press C
lub Complete Text Thank you. It's great to be here at the National Press Club - I want to thank the club as well as the FDR Insti
tute for arranging this luncheon together. I'd also like to thank Anne Roosevelt and Jim Roosevelt, who inspire us all by carryin
g on the proud legacy of their grandfather.By the time the Senate Finance Committee holds the first Senate hearing on the Preside
nt's Social Security plan today, we'll have heard just about everything there is to be said about the issue. We've heard about pr
ivatization and benefit cuts, about massive new debt and huge new risks, and we've even been scared into thinking the system will
 go broke when our kids retire, even though we know there'll be enough money then to pay the vast majority of benefits.I'm happy 
to address some of these issues in the Q and A after the speech. But aside from the usual back and forth of this debate, I can't 
help but think about the larger issue at stake here.Think about the America that Franklin Roosevelt saw when he looked out the wi
ndows of the White House from his wheelchair - an America where too many were ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure. An 
America where more and more Americans were finding themselves on the losing end of a new economy, and where there was nothing ava
ilable to cushion their fall.Some thought that our country didn't have a responsibility to do anything about these problems, that
 people would be better off left to their own devices and the whims of the market. Others believed that American capitalism had f
ailed and that it was time to try something else altogether.But our President believed deeply in the American idea.He understood 
that the freedom to pursue our own individual dreams is made possible by the promise that if fate causes us to stumble or fall, o
ur larger American family will be there to lift us up. That if we're willing to share even a small amount of life's risks and rew
ards with each other, then we'll all have the chance to make the most of our God-given potential.And because Franklin Roosevelt h
ad the courage to act on this idea, individual Americans were able to get back on their feet and build a shared prosperity that i
s still the envy of the world.The New Deal gave the laid-off worker a guarantee that he could count on unemployment insurance to 
put food on his family's table while he looked for a new job. It gave the young man who suffered a debilitating accident assuranc
e that he could count on disability benefits to get him through the tough times. A widow might still raise her children without t
he indignity of charity. And Franklin Roosevelt's greatest legacy promised the couple who put in a lifetime of sacrifice and hard
 work that they could retire in comfort and dignity because of Social Security.Today, we're told by those who want to privatize t
hat promise how much things are different and times have changed since Roosevelt's day.I couldn't agree more.A child born in this
 new century is likely to start his life with both parents - or a single parent - working full-time jobs. They'll try their harde
st to juggle work and family, but they'll end up needing child care to keep him safe, cared for, and educated early.They'll want 
to give him the best education possible, but unless they live in a wealthy town with good public schools, they'll have to settle 
for less or find the money for private schools.This student will study hard and dream of going to the best colleges in the countr
y, but with tuition rising higher and faster than ever before, he may have to postpone those dreams or start life deeper in debt 
than any generation before him.When he graduates from college, this young man will find a job market where middle-class manufactu
ring jobs with good benefits have long been replaced with low-wage, low-benefit service sector jobs and high-skill, high-wage job
s of the future.To get those good jobs, he'll need the skills and knowledge to not only compete with other workers in America, bu
t with highly skilled and highly knowledgeable workers all over the world who are being recruited by the same companies that once
 made their home in this country.When he finally starts his job, he'll want health insurance, but rising costs mean that fewer em
ployers can afford to provide that benefit, and when they do, fewer employees can afford the record premiums.When he starts a fam
ily, he'll want to buy a house and a car and pay for child care and college for his own children, but as he watches the lucky few
 benefit from lucrative bonuses and tax shelters, he'll see his own tax burden rise and his own paycheck barely cover this month'
s bills.And when he retires, he'll hope that he and his wife have saved enough, but if there wasn't enough to save, he'll hope th
at there will still be two Social Security checks that come to the house every month.These are the challenges we face at the begi
nning of the 21st century. We shouldn't exaggerate; we aren't seeing the absolute deprivation of the Great Depression. But it can
not be denied that families face more risk and greater insecurity than we have known since FDR's time, even as those families hav
e fewer resources available to help pull themselves through the tough spots. Whereas people were once able to count on their empl
oyer to provide health care, pensions, and a job that would last a lifetime, today's worker wonders if suffering a heart attack w
ill cause his employer to drop his coverage, worries about how much he can contribute to his own pension fund, and fears the poss
ibility that he might walk into work tomorrow and find his job outsourced.Yet, just as the naysayers in Roosevelt's day told us t
hat there was nothing we could do to help people help themselves, the people in power today are telling us that instead of sharin
g the risks of the new economy, we should shoulder them on our own.In the end, this is what the debate over the future of Social 
Security is truly about.After a lifetime of hard work and contribution to this country, do we tell our seniors that they're on th
eir own, or that we're here for them to provide a basic standard of living? Is the dignity of life in their latter years their pr
oblem, or one we all share?Since this is Washington, you won't hear them answer those questions directly when they talk about Soc
ial Security. Instead, they use the word "reform" when they mean "privatize," and they use "strengthen" when they really mean "di
smantle." They tell us there's a crisis to get us all riled up so we'll sit down and listen to their plan to privatize.But we kno
w what the whole thing's really about.It's not just about cutting guaranteed benefits by up to 50% -- though it certainly does th
at.It's not just about borrowing $5 trillion from countries like China and Japan to finance the plan - after all, we know how fis
cal conservatives hate debt and deficit.And it's not even about the ability private accounts to finance the gap in the system - b
ecause even the privatization advocates admit they don't.What this whole thing is about, and why conservatives have been pushing 
it so hard for so long now, is summed up in one sentence in one White House memo that somehow made its way out of the White House
:"For the first time in six decades, the Social Security battle is one we can win - and in doing so, we can help transform the po
litical and philosophical landscape of the country."And there it is. Since Social Security was first signed into law almost seven
ty years ago, at a time when FDR's opponents were calling it a hoax that would never work and some likened it to communism, there
 has been movement after movement to get rid of the program for purely ideological reasons. Because some still believe that we ca
n't solve the problems we face as one American community; they think this country works better when we're left to face fate by ou
rselves.I understand this view. There's something bracing about the Social Darwinist idea, the idea that there isn't a problem th
at the unfettered free market can't solve. It requires no sacrifice on the part of those of us who have won life's lottery...and 
doesn't consider who our parents were, or the education we received, or the right breaks that came at the right time.But I couldn
't disagree more. If we privatize Social Security, what will we tell retirees whose investments in the stock market went badly? W
e're sorry? Keep working? You're on your own?When people's expected benefits get cut and they have to choose between their grocer
ies and their prescriptions, what will we say then? That's not our problem?When our debt climbs so high that our children face sk
y-high taxes just as they're starting their first job, what will we tell them? Deal with it yourselves?This isn't how America wor
ks. This isn't how we saved millions of seniors from a life of poverty seventy years ago. This isn't how we sent a greatest gener
ation of veterans to college so they could build the greatest middle-class in history. And this isn't how we should face the chal
lenges of this new century either.And yet, this is the direction they're trying to take America on almost every issue. Instead of
 trying to contain the skyrocketing cost of health care and expand access to the uninsured, the idea behind the President's Healt
h Savings Accounts are to leave the system alone and give you a few extra bucks to go find a plan you can afford on your own. You
 deal with double digit inflation by going to the doctor less. Instead of strengthening a pension system that provides defined be
nefits to employees who've worked a lifetime, we'll give you a tax break and hope that you invest well and save well in your own 
little account. And if none of this works - if you couldn't find affordable insurance and suffer an illness that leaves you thous
ands of dollars in debt - then you should no longer count on being able to start over by declaring bankruptcy because they've cha
nged the law to put the burden of debt squarely on your shoulders.Taking responsibility for oneself and showing individual initia
tive are American values we all share. Frankly, they're values we could stand to see more of in a culture where the buck is too o
ften passed to the next guy. They are values we could use more of here in Washington too.But the irony of this all-out assault ag
ainst every existing form of social insurance is that these safety nets are exactly what encourage each of us to be risk-takers a
nd entrepreneurs who are free to pursue our individual ambitions. We get into a car knowing that if someone rear-ends us, they wi
ll have insurance to pay for the repairs. We buy a house knowing that our investment is protected by homeowners insurance. We tak
e a chance on start-ups and small businesses because we know that if they fail, there are protections available to cushion our fa
ll. Corporations across America have limited liability for this very reason. Families should too - and that's why we need social 
insurance. This is how the market works.This is how America works. And if we want it to keep working, we need to develop new ways
 for all of us to share the new risks of a 21st century economy, not destroy what we already have.The genius of Roosevelt was put
ting into practice the idea that America doesn't have to be a place where our individual aspirations are at war with our common g
ood; it's a place where one makes the other possible.I think we will save Social Security from privatization this year. And in do
ing so, we will affirm our belief that we are all connected as one people - ready to share life's risks and rewards for the benef
it of each and the good of all.Let me close by suggesting that Democrats are absolutely united in the need to strengthen Social S
ecurity and make it solvent for future generations. We know that, and we want that. And I believe that both Democrats and Republi
cans can work together to do that. While we're at it, we can begin a debate about the real challenges America faces as the baby b
oomers begin to retire.About getting a handle on the growing cost of health care and prescription drugs. About increasing individ
ual and national savings. About strengthening our pension system for the 21st century.These are important questions that require 
us to work together, not in a manufactured panic about a genuine but solvable problem, but with the spirit of pragmatism and inno
vation that will offer every American the secure retirement they have earned.You know, there are times in the life of this nation
 where we are individual citizens going about our own business, enjoying the freedoms we've been blessed with.And then there are 
times when we are one America, linked by the dignity of each and the destiny of all.The debate over the future of Social Security
 must be one of these times.The people I've met since starting my campaign tell me they don't want a big government that's runnin
g their lives, but they do want an active government that will give them the opportunity to make the most of their lives.Starting
 with the child born today and the senior moving into the twilight of life, together we can provide that opportunity.The day Fran
klin Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act of 1935 into law, he began by saying that "Today, a hope of many years' standing is
 in large part fulfilled."It is now time to fulfill our hope for an America where we're in this together - for our seniors, for o
ur children, and for every American in the years and generations yet to come.Thank you. ABRAHAM LINCOLN PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY AND 
MUSEUM TOPIC: Our Past, Our Future, Our VisionApril 20, 2005 Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum Remarks by Senator B
arack Obama Complete Text Let me congratulate all of those who have helped to make this wonderful vision a reality.But we gather 
here today not to celebrate a building. We gather to celebrate a man.What is it that makes Lincoln such a seminal figure in our s
tory? How is it that this man, born in the backwoods of Kentucky, with little formal education, homely and awkward, a man given t
o depression and wracked with self-doubt, might come to represent so much of who we are as a people, and so much of what we aspir
e to be?Some of it has to do with the trajectory of his life. In his rise from poverty, his self-study and ultimate mastery of la
nguage and of law, in his capacity to overcome personal loss and remain determined in the face of repeated defeat - in all of thi
s we see a fundamental element of the American character, a belief that we can constantly remake ourselves to fit our larger drea
ms.Some of it has to do with the sheer energy of the man, the railsplitter, ax-in-hand, looking out at a frontier of hope and pos
sibility. Lincoln believed deeply in the American spirit of innovation and exploration that accepts no limits to the heights to w
hich our nation might reach.In all of this - the repeated acts of self-creation, the insistence that with sweated brow and callou
sed hands and focused will we can recast the wilderness of the American landscape and the American heart into something better, s
omething finer - in all of this Lincoln embodies our deepest myths. It is a mythology that drives us still.And yet what separates
 Lincoln from the other great men has to do with something else. It's an issue of character that speaks to us, of moral resolve. 
Lincoln was not a perfect man, nor a perfect president. By modern standards, his condemnation of slavery might be considered tent
ative; his Emancipation Proclamation more a military document than a clarion call for justice. He wasn't immune to political cons
iderations; his temperament could be indecisive and morose.And yet despite these imperfections, despite his fallibility...indeed,
 perhaps because of a painful self-awareness of his own failings, etched in every crease of his face and reflected in those haunt
ed eyes...because of this essential humanity of his, when it came time to confront the greatest moral challenge this nation has e
ver faced, Lincoln did not flinch. He did not equivocate or duck or pass the challenge on to future generations. He did not demon
ize the fathers and sons who did battle on the other side, nor seek to diminish the terrible costs of his war. In the midst of sl
avery's dark storm and the complexities of governing a house divided, he kept his moral compass pointed firm and true.It serves u
s then to reflect on whether that element of Lincoln's character, and the American character - that aspect which makes tough choi
ces, and speaks the truth when least convenient, and acts while still admitting doubt - remains with us today. Lincoln once said 
that "character is like a tree and reputation like its shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the real thing."At 
a time when image all too often trumps substance, when our politics all too often feeds rather than bridges division, when the pr
ospects of a poor youth rising out of poverty seem of no consequence to the powerful, and when we evoke our common God to condemn
 those who do not think as we do, rather than to seek God's mercy for our own lack of understanding - at such a time it is helpfu
l to remember this man who was the real thing. Lincoln reminds us that our essential greatness is not the shadow of sophisticatio
n or popularity, or wealth or power or fleeting celebrity. It is the tree that stands in the face of our doubts and fears and big
otries, and insists we can do better.Today we come to celebrate not a building but a man. And as that man called once upon the be
tter angels of our nature, so is he calling still, across the ages, to summon some measure of that character, his character, in e
ach of us, today. Chicago White Sox Senate Floor Statement TOPIC: Domestic Policy Related October 27, 2005 Statement of Sen. Bara
ck Obama Chicago White Sox Senate Floor Statement Complete Text I rise today as a U.S. Senator, as an Illinoisan, and as a proud 
resident of the Southside of Chicago, to congratulate the Chicago White Sox for winning the 2005 World Series. As my fellow South
siders know, it has been a long time coming.Founded in 1900 as the Chicago White Stockings, this year's team reached the World Se
ries for the first time since 1959. Over a century of White Sox fans have cheered for superstars such as Luke Appling, Nellie Fox
, Carlton Fisk, Luis Aparicio, Harold Baines, and of course Big Frank Thomas. But we haven't savored the sweet taste of a World S
eries championship since 1917 - until now.Back then, Woodrow Wilson was President, and the Great War was raging in Europe. The Wh
ite Sox were a bright spot in tough times.The Sox won last night the way they have won all season--by playing aggressively, scrap
ping for every base and every run. When Juan Uribe threw to Paul Konerko for the final out, it was fitting that the ball beat the
 runner by only half a step. The four games against the Astros were decided by a total of six runs. Win by the skin of your teeth
. Win or die trying, that's our motto this year.Jermaine Dye is the World Series MVP, and I congratulate him for that, but I'm su
re he'll be the first to say that everyone on this year's team deserves a part of that award. This is a team with so many great p
layers, but no undisputed leader on the field. I don't claim to be a baseball expert - or particularly unbiased on this matter - 
but this is one of the most selfless, balanced teams I've ever seen. A team of unlikely heroes.Scott Podsednik, who hadn't hit a 
home run all season, stepped up and hit two in the playoffs, including the walk-off winner in Game 2 on Sunday. Willie Harris, wh
o barely played in the playoffs, got a pinch hit to get on base and bring home the only run last night. Geoff Blum, a former Astr
o, who got a pinch hit homer in the 14th inning to give us the margin of victory in Game 3. And the pitching--four complete games
 to close out the American League Championship Series. An 11 and 1 record in the playoffs. 15 scoreless innings to finish the Wor
ld Series.Before the season started, the Sox were a consensus .500 team. Even as we built and maintained the best record in the A
merican League all season, there were many doubters. Towards the end of the season, we hit a rough patch, and the doubters got lo
uder. They said Cleveland had more playoff experience. They said even if we held on to make the playoffs, we would get embarrasse
d in the first round. But during the stretch run, manager Ozzie Guillen and his "kids," as he calls them, were calm and relaxed. 
Even as Cleveland came on strong and our lead in the Central Division dwindled, Ozzie's kids continued to play pranks on each oth
er in the clubhouse, and continued to run hard on the basepaths.Once the playoffs started, there was no looking back. That diffic
ult September was gone in an instant. We silenced the doubters by sweeping the World Champion Boston Red Sox. We silenced the Ang
els during the ALCS in five games. And we swept the Astros in four games.I had the privilege of attending game one of the World S
eries on Saturday, and the fans in and around the park were a cross-section of the city. There were plenty of folks old enough to
 remember the '59 team. Almost everyone remembered the 2000 team that made the playoffs. A few were even alive in 1917. A staffer
 of mine, a Southside Irishman and a Sox fan all his life, mentioned a 92-year-old woman at Saturday's game. She was jumping and 
cheering so much with every hit and every run that my staffer worried for her health!I would like to congratulate the entire Whit
e Sox organization, in particular Jerry Reinsdorf, Kenny Williams, and Ozzie Guillen. We will be celebrating this victory for a l
ong time on the Southside, around the city of Chicago, and around the entire state of Illinois.Later today, Senator Durbin and I 
will be introducing a resolution honoring the White Sox, and we will be asking for its immediate consideration and adoption. Than
k you, and I yield the floor. Final Primary Night Presumptive Democratic Nominee Speech St. Paul, Minnesota June 3, 2008Tonight, 
after fifty-four hard-fought contests, our primary season has finally come to an end.Sixteen months have passed since we first st
ood together on the steps of the Old State Capitol in Springfield, Illinois. Thousands of miles have been traveled. Millions of v
oices have been heard. And because of what you said because you decided that change must come to Washington; because you believed
 that this year must be different than all the rest; because you chose to listen not to your doubts or your fears but to your gre
atest hopes and highest aspirations, tonight we mark the end of one historic journey with the beginning of another a journey that
 will bring a new and better day to America. Tonight, I can stand before you and say that I will be the Democratic nominee for Pr
esident of the United States.I want to thank every American who stood with us over the course of this campaign through the good d
ays and the bad; from the snows of Cedar Rapids to the sunshine of Sioux Falls. And tonight I also want to thank the men and woma
n who took this journey with me as fellow candidates for President.At this defining moment for our nation, we should be proud tha
t our party put forth one of the most talented, qualified field of individuals ever to run for this office. I have not just compe
ted with them as rivals, I have learned from them as friends, as public servants, and as patriots who love America and are willin
g to work tirelessly to make this country better. They are leaders of this party, and leaders that America will turn to for years
 to come.That is particularly true for the candidate who has traveled further on this journey than anyone else. Senator Hillary C
linton has made history in this campaign not just because she's a woman who has done what no woman has done before, but because s
he's a leader who inspires millions of Americans with her strength, her courage, and her commitment to the causes that brought us
 here tonight.We've certainly had our differences over the last sixteen months. But as someone who's shared a stage with her many
 times, I can tell you that what gets Hillary Clinton up in the morning even in the face of tough odds is exactly what sent her a
nd Bill Clinton to sign up for their first campaign in Texas all those years ago; what sent her to work at the Children's Defense
 Fund and made her fight for health care as First Lady; what led her to the United States Senate and fueled her barrier-breaking 
campaign for the presidency an unyielding desire to improve the lives of ordinary Americans, no matter how difficult the fight ma
y be. And you can rest assured that when we finally win the battle for universal health care in this country, she will be central
 to that victory. When we transform our energy policy and lift our children out of poverty, it will be because she worked to help
 make it happen. Our party and our country are better off because of her, and I am a better candidate for having had the honor to
 compete with Hillary Rodham Clinton.There are those who say that this primary has somehow left us weaker and more divided. Well 
I say that because of this primary, there are millions of Americans who have cast their ballot for the very first time. There are
 Independents and Republicans who understand that this election isn't just about the party in charge of Washington, it's about th
e need to change Washington. There are young people, and African-Americans, and Latinos, and women of all ages who have voted in 
numbers that have broken records and inspired a nation.All of you chose to support a candidate you believe in deeply. But at the 
end of the day, we aren't the reason you came out and waited in lines that stretched block after block to make your voice heard. 
You didn't do that because of me or Senator Clinton or anyone else. You did it because you know in your hearts that at this momen
t a moment that will define a generation we cannot afford to keep doing what we've been doing. We owe our children a better futur
e. We owe our country a better future. And for all those who dream of that future tonight, I say let us begin the work together. 
Let us unite in common effort to chart a new course for America.In just a few short months, the Republican Party will arrive in S
t. Paul with a very different agenda. They will come here to nominate John McCain, a man who has served this country heroically. 
I honor that service, and I respect his many accomplishments, even if he chooses to deny mine. My differences with him are not pe
rsonal; they are with the policies he has proposed in this campaign.Because while John McCain can legitimately tout moments of in
dependence from his party in the past, such independence has not been the hallmark of his presidential campaign.It's not change w
hen John McCain decided to stand with George Bush ninety-five percent of the time, as he did in the Senate last year.It's not cha
nge when he offers four more years of Bush economic policies that have failed to create well-paying jobs, or insure our workers, 
or help Americans afford the skyrocketing cost of college policies that have lowered the real incomes of the average American fam
ily, widened the gap between Wall Street and Main Street, and left our children with a mountain of debt.And it's not change when 
he promises to continue a policy in Iraq that asks everything of our brave men and women in uniform and nothing of Iraqi politici
ans a policy where all we look for are reasons to stay in Iraq, while we spend billions of dollars a month on a war that isn't ma
king the American people any safer.So I'll say this there are many words to describe John McCain's attempt to pass off his embrac
e of George Bush's policies as bipartisan and new. But change is not one of them.Change is a foreign policy that doesn't begin an
d end with a war that should've never been authorized and never been waged. I won't stand here and pretend that there are many go
od options left in Iraq, but what's not an option is leaving our troops in that country for the next hundred years especially at 
a time when our military is overstretched, our nation is isolated, and nearly every other threat to America is being ignored.We m
ust be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in - but start leaving we must. It's time for Iraqis to take re
sponsibility for their future. It's time to rebuild our military and give our veterans the care they need and the benefits they d
eserve when they come home. It's time to refocus our efforts on al Qaeda's leadership and Afghanistan, and rally the world agains
t the common threats of the 21st century terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease. That's 
what change is.Change is realizing that meeting today's threats requires not just our firepower, but the power of our diplomacy t
ough, direct diplomacy where the President of the United States isn't afraid to let any petty dictator know where America stands 
and what we stand for. We must once again have the courage and conviction to lead the free world. That is the legacy of Roosevelt
, and Truman, and Kennedy. That's what the American people want. That's what change is.Change is building an economy that rewards
 not just wealth, but the work and workers who created it. It's understanding that the struggles facing working families can't be
 solved by spending billions of dollars on more tax breaks for big corporations and wealthy CEOs, but by giving a the middle-clas
s a tax break, and investing in our crumbling infrastructure, and transforming how we use energy, and improving our schools, and 
renewing our commitment to science and innovation. It's understanding that fiscal responsibility and shared prosperity can go han
d-in-hand, as they did when Bill Clinton was President.John McCain has spent a lot of time talking about trips to Iraq in the las
t few weeks, but maybe if he spent some time taking trips to the cities and towns that have been hardest hit by this economy citi
es in Michigan, and Ohio, and right here in Minnesota he'd understand the kind of change that people are looking for.Maybe if he 
went to Iowa and met the student who works the night shift after a full day of class and still can't pay the medical bills for a 
sister who's ill, he'd understand that she can't afford four more years of a health care plan that only takes care of the healthy
 and wealthy. She needs us to pass health care plan that guarantees insurance to every American who wants it and brings down prem
iums for every family who needs it. That's the change we need.Maybe if he went to Pennsylvania and met the man who lost his job b
ut can't even afford the gas to drive around and look for a new one, he'd understand that we can't afford four more years of our 
addiction to oil from dictators. That man needs us to pass an energy policy that works with automakers to raise fuel standards, a
nd makes corporations pay for their pollution, and oil companies invest their record profits in a clean energy future an energy p
olicy that will create millions of new jobs that pay well and can't be outsourced. That's the change we need.And maybe if he spen
t some time in the schools of South Carolina or St. Paul or where he spoke tonight in New Orleans, he'd understand that we can't 
afford to leave the money behind for No Child Left Behind; that we owe it to our children to invest in early childhood education;
 to recruit an army of new teachers and give them better pay and more support; to finally decide that in this global economy, the
 chance to get a college education should not be a privilege for the wealthy few, but the birthright of every American. That's th
e change we need in America. That's why I'm running for President.The other side will come here in September and offer a very dif
ferent set of policies and positions, and that is a debate I look forward to. It is a debate the American people deserve. But wha
t you don't deserve is another election that's governed by fear, and innuendo, and division. What you won't hear from this campai
gn or this party is the kind of politics that uses religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon that sees our opponents not 
as competitors to challenge, but enemies to demonize. Because we may call ourselves Democrats and Republicans, but we are America
ns first. We are always Americans first.Despite what the good Senator from Arizona said tonight, I have seen people of differing 
views and opinions find common cause many times during my two decades in public life, and I have brought many together myself. I'
ve walked arm-in-arm with community leaders on the South Side of Chicago and watched tensions fade as black, white, and Latino fo
ught together for good jobs and good schools. I've sat across the table from law enforcement and civil rights advocates to reform
 a criminal justice system that sent thirteen innocent people to death row. And I've worked with friends in the other party to pr
ovide more children with health insurance and more working families with a tax break; to curb the spread of nuclear weapons and e
nsure that the American people know where their tax dollars are being spent; and to reduce the influence of lobbyists who have al
l too often set the agenda in Washington.In our country, I have found that this cooperation happens not because we agree on every
thing, but because behind all the labels and false divisions and categories that define us; beyond all the petty bickering and po
int-scoring in Washington, Americans are a decent, generous, compassionate people, united by common challenges and common hopes. 
And every so often, there are moments which call on that fundamental goodness to make this country great again.So it was for that
 band of patriots who declared in a Philadelphia hall the formation of a more perfect union; and for all those who gave on the fi
elds of Gettysburg and Antietam their last full measure of devotion to save that same union.So it was for the Greatest Generation
 that conquered fear itself, and liberated a continent from tyranny, and made this country home to untold opportunity and prosper
ity.So it was for the workers who stood out on the picket lines; the women who shattered glass ceilings; the children who braved 
a Selma bridge for freedom's cause.So it has been for every generation that faced down the greatest challenges and the most impro
bable odds to leave their children a world that's better, and kinder, and more just.And so it must be for us.America, this is our
 moment. This is our time. Our time to turn the page on the policies of the past. Our time to bring new energy and new ideas to t
he challenges we face. Our time to offer a new direction for the country we love.The journey will be difficult. The road will be 
long. I face this challenge with profound humility, and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith 
in the capacity of the American people. Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am 
absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we
 began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow a
nd our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, b
est hope on Earth. This was the moment this was the time when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always 
reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals. Thank you, God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America. 
Way Forward in Iraq Remarks - Chicago Council on Global Affairs TOPIC: Iraq November 20, 2006 A Way Forward in Iraq Remarks Chica
go Council on Global Affairs Complete Text Throughout American history, there have been moments that call on us to meet the chall
enges of an uncertain world, and pay whatever price is required to secure our freedom. They are the soul-trying times our forbear
ers spoke of, when the ease of complacency and self-interest must give way to the more difficult task of rendering judgment on wh
at is best for the nation and for posterity, and then acting on that judgment ? making the hard choices and sacrifices necessary 
to uphold our most deeply held values and ideals.This was true for those who went to Lexington and Concord. It was true for those
 who lie buried at Gettysburg. It was true for those who built democracys arsenal to vanquish fascism, and who then built a serie
s of alliances and a world order that would ultimately defeat communism.And this has been true for those of us who looked on the 
rubble and ashes of 9/11, and made a solemn pledge that such an atrocity would never again happen on United States soil; that we 
would do whatever it took to hunt down those responsible, and use every tool at our disposal ? diplomatic, economic, and military
 ? to root out both the agents of terrorism and the conditions that helped breed it.In each case, what has been required to meet 
the challenges we face has been good judgment and clear vision from our leaders, and a fundamental seriousness and engagement on 
the part of the American people ? a willingness on the part of each of us to look past what is petty and small and sensational, a
nd look ahead to what is necessary and purposeful.A few Tuesdays ago, the American people embraced this seriousness with regards 
to Americas policy in Iraq. Americans were originally persuaded by the President to go to war in part because of the threat of we
apons of mass destruction, and in part because they were told that it would help reduce the threat of international terrorism.Nei
ther turned out to be true. And now, after three long years of watching the same back and forth in Washington, the American peopl
e have sent a clear message that the days of using the war on terror as a political football are over. That policy-by-slogan will
 no longer pass as an acceptable form of debate in this country. Mission Accomplished, cut and run, stay the course ? the America
n people have determined that all these phrases have become meaningless in the face of a conflict that grows more deadly and chao
tic with each passing day ? a conflict that has only increased the terrorist threat it was supposed to help contain.2,867 America
ns have now died in this war. Thousands more have suffered wounds that will last a lifetime. Iraq is descending into chaos based 
on ethnic divisions that were around long before American troops arrived. The conflict has left us distracted from containing the
 worlds growing threats ? in North Korea, in Iran, and in Afghanistan. And a report by our own intelligence agencies has conclude
d that al Qaeda is successfully using the war in Iraq to recruit a new generation of terrorists for its war on America.These are 
serious times for our country, and with their votes two weeks ago, Americans demanded a feasible strategy with defined goals in I
raq ? a strategy no longer driven by ideology and politics, but one that is based on a realistic assessment of the sobering facts
 on the ground and our interests in the region.This kind of realism has been missing since the very conception of this war, and i
t is what led me to publicly oppose it in 2002. The notion that Iraq would quickly and easily become a bulwark of flourishing dem
ocracy in the Middle East was not a plan for victory, but an ideological fantasy. I said then and believe now that Saddam Hussein
 was a ruthless dictator who craved weapons of mass destruction but posed no imminent threat to the United States; that a war in 
Iraq would harm, not help, our efforts to defeat al Qaeda and finish the job in Afghanistan; and that an invasion would require a
n occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.Month after month, and then year after 
year, Ive watched with a heavy heart as my deepest suspicions about this wars conception have been confirmed and exacerbated in i
ts disastrous implementation. No matter how bad it gets, we are told to wait, and not ask questions. We have been assured that th
e insurgency is in its last throes. We have been told that progress is just around the corner, and that when the Iraqis stand up,
 we will be able to stand down. Last week, without a trace of irony, the President even chose Vietnam as the backdrop for remarks
 counseling patience with his policies in Iraq.When I came here and gave a speech on this war a year ago, I suggested that we beg
in to move towards a phased redeployment of American troops from Iraqi soil. At that point, seventy-five U.S. Senators, Republica
n and Democrat, including myself, had also voted in favor of a resolution demanding that 2006 be a year of significant transition
 in Iraq.What we have seen instead is a year of significant deterioration. A year in which well-respected Republicans like John W
arner, former Administration officials like Colin Powell, generals who have served in Iraq, and intelligence experts have all sai
d that what we are doing is not working. A year that is ending with an attempt by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group to determine wh
at can be done about a country that is quickly spiraling out of control.According to our own Pentagon, the situation on the groun
d is now pointing towards chaos. Sectarian violence has reached an all-time high, and 365,000 Iraqis have fled their homes since 
the bombing of a Shia mosque in Samarra last February. 300,000 Iraqi security forces have supposedly been recruited and trained o
ver the last two years, and yet American troop levels have not been reduced by a single soldier. The addition of 4,000 American t
roops in Baghdad has not succeeded in securing that increasingly perilous city. And polls show that almost two-thirds of all Iraq
is now sympathize with attacks on American soldiers.Prime Minister Maliki is not making our job easier. In just the past three we
eks, he has ? and Im quoting from a New York Times article here ? rejected the notion of an American timeline for action on urgen
t Iraqi political issues; ordered American commanders to lift checkpoints they had set up around the Shiite district of Sadr City
 to hunt for a kidnapped American soldier and a fugitive Shiite death squad leader; and blamed the Americans for the deterioratin
g security situation in Iraq.This is now the reality of Iraq.Now, I am hopeful that the Iraq Study Group emerges next month with 
a series of proposals around which we can begin to build a bipartisan consensus. I am committed to working with this White House 
and any of my colleagues in the months to come to craft such a consensus. And I believe that it remains possible to salvage an ac
ceptable outcome to this long and misguided war.But it will not be easy. For the fact is that there are no good options left in t
his war. There are no options that do not carry significant risks. And so the question is not whether there is some magic formula
 for success, or guarantee against failure, in Iraq. Rather, the question is what strategies, imperfect though they may be, are m
ost likely to achieve the best outcome in Iraq, one that will ultimately put us on a more effective course to deal with internati
onal terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and other critical threats to our security.What is absolutely clear is that it is not enou
gh for the President to respond to Iraqs reality by saying that he is open to or interested in new ideas while acting as if all t
hats required is doing more of the same. It is not enough for him to simply lay out benchmarks for progress with no consequences 
attached for failing to meet them. And it is not enough for the President to tell us that victory in this war is simply a matter 
of American resolve. The American people have been extraordinarily resolved. They have seen their sons and daughters killed or wo
unded in the streets of Fallujah. They have spent hundreds of billions of their hard-earned dollars on this effort ? money that c
ould have been devoted to strengthening our homeland security and our competitive standing as a nation. No, it has not been a fai
lure of resolve that has led us to this chaos, but a failure of strategy ? and that strategy must change.It may be politically ad
vantageous for the President to simply define victory as staying and defeat as leaving, but it prevents a serious conversation ab
out the realistic objectives we can still achieve in Iraq. Dreams of democracy and hopes for a perfect government are now just th
at ? dreams and hopes. We must instead turn our focus to those concrete objectives that are possible to attain ? namely, preventi
ng Iraq from becoming what Afghanistan once was, maintaining our influence in the Middle East, and forging a political settlement
 to stop the sectarian violence so that our troops can come home.There is no reason to believe that more of the same will achieve
 these objectives in Iraq. And, while some have proposed escalating this war by adding thousands of more troops, there is little 
reason to believe that this will achieve these results either. Its not clear that these troop levels are sustainable for a signif
icant period of time, and according to our commanders on the ground, adding American forces will only relieve the Iraqis from doi
ng more on their own. Moreover, without a coherent strategy or better cooperation from the Iraqis, we would only be putting more 
of our soldiers in the crossfire of a civil war.Let me underscore this point. The American soldiers I met when I traveled to Iraq
 this year were performing their duties with bravery, with brilliance, and without question. They are doing so today. They have b
attled insurgents, secured cities, and maintained some semblance of order in Iraq. But even as they have carried out their respon
sibilities with excellence and valor, they have also told me that there is no military solution to this war. Our troops can help 
suppress the violence, but they cannot solve its root causes. And all the troops in the world wont be able to force Shia, Sunni, 
and Kurd to sit down at a table, resolve their differences, and forge a lasting peace.I have long said that the only solution in 
Iraq is a political one. To reach such a solution, we must communicate clearly and effectively to the factions in Iraq that the d
ays of asking, urging, and waiting for them to take control of their own country are coming to an end. No more coddling, no more 
equivocation. Our best hope for success is to use the tools we have ? military, financial, diplomatic ? to pressure the Iraqi lea
dership to finally come to a political agreement between the warring factions that can create some sense of stability in the coun
try and bring this conflict under control.The first part of this strategy begins by exerting the greatest leverage we have on the
 Iraqi government ? a phased redeployment of U.S. troops from Iraq on a timetable that would begin in four to six months.When I f
irst advocated steps along these lines over a year ago, I had hoped that this phased redeployment could begin by the end of 2006.
 Such a timetable may now need to begin in 2007, but begin it must. For only through this phased redeployment can we send a clear
 message to the Iraqi factions that the U.S. is not going to hold together this country indefinitely ? that it will be up to them
 to form a viable government that can effectively run and secure Iraq.Let me be more specific. The President should announce to t
he Iraqi people that our policy will include a gradual and substantial reduction in U.S. forces. He should then work with our mil
itary commanders to map out the best plan for such a redeployment and determine precise levels and dates. When possible, this sho
uld be done in consultation with the Iraqi government ? but it should not depend on Iraqi approval.I am not suggesting that this 
timetable be overly-rigid. We cannot compromise the safety of our troops, and we should be willing to adjust to realities on the 
ground. The redeployment could be temporarily suspended if the parties in Iraq reach an effective political arrangement that stab
ilizes the situation and they offer us a clear and compelling rationale for maintaining certain troop levels. Moreover, it could 
be suspended if at any point U.S. commanders believe that a further reduction would put American troops in danger.Drawing down ou
r troops in Iraq will allow us to redeploy additional troops to Northern Iraq and elsewhere in the region as an over-the-horizon 
force. This force could help prevent the conflict in Iraq from becoming a wider war, consolidate gains in Northern Iraq, reassure
 allies in the Gulf, allow our troops to strike directly at al Qaeda wherever it may exist, and demonstrate to international terr
orist organizations that they have not driven us from the region.Perhaps most importantly, some of these troops could be redeploy
ed to Afghanistan, where our lack of focus and commitment of resources has led to an increasing deterioration of the security sit
uation there. The Presidents decision to go to war in Iraq has had disastrous consequences for Afghanistan -- we have seen a fier
ce Taliban offensive, a spike in terrorist attacks, and a narcotrafficking problem spiral out of control. Instead of consolidatin
g the gains made by the Karzai government, we are backsliding towards chaos. By redeploying from Iraq to Afghanistan, we will ans
wer NATOs call for more troops and provide a much-needed boost to this critical fight against terrorism.As a phased redeployment 
is executed, the majority of the U.S. troops remaining in Iraq should be dedicated to the critical, but less visible roles, of pr
otecting logistics supply points, critical infrastructure, and American enclaves like the Green Zone, as well as acting as a rapi
d reaction force to respond to emergencies and go after terrorists.In such a scenario, it is conceivable that a significantly red
uced U.S. force might remain in Iraq for a more extended period of time. But only if U.S. commanders think such a force would be 
effective; if there is substantial movement towards a political solution among Iraqi factions; if the Iraqi government showed a s
erious commitment to disbanding the militias; and if the Iraqi government asked us ? in a public and unambiguous way ? for such c
ontinued support. We would make clear in such a scenario that the United States would not be maintaining permanent military bases
 in Iraq, but would do what was necessary to help prevent a total collapse of the Iraqi state and further polarization of Iraqi s
ociety. Such a reduced but active presence will also send a clear message to hostile countries like Iran and Syria that we intend
 to remain a key player in this region.The second part of our strategy should be to couple this phased redeployment with a more e
ffective plan that puts the Iraqi security forces in the lead, intensifies and focuses our efforts to train those forces, and exp
ands the numbers of our personnel ? especially special forces ? who are deployed with Iraqi as units advisers.An increase in the 
quality and quantity of U.S. personnel in training and advisory roles can guard against militia infiltration of Iraqi units; deve
lop the trust and goodwill of Iraqi soldiers and the local populace; and lead to better intelligence while undercutting grassroot
s support for the insurgents.Let me emphasize one vital point ? any U.S. strategy must address the problem of sectarian militias 
in Iraq. In the absence of a genuine commitment on the part of all of the factions in Iraq to deal with this issue, it is doubtfu
l that a unified Iraqi government can function for long, and it is doubtful that U.S. forces, no matter how large, can prevent an
 escalation of widespread sectarian killing.Of course, in order to convince the various factions to embark on the admittedly diff
icult task of disarming their militias, the Iraqi government must also make headway on reforming the institutions that support th
e military and the police. We can teach the soldiers to fight and police to patrol, but if the Iraqi government will not properly
 feed, adequately pay, or provide them with the equipment they need, they will continue to desert in large numbers, or maintain f
ealty only to their religious group rather than the national government. The security forces have to be far more inclusive ? stan
ding up an army composed mainly of Shiites and Kurds will only cause the Sunnis to feel more threatened and fight even harder.The
 third part of our strategy should be to link continued economic aid in Iraq with the existence of tangible progress toward a pol
itical settlement.So far, Congress has given the Administration unprecedented flexibility in determining how to spend more than $
20 billion dollars in Iraq. But instead of effectively targeting this aid, we have seen some of the largest waste, fraud, and abu
se of foreign aid in American history. Today, the Iraqi landscape is littered with ill-conceived, half-finished projects that hav
e done almost nothing to help the Iraqi people or stabilize the country.This must end in the next session of Congress, when we re
assert our authority to oversee the management of this war. This means no more bloated no-bid contracts that cost the taxpayers m
illions in overhead and administrative expenses.We need to continue to provide some basic reconstruction funding that will be use
d to put Iraqis to work and help our troops stabilize key areas. But we need to also move towards more condition-based aid packag
es where economic assistance is contingent upon the ability of Iraqis to make measurable progress on reducing sectarian violence 
and forging a lasting political settlement.Finally, we have to realize that the entire Middle East has an enormous stake in the o
utcome of Iraq, and we must engage neighboring countries in finding a solution.This includes opening dialogue with both Syria and
 Iran, an idea supported by both James Baker and Robert Gates. We know these countries want us to fail, and we should remain stea
dfast in our opposition to their support of terrorism and Irans nuclear ambitions. But neither Iran nor Syria want to see a secur
ity vacuum in Iraq filled with chaos, terrorism, refugees, and violence, as it could have a destabilizing effect throughout the e
ntire region ? and within their own countries.And so I firmly believe that we should convene a regional conference with the Iraqi
s, Saudis, Iranians, Syrians, the Turks, Jordanians, the British and others. The goal of this conference should be to get foreign
 fighters out of Iraq, prevent a further descent into civil war, and push the various Iraqi factions towards a political solution
.Make no mistake ? if the Iranians and Syrians think they can use Iraq as another Afghanistan or a staging area from which to att
ack Israel or other countries, they are badly mistaken. It is in our national interest to prevent this from happening. We should 
also make it clear that, even after we begin to drawdown forces, we will still work with our allies in the region to combat inter
national terrorism and prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction. It is simply not productive for us not to engage in dis
cussions with Iran and Syria on an issue of such fundamental importance to all of us.This brings me to a set of broader points. A
s we change strategy in Iraq, we should also think about what Iraq has taught us about Americas strategy in the wider struggle ag
ainst rogue threats and international terrorism.Many who supported the original decision to go to war in Iraq have argued that it
 has been a failure of implementation. But I have long believed it has also been a failure of conception ? that the rationale beh
ind the war itself was misguided. And so going forward, I believe there are strategic lessons to be learned from this as we conti
nue to confront the new threats of this new century.The first is that we should be more modest in our belief that we can impose d
emocracy on a country through military force. In the past, it has been movements for freedom from within tyrannical regimes that 
have led to flourishing democracies; movements that continue today. This doesnt mean abandoning our values and ideals; wherever w
e can, its in our interest to help foster democracy through the diplomatic and economic resources at our disposal. But even as we
 provide such help, we should be clear that the institutions of democracy ? free markets, a free press, a strong civil society ? 
cannot be built overnight, and they cannot be built at the end of a barrel of a gun. And so we must realize that the freedoms FDR
 once spoke of ? especially freedom from want and freedom from fear ? do not just come from deposing a tyrant and handing out bal
lots; they are only realized once the personal and material security of a people is ensured as well.The second lesson is that in 
any conflict, it is not enough to simply plan for war; you must also plan for success. Much has been written about how the milita
ry invasion of Iraq was planned without any thought to what political situation we would find after Baghdad fell. Such lack of fo
resight is simply inexcusable. If we commit our troops anywhere in the world, it is our solemn responsibility to define their mis
sion and formulate a viable plan to fulfill that mission and bring our troops home.The final lesson is that in an interconnected 
world, the defeat of international terrorism ? and most importantly, the prevention of these terrorist organizations from obtaini
ng weapons of mass destruction -- will require the cooperation of many nations. We must always reserve the right to strike unilat
erally at terrorists wherever they may exist. But we should know that our success in doing so is enhanced by engaging our allies 
so that we receive the crucial diplomatic, military, intelligence, and financial support that can lighten our load and add legiti
macy to our actions. This means talking to our friends and, at times, even our enemies.We need to keep these lessons in mind as w
e think about the broader threats America now faces ? threats we havent paid nearly enough attention to because we have been dist
racted in Iraq.The National Intelligence Estimate, which details how were creating more terrorists in Iraq than were defeating, i
s the most obvious example of how the war is hurting our efforts in the larger battle against terrorism. But there are many other
s.The overwhelming presence of our troops, our intelligence, and our resources in Iraq has stretched our military to the breaking
 point and distracted us from the growing threats of a dangerous world. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs recently said that if a 
conflict arose in North Korea, wed have to largely rely on the Navy and Air Force to take care of it, since the Army and Marines 
are engaged elsewhere. In my travels to Africa, I have seen weak governments and broken societies that can be exploited by al Qae
da. And on a trip to the former Soviet Union, I have seen the biological and nuclear weapons terrorists could easily steal while 
the world looks the other way.There is one other place where our mistakes in Iraq have cost us dearly ? and that is the loss of o
ur governments credibility with the American people. According to a Pew survey, 42% of Americans now agree with the statement tha
t the U.S. should "mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own.We cann
ot afford to be a country of isolationists right now. 9/11 showed us that try as we might to ignore the rest of the world, our en
emies will no longer ignore us. And so we need to maintain a strong foreign policy, relentless in pursuing our enemies and hopefu
l in promoting our values around the world.But to guard against isolationist sentiments in this country, we must change condition
s in Iraq and the policy that has characterized our time there ? a policy based on blind hope and ideology instead of fact and re
ality.Americans called for this more serious policy a few Tuesdays ago. Its time that we listen to their concerns and win back th
eir trust. I spoke here a year ago and delivered a message about Iraq that was similar to the one I did today. I refuse to accept
 the possibility that I will have to come back a year from now and say the same thing.There have been too many speeches. There ha
ve been too many excuses. There have been too many flag-draped coffins, and there have been too many heartbroken families.The tim
e for waiting in Iraq is over. It is time to change our policy. It is time to give Iraqis their country back. And it is time to r
efocus Americas efforts on the wider struggle yet to be won. Thank you. Floor Statment - PATRIOT Act Reauthorization - Complete T
ext TOPIC: Homeland Security February 16, 2006 Floor Statement of Senator Barack Obama S.2271 - USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization C
omplete Text Mr. President, four years ago, following one of the most devastating attacks in our nation's history, Congress passe
d the USA PATRIOT Act to give our nation's law enforcement the tools they needed to track down terrorists who plot and lurk withi
n our own borders and all over the world - terrorists who, right now, are looking to exploit weaknesses in our laws and our secur
ity to carry out even deadlier attacks than we saw on September 11th.We all agreed that we needed legislation to make it harder f
or suspected terrorists to go undetected in this country. Americans everywhere wanted that.But soon after the PATRIOT Act passed,
 a few years before I ever arrived in the Senate, I began hearing concerns from people of every background and political leaning 
that this law didn't just provide law enforcement the powers it needed to keep us safe, but powers it didn't need to invade our p
rivacy without cause or suspicion.Now, at times this issue has tended to degenerate into an "either-or" type of debate. Either we
 protect our people from terror or we protect our most cherished principles. But that is a false choice. It asks too little of us
 and assumes too little about America.Fortunately, last year, the Senate recognized that this was a false choice. We put patrioti
sm before partisanship and engaged in a real, open, and substantive debate about how to fix the PATRIOT Act. And Republicans and 
Democrats came together to propose sensible improvements to the Act. Unfortunately, the House was resistant to these changes, and
 that's why we're voting on the compromise before us.Let me be clear: this compromise is not as good as the Senate version of the
 bill, nor is it as good as the SAFE Act that I have cosponsored. I suspect the vast majority of my colleagues on both sides of t
he aisle feel the same way. But, it's still better than what the House originally proposed.This compromise does modestly improve 
the PATRIOT Act by strengthening civil liberties protections without sacrificing the tools that law enforcement needs to keep us 
safe. In this compromise:We strengthened judicial review of both National Security Letters, the administrative subpoenas used by 
the FBI, and Section 215 orders, which can be used to obtain medical, financial and other personal records.We established hard ti
me limits on sneak-and-peak searches and limits on roving wiretaps.We protected most libraries from being subject to National Sec
urity Letters.We preserved an individual's right to seek counsel and hire an attorney without fearing the FBI's wrath.And we allo
wed judicial review of the gag orders that accompany Section 215 searches.The compromise is far from perfect. I would have liked 
to see stronger judicial review of National Security Letters and shorter time limits on sneak and peak searches, among other thin
gs.Sen. Feingold has proposed several sensible amendments - that I support - to address these issues. Unfortunately, the Majority
 Leader is preventing Sen. Feingold from offering these amendments through procedural tactics. That is regrettable because it fli
es in the face of the bipartisan cooperation that allowed the Senate to pass unanimously its version of the Patriot Act - a versi
on that balanced security and civil liberties, partisanship and patriotism.The Majority Leader's tactics are even more troubling 
because we will need to work on a bipartisan basis to address national security challenges in the weeks and months to come. In pa
rticular, members on both sides of the aisle will need to take a careful look at President Bush's use of warrantless wiretaps and
 determine the right balance between protecting our security and safeguarding our civil liberties. This is a complex issue. But o
nly by working together and avoiding election-year politicking will we be able to give our government the necessary tools to wage
 the war on terror without sacrificing the rule of law.So, I will be supporting the Patriot Act compromise. But I urge my colleag
ues to continue working on ways to improve the civil liberties protections in the Patriot Act after it is reauthorized.I thank th
e chair and yield the floor. Immigration Rallies and Status of Reform - Podcast Transcript TOPIC: Immigration May 4, 2006 Immigra
tion Rallies Complete Transcript Hello, this is Senator Barack Obama and today is Thursday, May 4th, 2006.On Monday, I traveled f
rom D.C. to Chicago to witness a monumental event. There were 400,000 people marching on behalf of comprehensive immigration refo
rm in this country. There were rallies all across the country but Chicago was one of the largest. I had the opportunity to speak 
to the people who were gathering at Union Park before they marched over to Grant Park. Four-hundred thousand people, mostly of Me
xican origin, but large numbers of people from other countries - Nigerians and Pakistanis and Indians and Filipinos - people who'
ve come to this country for the same reason that immigrants have been drawn to this country for generations: the notion that they
 can pursue and better life for themselves but, most importantly, for their children, if they work hard and apply themselves.I th
ink most of you are familiar with the issues that have surrounded immigration. They've gotten a lot of attention recently. We hav
e a system of legal immigration in which people are drawn through the normal processes and they apply for legal residency and ult
imately get naturalized as citizens if they so choose. The controversy right now surrounds undocumented workers - people who came
 here illegally, most of them crossing the border between Mexico and the United States. It's estimated at this point that we prob
ably have 11 to 12 million undocumented workers around the country. Most of them are employed in low-wage backbreaking work in ag
ricultural sectors, in packing plants, in restaurants, in construction. Obviously, the country feels ambivalent about this influx
.On the one hand, I think many of us (including myself) believe that these people are doing what any of us would do if we had an 
opportunity for a better life for our kids. They take the risk of coming here; many of them are extraordinarily impoverished and 
would not likely be able to get to the United States through the limited number of visas that are currently issued.On the other h
and, we are a nation of laws and these people did come here outside of the law. Economists debate what kind of effect undocumente
d workers have in this country. There's no doubt that in many areas, like the agricultural sector, these immigrants are doing wor
k that Americans would not do, at least at the wages that are paid. There are other circumstances in which it is clear that emplo
yers are importing these workers simply because they don't want to pay the living wages that Americans demand. There is no doubt 
that if construction companies were willing to pay more that they would see more U.S. workers applying for those jobs. It does ap
pear that undocumented workers have a somewhat adverse effect in depressing the wages of low-skill workers, which is why in the A
frican-American community, for example, there is some nervousness of about the number of undocumented workers that are coming int
o this country and whether they are systematically replacing or pushing out low-skill, low-wage black workers.Having said all tha
t, I think we need to recognize that if we are going to uphold the traditions of this country as a nation of immigrants, than we 
are going to have to deal with this issue in a way that reflects common sense and compassion.The House of Representatives passed 
a bill that was extraordinarily punitive. It talked about border security and it made any undocumented worker in this country a f
elon; it also made people who potentially helped undocumented workers, for example, providing housing assistance or providing a d
omestic violence shelter potentially subject to a felony conviction.It's that draconian measure that passed in the House that pro
mpted these marches, but what started as a march of fear on the part of many undocumented workers, I think, has become a march fo
r hope. People are hoping that they have an opportunity to legalize themselves in some fashion.In the United States Senate there 
has been a bipartisan group, including myself, Ted Kennedy, John McCain, Chuck Hagel, Mel Martinez, Ken Salazar, Lindsey Graham a
nd a number of others who've been trying to negotiate a comprehensive package that would include stronger border security, making
 sure that employers actually verify employment status through a tamper-proof employee-verification card, and creation of a pathw
ay to citizenship - earned citizenship - for the 11 to 12 million people that are already here. The idea would be that those peop
le, over the course of eleven years could earn their way to citizenship by paying a fine, paying their back taxes (if they owe an
y), staying out of trouble, learning English and so on. The opponents of this kind of proposal call this amnesty and they hearken
 back to what happened in 1986 when, in fact, undocumented workers were provided amnesty. There was supposed to be a grand bargai
n where in exchange for such amnesty there was going to be serious border security and employer sanctions on those who had hired 
undocumented workers. That never really happened. And so people who are opposed to the Senate bill believe that the best strategy
 is not to provide amnesty to these undocumented workers but simply shut off the possibility that they can be hired, perhaps depo
rt them where they can be rounded up and build either a virtual wall or a literal wall along the Mexican and United States border
s. That kind of approach just isn't realistic. We're not going to deport 11 to 12 million people; many of them have been here for
 many years, many of them have strong roots, many of them have children who were born here and are therefore United States citize
ns. It's hard to imagine that we want to live in a country where we would have police and immigration officials coming into peopl
e's homes and taking away the father of a family, sending him back to Mexico, leaving a mother and child behind.This is going to 
be an emotional issue. It's not going to go away any time soon. I think what we saw in those marches is the face of a new America
. America is changing and we can't be threatened by it. We have to understand that we are going to be better off united than divi
ded.When I spoke to folks at this rally I insisted that for those undocumented workers who hope some way to have a pathway to cit
izenship, they have to understand that citizenship involves a common language, a common faith in the country, common commitments 
and a common sense of purpose, fealty to a common flag. I think there are times in these marches were you have seen Mexican flags
; there has been controversy around a Spanish national anthem. I think that is not helpful because it indicates that somehow the 
traditional pattern of immigrants assimilating to a broader American culture is not what these marchers are seeking. I think they
 have to seek that because that is the essence of this country - that in diversity we come together as one.On the other hand, to 
those who are fearful of these immigrants, in some cases because they have come to represent a loss of control for the country an
d its borders, I would just say to them that we can't have a country in which you have a servant class that is picking our lettuc
e or plucking our chickens or looking after our children or mowing our lawns but who never have the full rights and obligations o
f citizenship. That's just not the kind of country that I want to have my children grow up in and my hope is that over the coming
 months we can come up with the kind of comprehensive, thoughtful legislation that I think the Senate bill reflects and we can ha
ve strong border security, we can have employers do the right thing by hiring those who are here legally in some fashion, but tha
t we also provide all those families, children, elderly people and teenagers that I saw in that amazing march on Monday the oppor
tunity to be full members of the American community.Anyway, I will keep you guys posted on this important issue and I look forwar
d to talking to you next week. Bye-bye. REMARKS OF SENATOR OBAMA AT TECHNET Tuesday, March 8, 2005Remarks at TechNetComplete Text
 Thank you John Doer. It's great to be here with all of you today, and I'm honored that you've given me the opportunity to join t
his discussion about the role technology can play in our future and our children's future. And before we begin, I'd just like to 
recognize your CEO, Rick White, who is leaving TechNet after years of inspired leadership and service to this organization and th
is country. Thank you Rick.We're here today because when it comes to the global economy, the rules of the game have changed. This
 is a fact not only understood by a roomful of Silicon Valley CEOs, but by families I met all across Illinois during the campaign
. They know that when it comes to their jobs and their wages, they're not only competing with workers in Naperville and Carbondal
e, but in New Delhi and Calcutta. What's more, they know that when it comes to the high-tech, high skill jobs of the future, thei
r children are not only competing with children here in the United States, but with those on the other side of the globe who are 
increasingly being educated earlier, longer, and with a special emphasis on the math and science skills required for the industri
es of tomorrow.These families tell me that they're anxious about their future. They worry that they could become the first genera
tion of Americans to see their children do worse than they did. They remember that when we were all growing up, our parents knew 
that if they pushed us to study and work hard, the best universities would be open to us and we could get any job we wanted. But 
today, parents in cities and towns all over America are losing that hope - they're losing the sense that their kids will be able 
to dream the American dream.The rules of the game have changed. And so we must change with them. But in a country of innovators a
nd optimists - a country that pioneered the first moon landing, discovered the cure for polio, and led the technological revoluti
on of the nineties - I have no doubt that we can. This is the great project for our time, and so it must become a larger part of 
the debate in our politics, our businesses, our schools and our homes.The good news is that we have the resources, we have the br
ainpower, and we are still an economic and technological giant. In Illinois alone we have 238,000 high-tech workers. The Universi
ty of Illinois at Champagne-Urbana is where Marc Andreesen developed Mosaic, the browser that made the World Wide Web what it is 
today. And right now at Argonne National Laboratory, scientists are developing the technology for "grid computing" - which IBM an
d others believe represents the future of the IT industry.All across America, world-class universities, first-rate research facil
ities and brilliant minds are on the cusp of discovering the next big idea that will lift up the quality of our lives, create mil
lions of new jobs, and change our world. We can take comfort in knowing that, but we can't take it for granted, because right now
 other countries are looking at places like Silicon Valley and North Carolina's Research Triangle and saying "we want that." They
're investing in better universities, expanding research budgets and venture capital, producing more science and engineering grad
uates, and passing innovation-friendly public policies.None of us expect or want the government to lead the next technological re
volution, but I believe that we can provide the spark that fuels America's innovation and competitiveness in the global economy. 
I believe we can do better than cutting the budget for the National Science Foundation, as this year's budget has done for the fi
rst time. We can do better than falling to 10th place in the world when it comes to providing people with access to Broadband. We
 can do better when it comes to using technology to free ourselves from America's dangerous dependence on Mideast oil. We can do 
better than burdening businesses with cases of class action abuse, and that's why I cast a tough vote in favor of reform the othe
r week.And we can do better, think bigger, and act bolder when it comes to education in this country. The best part about Bill Ga
tes' speech last week was when he said that our schools are in danger of becoming obsolete as tools to educate tomorrow's workers
 for tomorrow's jobs. But schools are where our children's dreams begin, and so schools are where we must begin to make those dre
ams come true.We shouldn't wait until high school either. We have to start the way Jim Barksdale of Netscape did when he gave a b
ig grant and a lot of hope to preschoolers in Mississippi. We can't leave kids behind before they even enter the first grade, and
 that's why I'll continue to focus on early childhood education as a way to give them the best start in life.We also know that so
me of the best ideas in education don't come from Washington, but from local schools all over America. That's why charter schools
 are a great way for us to learn from experiments in Topeka and Springfield that schools in Chicago and L.A. can replicate in the
ir own classrooms. And because the success of your businesses depend on your ability to fill jobs with great minds, we need more 
corporate and private investment in our schools. John Doer's work with the New Schools Venture Fund is leading the way on this fr
ont, and we should all commend him for that.As parents and citizens, each of us has a stake in making sure that our schools are d
oing everything possible to give our kids the competitive edge they'll need in a 21st century economy. The tests we have now are 
great ways to gather information about what works and what doesn't, but they're not enough. I believe that to meet tomorrow's cha
llenges, we should create a national network of academies to train 25,000 new teachers and get them into high-need rural and urba
n schools. We should give local schools the latest technology training tools as John Chambers has done with the CISCO Networking 
Academy Program. When I was at the University of Chicago, other faculty members and myself developed a program where we essential
ly adopted primary schools to help them learn how to use the technological opportunities they were being offered. It's not enough
 just to set down a computer in a classroom and walk away - we must also train teachers and administrators on how to use that com
puter and its technology to find new and better ways of educating our children.Finally, we should work to close the gap that is w
idening between America and the rest of the world when it comes to math and science graduates.To do this, we must start by inspir
ing our children with a sense of purpose...by nurturing their imagination so that they may dream big and then work hard to reach 
those dreams. Too often, our children spend hours playing Playstation without ever finding out how to build Playstation. They wat
ch television but never wonder how it's put together. They surf web page after web page on the Internet, but are never taught how
 to design one.The incredible story of progress that is America has always been built by those who ask why, what if, and why not.
 Our schools must begin instilling that wonder in our children again so that their generation will unite around the next great pr
oject of our time, whether it be declaring America energy independent or launching the next great technological revolution.Too of
ten, the debate about education here in Washington degenerates to old arguments and stale ideas. And so it's time to put aside pa
rtisan differences and just talk about what works for our kids and what will keep America competitive in this new century. Those 
are goals we all have and hopes we all share.Yes, the rules of the game have changed. And now it's time for us to prove to the wo
rld that we can still play better than anyone. The families I've met are ready to try. Their kids are ready. TechNet is ready. An
d in the coming months, I will do my best to work with my colleagues and make sure our government is ready too. I want to thank T
echNet for doing your part to get this dialogue going, and now I'd like to take a few questions from the audience. Thank you. Oba
ma's Floor Statement on the Hurricane Katrina Child Assistance Amendment TOPIC: Katrina & Gulf Recovery February 1, 2006 Senator 
Obama's Floor Statement Hurricane Katrina Child Assistance Amendment Complete Text Mr. President, I rise to speak about an amendm
ent to the Tax Reconciliation bill that I intend to offer at the appropriate time. The Amendment achieves two goals. First, it he
lps keep a promise the President made to rebuild the Gulf Coast in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Second, in a $70 billion bill l
aden with tax cuts for the wealthy and well-connected, it sets aside less than 1 percent for the neediest in our society.Two week
s after Katrina made landfall, President Bush stood in the ruins of New Orleans and vowed to "do what it takes" to help the regio
n recover. He also acknowledged the terrifying images of abject poverty that struck Americans on their TV screens and said, "We h
ave a duty to confront this poverty with bold action." Five months later, the President's timid actions have not matched his bold
 rhetoric. He has not lived up to his promises.My amendment uses a cost-effective and proven tool in our tax code--the Child Tax 
Credit--to extend aid to low-income working families affected by Hurricane Katrina.Enacted in 1997, the Child Credit allows famil
ies with qualifying children to receive a credit of $1,000 per child against their federal income tax. Unfortunately, the credit 
is skewed so that many families who need it the most can't get it.Under current law, families that earn less than $11,000 get no 
benefit from the refundable child credit. That means that a child is left out of the credit even if her parent works full time at
 minimum wage, which has not increased since 1997. And the child doesn't get the full benefit of the $1000 credit until her paren
t earns close to $18,000, or even more if the child has siblings.What's worse: if her parents' incomes stagnate, are disrupted fo
r any reason, or the economy stalls and work hours or wages are reduced, the value of the credit drops or even disappears. Under 
current law, almost 17 million children get less than the full credit.We all know what happened to the families on the Gulf Coast
 due to Hurricane Katrina, and it will be a long time before these families can rebuild their lives. Many of the families in the 
affected states were evacuated to other areas, and many of them cannot even afford to go back. And the federal response so far ha
s been inadequate to get these families effectively back on their feet.We need to do better. At a time when we are debating $70 b
illion of tax breaks, many of which will benefit those who need the least help, it is critical that we remember the worst off and
 the most vulnerable members of our society.When I went to Houston after the Hurricane, I met an evacuee from New Orleans who sai
d to me: "we had nothing before the hurricane, and now we've got less than nothing." Life was hard for many families even before 
Katrina hit. In Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, for example, more than 900,000 children under 17 years old were so poor that
 they got no child tax credit or only a partial credit. These states had among the highest rates of children too poor to get the 
full credit. In fact, more than 1/3 of the children in Mississippi and Louisiana didn't get the full benefit of the child tax cre
dit.This amendment, at a cost of less than 1 percent of the overall Tax Reconciliation bill, will provide necessary assistance to
 many of these families. The amendment eliminates the income threshold that excluded all children in families with less than $11,
000 of income.My amendment sends a simple message: if you work, your kids get a benefit. It provides a partial credit starting wi
th the first dollar of a parent's income for families who lived in the areas affected by Hurricane Katrina.The amendment is simpl
e: it says that the children of low-income working parents affected by Hurricane Katrina will no longer be denied the child credi
t. You work, your kids get a benefit. If you don't work, no benefit. And if you want the full benefit, you have to earn at least 
$10,000, which is just about the income of a full time job at minimum wage.That's a common sense way to support families with chi
ldren, especially families that have experienced the huge cost - psychological and financial - of a natural disaster.My amendment
 is also narrowly tailored and fiscally responsible. It is aimed at families affected by the Hurricanes, and it provides short-te
rm support, expiring in 2008.With this amendment, hundreds of thousands of this country's most disadvantaged children will see an
 increase in their credit. Katrina offered us a window into America's poverty. Let's not let that window close without doing some
thing to provide a chance for America's children to rebuild their lives with dignity, hope, and opportunity.I yield the floor. Po
tomac Primary Night Madison, WI February 12, 2008 Today, the change we seek swept through the Chesapeake and over the Potomac.We 
won the state of Maryland. We won the Commonwealth of Virginia. And though we won in Washington D.C., this movement won't stop un
til there's change in Washington. And tonight, we're on our way.But we know how much farther we have to go.We know it takes more 
than one night or even one election to overcome decades of money and the influence; bitter partisanship and petty bickering that'
s shut you out, let you down and told you to settle.We know our road will not be easy.But we also know that at this moment the cy
nics can no longer say our hope is false.We have now won east and west, north and south, and across the heartland of this country
 we love. We have given young people a reason to believe, and brought folks back to the polls who want to believe again. And we a
re bringing together Democrats and Independents and Republicans; blacks and whites; Latinos and Asians; small states and big stat
es; Red States and Blue States into a United States of America.This is the new American majority. This is what change looks like 
when it happens from the bottom up. And in this election, your voices will be heard.Because at a time when so many people are str
uggling to keep up with soaring costs in a sluggish economy, we know that the status quo in Washington just won't do. Not this ti
me. Not this year. We can't keep playing the same Washington game with the same Washington players and expect a different result 
because it's a game that ordinary Americans are losing.It's a game where lobbyists write check after check and Exxon turns record
 profits, while you pay the price at the pump, and our planet is put at risk. That's what happens when lobbyists set the agenda, 
and that's why they won't drown out your voices anymore when I am President of the United States of America.It's a game where tra
de deals like NAFTA ship jobs overseas and force parents to compete with their teenagers to work for minimum wage at Wal-Mart. Th
at's what happens when the American worker doesn't have a voice at the negotiating table, when leaders change their positions on 
trade with the politics of the moment, and that's why we need a President who will listen to Main Street not just Wall Street; a 
President who will stand with workers not just when it's easy, but when it's hard.It's a game where Democrats and Republicans fai
l to come together year after year after year, while another mother goes without health care for her sick child. That's why we ha
ve to put an end to the division and distraction in Washington, so that we can unite this nation around a common purpose, a highe
r purpose.It's a game where the only way for Democrats to look tough on national security is by talking, and acting and voting li
ke Bush-McCain Republicans, while our troops are sent to fight tour after tour of duty in a war that should've never been authori
zed and should've never been waged. That's what happens when we use 9/11 to scare up votes, and that's why we need to do more tha
n end a war we need to end the mindset that got us into war.That's the choice in this primary. It's about whether we choose to pl
ay the game, or whether we choose to end it; it's change that polls well, or change we can believe in; it's the past versus the f
uture. And when I'm the Democratic nominee for President that will be the choice in November.John McCain is an American hero. We 
honor his service to our nation. But his priorities don't address the real problems of the American people, because they are boun
d to the failed policies of the past.George Bush won't be on the ballot this November, but his war and his tax cuts for the wealt
hy will.When I am the nominee, I will offer a clear choice. John McCain won't be able to say that I ever supported this war in Ir
aq, because I opposed it from the beginning. Senator McCain said the other day that we might be mired for a hundred years in Iraq
, which is reason enough to not give him four years in the White House.If we had chosen a different path, the right path, we coul
d have finished the job in Afghanistan, and put more resources into the fight against bin Laden; and instead of spending hundreds
 of billions of dollars in Baghdad, we could have put that money into our schools and hospitals, our road and bridges and that's 
what the American people need us to do right now.And I admired Senator McCain when he stood up and said that it offended his "con
science" to support the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy in a time of war; that he couldn't support a tax cut where "so many of the 
benefits go to the most fortunate." But somewhere along the road to the Republican nomination, the Straight Talk Express lost its
 wheels, because now he's all for them.Well I'm not. We can't keep spending money that we don't have in a war that we shouldn't h
ave fought. We can't keep mortgaging our children's future on a mountain of debt. We can't keep driving a wider and wider gap bet
ween the few who are rich and the rest who struggle to keep pace. It's time to turn the page.We need a new direction in this coun
try. Everywhere I go, I meet Americans who can't wait another day for change. They're not just showing up to hear a speech they n
eed to know that politics can make a difference in their lives, that it's not too late to reclaim the American Dream.It's a dream
 shared in big cities and small towns; across races, regions and religions that if you work hard, you can support a family; that 
if you get sick, there will be health care you can afford; that you can retire with the dignity and security and respect that you
 have earned; that your kids can get a good education, and young people can go to college even if they're not rich. That is our c
ommon hope. That is the American Dream.It's the dream of the father who goes to work before dawn and lies awake at night wonderin
g how he's going to pay the bills. He needs us to restore fairness to our economy by putting a tax cut into the pockets of workin
g people, and seniors, and struggling homeowners.It's the dream of the woman who told me she works the night shift after a full d
ay of college and still can't afford health care for a sister who's ill. She needs us to finally come together to make health car
e affordable and available for every American.It's the dream of the senior I met who lost his pension when the company he gave hi
s life to went bankrupt. He doesn't need bankruptcy laws that protect banks and big lenders. He needs us to protect pensions, not
 CEO bonuses; and to do what it takes to make sure that the American people can count on Social Security today, tomorrow and fore
ver.It's the dream of the teacher who works at Dunkin Donuts after school just to make ends meet. She needs better pay, and more 
support, and the freedom to do more than just teach to the test. And if her students want to go on to college, they shouldn't fea
r decades of debt. That's why I'll make college affordable with an annual $4,000 tax credit if you're willing to do community ser
vice, or national service. We will invest in you, but we'll ask you to invest in your country.That is our calling in this campaig
n. To reaffirm that fundamental belief I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper that makes us one people, and one nation
. It's time to stand up and reach for what's possible, because together, people who love their country can change it.Now when I s
tart talking like this, some folks tell me that I've got my head in the clouds. That I need a reality check. That we're still off
ering false hope. But my own story tells me that in the United States of America, there has never been anything false about hope.
I should not be here today. I was not born into money or status. I was born to a teenage mom in Hawaii, and my dad left us when I
 was two. But my family gave me love, they gave me education, and most of all they gave me hope hope that in America, no dream is
 beyond our grasp if we reach for it, and fight for it, and work for it.Because hope is not blind optimism. I know how hard it wi
ll be to make these changes. I know this because I fought on the streets of Chicago as a community organizer to bring jobs to the
 jobless in the shadow of a shuttered steel plant. I've fought in the courts as a civil rights lawyer to make sure people weren't
 denied their rights because of what they looked like or where they came from. I've fought in the legislature to take power away 
from lobbyists. I've won some of those fights, but I've lost some of them too. I've seen good legislation die because good intent
ions weren't backed by a mandate for change.The politics of hope does not mean hoping things come easy. Because nothing worthwhil
e in this country has ever happened unless somebody, somewhere stood up when it was hard; stood up when they were told no you can
't, and said yes we can.And where better to affirm our ideals than here in Wisconsin, where a century ago the progressive movemen
t was born. It was rooted in the principle that the voices of the people can speak louder than special interests; that citizens c
an be connected to their government and to one another; and that all of us share a common destiny, an American Dream.Yes we can r
eclaim that dream.Yes we can heal this nation.The voices of the American people have carried us a great distance on this improbab
le journey, but we have much further to go. Now we carry our message to farms and factories across this state, and to the cities 
and small towns of Ohio, to the open plains deep in the heart of Texas, and all the way to Democratic National Convention in Denv
er; it's the same message we had when we were up, and when were down; that out of many, we are one; that our destiny will not be 
written for us, but by us; and that we can cast off our doubts and fears and cynicism because our dream will not be deferred; our
 future will not be denied; and our time for change has come. PRITZKER SCHOOL OF MEDICINE COMMENCEMENT TOPICS: Commencement & Hea
lth/Healthcare Issues Friday, June 10th 2005 Pritzker School of Medicine Commencement Chicago, Illinois Complete Text Congratulat
ions! After four long years of endless studying, sleepless nights, and constant stress, who's ready to kick back, relax, and jump
 head first into their residency?And who wishes people would stop making that joke? I thought so.It's an honor to be back here at
 the University of Chicago. As most of you know, I used to teach over at the law school and my wife Michelle is in charge of comm
unity affairs at the hospital, so as a part of the family we're especially proud of you all right now.We're also especially hopef
ul. With the caliber of talent and amazing dedication represented here today, I found myself thinking that in one of these chairs
 could sit the researcher who will finally win humanity's long battle against cancer. In one of these chairs could sit the scient
ist who transforms AIDS from one of the greatest disasters of the 20th century to one of the most curable diseases of the 21st. I
n one of these chairs could sit the doctor who says "Hey Barack, don't worry about that trick knee - you're just getting old." So
 that's hopeful too.But this hope that I have for your class - this faith in our ability to overcome that which threatens to halt
 the march of human progress - is nothing new. It is as old as our history and as powerful as the idea of America itself. And tha
t's because we've been here before.Almost eighty years ago, when the University of Chicago's first graduating class sat here read
y to collect their diplomas, who would have dared to believe that before the beginning of the next century, we would add thirty y
ears to the average lifespan and witness a 90% drop in the rate of infant death? Who would have dared to believe that with a simp
le vaccine, we could eliminate a disease that left millions without the ability to walk? That we could transplant a heart or resu
scitate one that stopped? That we could unlock the greatest mysteries of life from the most basic building blocks of our existenc
e?In a time where you were lucky to live past fifty and doomed if you came down with the flu, who would have dared to believe the
se things?The people who once sat in your chairs - they did. The doctors and nurses, researchers and scientists who came before. 
Who grew up believing that in America, the most improbable of all experiments, the place where we continue to defy the odds and w
rite our own history, they could be the ones to improve, extend, and save human life. They could be the healers.As this new centu
ry unfolds, their success and your potential have led us to a moment of unparalleled promise in health and medicine. Just like a 
century ago, technology and treatments that were once barely imagined are now imminently possible.Yet, while these are some of to
morrow's biggest potential breakthroughs, they are not today's biggest medical challenge. Today, as we continue to find new ways 
to live longer and better, the greatest single threat to the health of our nation is not a scarcity of genius or a failure of dis
covery; it is a lack of collective will to ensure that every single American has access to effective, affordable health care. It 
is our inability, after years and years of talk and gridlock, to finally do something about the crushing cost of health care in A
merica.This has long stopped being about a single issue that politicians bring up during an election year. This is now a national
 crisis.45 million Americans are uninsured - over 5 million more in the last four years. This isn't just a moral shame, it's an e
conomic disaster that's catching Americans in a vicious cycle. Because the uninsured can't afford health care, they put off seein
g a doctor or end up in the ER when they get sick. Then their care is more expensive, and so premiums for all Americans go up - t
o the tune of $922 a family. Because everyone's premiums go up, more Americans lose their health care.All the while, costs just k
eep climbing and climbing. Family premiums are up by nearly 65% over the last five years. Deductibles are up 50%. Co-payments for
 care and prescriptions are through the roof. From the smallest mom and pop stores to major corporations like GM, businesses who 
can't afford these rising costs cut back on insurance, workers, or both. States with bigger Medicaid bills and smaller budgets ar
e being forced to choose whether they want their citizens to be unhealthy or uneducated. And over half of all family bankruptcies
 today are caused by medical bills.The cost crisis is affecting your profession too. Whether it's Medicaid reimbursements, the ri
sing price of medical malpractice insurance, or having HMOs look over your shoulder, all the hard work and sacrifice you've put i
n during medical school isn't as rewarding as it once was.So now, just like generations before, you must dare to believe - not on
ly as tomorrow's physicians, but as tomorrow's parents, workers, business owners, and citizens. You must choose: Will the groundb
reaking miracles you discover over the next generation reach only the luckiest few? Or will history look back at this moment as t
he time when we finally made care available at a cost that won't bring the world's largest economy to its knees?For you guys, thi
s is about more than just the statistics and the numbers. Part of the philosophy of the Pritzker School of Medicine has always be
en the recognition that "medicine does not exist in a social vacuum." Living here over the last four years, you've seen this. Sur
rounding us right now on the south side of Chicago are poor kids sitting in those ERs who could never afford a physical. Children
 suffering from adult diabetes because parents can't afford to provide the proper nutrition. Worried mothers thumbing through che
ckbooks, not knowing if they can pay for this month's medicine.There isn't one person sitting here today who wants to turn a sick
 patient away because they can't pay. Not one person who wants the cure they discover denied to those whose lives depend on it. E
ach of you has dedicated yourselves to this calling because where there is a sick person, you want to heal them. Where there is a
 life in jeopardy, you want to save it.And so today, when you leave here, it will not only be with great knowledge, but with even
 greater responsibility. Because if we do nothing about the rising cost of health care, experts believe that in ten years, the nu
mber of uninsured will grow to 54 million. And if we do nothing to expand access to the uninsured, costs will keep rising.But whi
le this is a national crisis, it still isn't part of the national conversation. It's an issue where we haven't seen any leadershi
p over the last four years; an issue that Washington continues to duck. We just spent three entire weeks arguing over the filibus
ter, but I can count on one hand the number of times we've talked about health care since I was sworn in last January. Yet, when 
I come back here and talk to families in Illinois, that's all they tell me about.This isn't just limited to one party either. In 
part, the fear of reform stems from the experience President Clinton had in the early '90s when he recognized the emerging health
 care crisis and sought a comprehensive answer. For that, he deserves great credit.But the resulting political firestorm, fanned 
by the insurance lobby and other powerful interests who had a stake in maintaining the status quo, badly singed the Clinton Admin
istration.Since then, health care continues to be fodder for candidates, but quickly recedes into the background when elections c
ome and go.And with each passing year, the problem grows and the solutions become more difficult.We cannot turn our heads any lon
ger.Challenging as it is, fixing the health care system is not an impossible problem to solve. I'm not saying it will be easy, or
 that all the solutions are right in front of us. We may not be able to build consensus on every detail right away, but where we 
do agree, we should act now to bring down skyrocketing costs.One place to start is by bringing the health care system into the 21
st century. In our lifetimes, we've seen some of the greatest advances in the history of technology and the sharing of informatio
n. Yet, you're about to enter a profession where too much care is still provided with a pen and paper. Where too much information
 about patients isn't shared between doctors or readily available to them in the first place. And where we still don't have the i
nformation to know what care has worked most effectively and efficiently to make patients healthy.For too many Americans, the tim
e lost as a result of archaic record-keeping has been the margin between life and death.But embracing 21st century technology is 
not just about reducing errors and improving the quality of medical care. It's also about cost.We spend nearly one and a half tri
llion dollars a year on health care in America. But a quarter of that money - one out of every four dollars - is spent on non-med
ical costs; most of it bills and paperwork. Nearly every other industry in the world has saved billions on these administrative c
osts by doing it all online. Every transaction you make at a bank now costs them less than a penny. Even at the Veterans Administ
ration, where it used to cost nine dollars to pull up your medical record, new technology means you can call up the same record o
n the internet for free.Yet, because we haven't updated technology in the rest of the health care industry, a single transaction 
still costs up to twenty-five dollars - not one dime of which goes toward improving the quality of our health care. Doctors are f
orced to fumble through paperwork and don't have all of the information about each patient at the click of a mouse. Mistakes are 
easily made and today, patients are given the right kind of care only half of the time. In fact, a recent study showed that medic
al error alone kills up to 98,000 people a year - that's more than die from AIDS each year. This is due not only to outdated medi
cal technology, but the fact that we don't have a health care system that measures the quality of care patients are provided - th
at tells us what works, what doesn't, and where mistakes were made.But by bringing our health care system on-line, we could start
 improving the quality of care and cutting the cost of it. We could save thousands of lives and save families billions of dollars
. Just imagine if every doctor and nurse could sit by a patient's bedside with a laptop and pull up their entire medical history 
- information from every past doctor they've seen - with the click of a mouse. If every patient had an electronic bracelet that y
ou could scan to find out the exact type and amount of medication they needed so there were no mistakes made. If you could go on-
line and monitor a patient's breathing and heart rate while they were home to track their recovery.We know all of this possible -
 so what are we waiting for? It's time for this country to start taking on the big challenges and asking the big questions again.
 Why couldn't we help every health care provider who does business with the federal government that they need to convert their en
tire system to electronic transactions? Why couldn't we help connect our hospitals so they could share technology and information
 about what works and what doesn't? This way we could start creating a virtual system of health care in America where knowledge a
bout each individual's health needs and health history is readily available to every single person who provides them care.And whi
le we're at it, why couldn't we start rewarding the quality of care and the effort to prevent disease instead of only rewarding t
reatment itself? This way there would be actual incentives to provide good care and it would cut down on wasteful spending on the
 wrong kind of care. As tomorrow's doctors, you can help here too by making sure that all the drugs you prescribe aren't just the
 latest pharmaceutical fad, but the cheapest and most effective medicine for your patients.So why couldn't we do all of this? The
 answer is, we can. We can bring down the cost of health care in America and insure every American, and your generation can lead 
the way.Of course, no one's forcing you to meet these challenges. Each of you has been blessed with extraordinary gifts and talen
t. And so if you want, you can leave here and focus on your own medical career and your own success, not giving another thought t
o the plight of the growing millions who can't afford the care you will provide. After all, there is no community service require
ment in the real world; and no one's forcing you to care.But I hope that you do. Not because you have a debt to all of those who 
helped you get to where you are, although you do have that debt. Not because you have an obligation to those are less fortunate, 
although you do have that obligation. You need to take on the challenges that your country is facing because you have an obligati
on to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because it's only when you hitch your wagon to 
something larger than yourself that you will realize your true potential.Looking out at this class of 2005, I think my hope is we
ll-placed. With the field you have chosen, you've already shown how much you care about the lives of others; how strongly you hav
e heard the calling to be healers in this world. Today, I ask you to remember that call always, and to remember how it could incl
ude more than the patient sitting in your office. It could also include the patients who can't afford to get there, the ones who 
aren't being provided the best care, and the general health of all Americans.When you think about these challenges, I also ask yo
u to remember that in this country, our history of overcoming the seemingly impossible always comes about because individuals who
 care really can make a difference. America is great because Americans are good.And as you go forth from here in your own life, y
ou can keep this history alive if you only find the courage to try. Good luck with this journey, and congratulations on all of yo
ur achievements. Thank you. Iowa Caucus Night Des Moines, Iowa January 03, 2008 Thank you, Iowa.You know, they said this day woul
d never come.They said our sights were set too high.They said this country was too divided; too disillusioned to ever come togeth
er around a common purpose.But on this January night - at this defining moment in history - you have done what the cynics said we
 couldn't do. You have done what the state of New Hampshire can do in five days. You have done what America can do in this New Ye
ar, 2008. In lines that stretched around schools and churches; in small towns and big cities; you came together as Democrats, Rep
ublicans and Independents to stand up and say that we are one nation; we are one people; and our time for change has come.You sai
d the time has come to move beyond the bitterness and pettiness and anger that's consumed Washington; to end the political strate
gy that's been all about division and instead make it about addition - to build a coalition for change that stretches through Red
 States and Blue States. Because that's how we'll win in November, and that's how we'll finally meet the challenges that we face 
as a nation.We are choosing hope over fear. We're choosing unity over division, and sending a powerful message that change is com
ing to America.You said the time has come to tell the lobbyists who think their money and their influence speak louder than our v
oices that they don't own this government, we do; and we are here to take it back.The time has come for a President who will be h
onest about the choices and the challenges we face; who will listen to you and learn from you even when we disagree; who won't ju
st tell you what you want to hear, but what you need to know. And in New Hampshire, if you give me the same chance that Iowa did 
tonight, I will be that president for America.Thank you.I'll be a President who finally makes health care affordable and availabl
e to every single American the same way I expanded health care in Illinois by bringing Democrats and Republicans together to get 
the job done.I'll be a President who ends the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas and put a middle-class tax cut
 into the pockets of the working Americans who deserve it.I'll be a President who harnesses the ingenuity of farmers and scientis
ts and entrepreneurs to free this nation from the tyranny of oil once and for all.And I'll be a President who ends this war in Ir
aq and finally brings our troops home; who restores our moral standing; who understands that 9/11 is not a way to scare up votes,
 but a challenge that should unite America and the world against the common threats of the twenty-first century; common threats o
f terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease.Tonight, we are one step closer to that vision 
of America because of what you did here in Iowa. And so I'd especially like to thank the organizers and the precinct captains; th
e volunteers and the staff who made this all possible.And while I'm at it, on "thank yous," I think it makes sense for me to than
k the love of my life, the rock of the Obama family, the closer on the campaign trail; give it up for Michelle Obama.I know you d
idn't do this for me. You did this-you did this because you believed so deeply in the most American of ideas - that in the face o
f impossible odds, people who love this country can change it. know this-I know this because while I may be standing here tonight
, I'll never forget that my journey began on the streets of Chicago doing what so many of you have done for this campaign and all
 the campaigns here in Iowa - organizing, and working, and fighting to make people's lives just a little bit better.I know how ha
rd it is. It comes with little sleep, little pay, and a lot of sacrifice. There are days of disappointment, but sometimes, just s
ometimes, there are nights like this - a night-a night that, years from now, when we've made the changes we believe in; when more
 families can afford to see a doctor; when our children-when Malia and Sasha and your children-inherit a planet that's a little c
leaner and safer; when the world sees America differently, and America sees itself as a nation less divided and more united; you'
ll be able to look back with pride and say that this was the moment when it all began.This was the moment when the improbable bea
t what Washington always said was inevitable.This was the moment when we tore down barriers that have divided us for too long - w
hen we rallied people of all parties and ages to a common cause; when we finally gave Americans who'd never participated in polit
ics a reason to stand up and to do so.This was the moment when we finally beat back the politics of fear, and doubt, and cynicism
; the politics where we tear each other down instead of lifting this country up. This was the moment.Years from now, you'll look 
back and you'll say that this was the moment - this was the place - where America remembered what it means to hope.For many month
s, we've been teased, even derided for talking about hope.But we always knew that hope is not blind optimism. It's not ignoring t
he enormity of the task ahead or the roadblocks that stand in our path. It's not sitting on the sidelines or shirking from a figh
t. Hope is that thing inside us that insists, despite all evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us if we have th
e courage to reach for it, and to work for it, and to fight for it.Hope is what I saw in the eyes of the young woman in Cedar Rap
ids who works the night shift after a full day of college and still can't afford health care for a sister who's ill; a young woma
n who still believes that this country will give her the chance to live out her dreams.Hope is what I heard in the voice of the N
ew Hampshire woman who told me that she hasn't been able to breathe since her nephew left for Iraq; who still goes to bed each ni
ght praying for his safe return.Hope is what led a band of colonists to rise up against an empire; what led the greatest of gener
ations to free a continent and heal a nation; what led young women and young men to sit at lunch counters and brave fire hoses an
d march through Selma and Montgomery for freedom's cause.Hope-hope-is what led me here today - with a father from Kenya; a mother
 from Kansas; and a story that could only happen in the United States of America. Hope is the bedrock of this nation; the belief 
that our destiny will not be written for us, but by us; by all those men and women who are not content to settle for the world as
 it is; who have the courage to remake the world as it should be.That is what we started here in Iowa, and that is the message we
 can now carry to New Hampshire and beyond; the same message we had when we were up and when we were down; the one that can chang
e this country brick by brick, block by block, calloused hand by calloused hand - that together, ordinary people can do extraordi
nary things; because we are not a collection of Red States and Blue States, we are the United States of America; and at this mome
nt, in this election, we are ready to believe again. Thank you, Iowa. ROCKFORD REGISTER STAR YOUNG AMERICAN AWARDS TOPIC: Educati
on and Technology May 7th, 2005 Rockford Register Star Young American Awards Complete Text Thank you, and congratulations to all 
of this year's Young Americans.Now that you've each received your award, I have one question for all of you:What are you going to
 do with it?I know that after you wear it out of here, your parents will proudly hang it up somewhere in the house where everyone
 can see it. And at some point you'll go off to college and, against our best wishes, probably find a way to use it to open certa
in beverages.But my question is - what are you going to do with it? What are you going to make of this honor and this recognition
? What will it mean in your lives?The committee who gave you this award, your parents, all of us - we hope that it means you will
 go on to achieve great things, find immeasureable success, and discover the job of your dreams.But we also hold another hope.You
're all sitting here because in each of you, someone saw a spark.It's a spark that goes deeper than tests and grades, varsity let
ters and service awards. It's the spark that keeps each of you asking the questions, what if, why, and why not? The one that keep
s you always searching for answers to those questions. The one that makes you say, "I don't have to be content with the present, 
because I have a role in changing the future."What each of you has is the desire to learn not just for the next test or even the 
next diploma, but to learn for the sake of learning. To constantly look around your world and seek new ways to improve it. To emb
race change as the inevitable engine of progress.At the dawn of the 21st century, when the world is changing faster than we could
've ever imagined, this spark, this skill - lifelong learning - is the most important thing you can take with you when you gradua
te here.Why, you're wondering. What's he talking about?Well, I'm talking about McDonald's.Some of you may know that McDonald's he
adquarters is located over in Oak Brook, Illinois.But what you may not know about is three very innovative McDonald's restaurants
 that have opened around the state.At these restaurants, you pull up to a drive-through window to give your order. Nothing new th
ere. But while you're pondering which processed food to order, your order's being processed by a voice that's sitting hundreds of
 miles away at a call center in Colorado or even Canada. There, they take a digital picture of your car, match it up with your or
der, and send it back to the people preparing your food. This makes the orders quicker, more accurate, and more profitable for Mc
Donald's.And just like that, driving back to yell at the person who forgot your fries could mean a 14 hour car ride.So why am I t
elling this story? What does this mean for all of you?It means that we haven't even begun to understand or feel the full impact o
f the technological revolution that happened in the last decade. It means walls between countries have been torn down and the glo
bal community has become more connected through the internet, cell phones, video phones, and other advances in communication.And 
it leaves all of you with this challenge:If the miracle of technology means that McDonald's can send its drive-thru jobs across t
he country, just think of where other companies can send theirs. And so while the first Young American Award winners in 1956 comp
eted for jobs with kids in Illinois and Wisconsin and Iowa, you'll be competing with kids from India, China, and all over the wor
ld who are being educated more and longer than ever before.So what do we do? What can you do?We can't stop this, but we can be pr
epared for it. And as Young American award winners, you've already taken the first step.See, in this new world, knowledge really 
is power. A new idea can lead not just to a new product or a new job, but entire new industries and a new way of thinking about t
he world.And so you need to be the Idea Generation.The generation who's always thinking on the cutting edge, who's wondering how 
to create and keep the next wave of American jobs and American innovations, who's figuring out how to out-compete the Idea Genera
tions of Indias and Chinas of the world.They're already sending drive-thru jobs across the country - what will you guys do?To fig
ure this out, you'll need to graduate first. Then you'll need a college diploma - and we need to make sure that everyone in Ameri
ca is afforded the chance to get one of those.Last year, 220,000 young people gave up on their dream to go to college for the sim
ple reason that they could not afford the price of tuition, which is now rising at the rate of almost 10% a year. If we have any 
hope of competing and winning in today's economy, we cannot let our kids' college dreams be dashed because of a hefty price tag. 
In Washington, I've been trying to do something about this by introducing the HOPE Act, which would make college more affordable 
for 430,000 Americans by increasing Pell Grant awards. But we must do more to make sure that young Americans here and everywhere 
have a chance at a college diploma.But even beyond those diplomas, you'll need something else to succeed in the years ahead. You'
ll need to keep that spark that's got this far. The one that will keep you learning the new rules, solving the new mysteries, and
 discovering the new answers of this brand new century.It is this fundamental character of the American spirit - the desire to mo
ve forward, look around the next corner, and reach for the unreachable - that put the first man on the moon, led to a cure for po
lio, and launched the technological revolution of the nineties.And if you Young Americans keep that spirit alive, I think we'll b
e just fine.Congratulations to all of you on your achievements, and may God Bless you. Thank you. THE NUCLEAR OPTION TOPIC: Forei
gn Policy & DefenseWednesday, April 13, 2005 Statement of Senator Barack Obama The Nuclear Option Washington, DC Complete Text Mr
. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to think about the implications the nuclear option would have on this chamber and
 this country. I urge you to think not just about winning every debate, but about protecting free and democratic debate.During my
 Senate campaign, I had the privilege and the opportunity to meet Americans from all walks of life and both ends of the political
 spectrum. They told me about their lives, about their hopes, about the issues that mattered to them, and they also told me what 
they think about Washington.Because you've all heard it yourselves, I know it won't surprise many of you to learn that a lot of p
eople don't think much gets done around here about the issues they care most about. They think the atmosphere has become too part
isan, the arguments have become too nasty, and the political agendas have become too petty.And while I haven't been here too long
, I've noticed that partisan debate is sharp, and dissent is not always well-received. Honest differences of opinion and principl
ed compromise often seem to be the victim of a determination to score points against one's opponents.But the American people sent
 us here to be their voice. They understand that those voices can at times become loud and argumentative, but they also hope that
 we can disagree without being disagreeable. And at the end of the day, they expect both parties to work together to get the peop
le's business done.What they don't expect is for one party - be it Republican or Democrat - to change the rules in the middle of 
the game so that they can make all the decisions while the other party is told to sit down and keep quiet. The American people wa
nt less partisanship in this town, but everyone in this chamber knows that if the majority chooses to end the filibuster - if the
y choose to change the rules and put an end to democratic debate - then the fighting and the bitterness and the gridlock will onl
y get worse.I understand that Republicans are getting a lot of pressure to do this from factions outside the chamber. But we need
 to rise above an "ends justify the means" mentality because we're here to answer to the people - all of the people - not just th
e ones wearing our party label.The fact is that both parties have worked together to confirm 95% of this President's judicial nom
inees. The Senate has accepted 205 of his 214 selections. In fact, we just confirmed another one judge this week by a vote of 95-
0. Overall, this is a better record than any President's had in the last 25 years. For a President who received 51% of the vote a
nd a Senate chamber made up of 55% of the President's party, I'd say that confirming 95% of your judicial nominations is a record
 I'd be pretty happy with.Again, I urge my Republican colleagues not to go through with changing these rules. In the long run, th
is is not a good result for either party. One day Democrats will be in the majority again, and this rule change will be no fairer
 to a Republican minority than it is to a Democratic minority.Mr. President, I sense that talk of the nuclear option is more abou
t power than about fairness. I believe some of my colleagues propose this rules change because they can get away with it rather t
han because they know it's good for our democracy.Right now, we're faced with rising gas prices, skyrocketing tuition costs, a re
cord number of uninsured Americans, and some of the most serious national security threats we've ever had, all while our bravest 
young men and women are risking their lives halfway around the world to keep us safe.These are challenges we all want to meet and
 problems we all want to solve, even if we don't all agree how to do it. But if the right of free and open debate is taken away f
rom the minority party and the millions of Americans who asked us to be their voice, I fear that the already partisan atmosphere 
of Washington will be poisoned to the point where no one will be able to agree on anything. That doesn't serve anyone's best inte
rests, and it certainly isn't what the patriots who founded this democracy had in mind.We owe the people who sent us here more th
an that. We owe them much more.Thank you. AMERICA'S NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION POLICY TOPIC: Foreign Policy & Defense May 26th, 20
05 America's Nuclear Non-Proliferation Policy Mr. President, throughout the last half of the 20th Century, one nation - more than
 any other on the face of the earth - defined and shaped the threats posed to the United States. This nation, of course, is the S
oviet Union and its successor state, Russia.While many have turned their attention to China or other parts of the world, I believ
e that the most important threat to the security of the United States continues to lie within the borders of the former Soviet Un
ion - in the form of stockpiles of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons and materials.We are in a race against time to preve
nt these weapons from getting in the hands of international terrorist organizations or rogue states. And the path to this potenti
al disaster is easier than anyone could imagine: there are a number of potential sources of fissile material in the former Soviet
 Union in sites that are poorly secured; the material is compact, easy to hide, and hard to track; and weapons designs can be fou
nd on the internet.Today, some weapons experts believe that terrorist organizations will have enough fissile material to build a 
nuclear bomb in the next 10 years. That's right - 10 years.I rise today to instill a sense of urgency here in the Senate. I rise 
today to ask how we are going to deal with this threat -- tomorrow; a year from now; and a decade from now.The President has just
 completed an international trip that included a visit to Russia.I want to commend the President for taking this trip and making 
our relationship with Russia a priority.During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union produced nearly 2,000 tons of
 plutonium and highly enriched uranium for use in weapons that could destroy the world several times over. To give you an idea of
 just how much this is, it takes only five to ten kilograms of plutonium to build a nuclear weapon that could kill the entire pop
ulation of St. Louis.For decades, strategic deterrence, our alliances, and the balance of power with the Soviet Union ensured the
 relative safety of these weapons and materials.With the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, all of this ch
anged.Key institutions within the Soviet national security apparatus crumbled, exposing dangerous gaps in the security of nuclear
 weapons, delivery systems, and fissile material. Regional powers felt fewer constraints to develop nuclear weapons. Rogue states
 accelerated nuclear weapons programs.And while this was happening, international terrorist organizations who were aggressively s
eeking nuclear weapons gained strength and momentum.Thanks to the leadership of Senators Nunn and Lugar in creating the Cooperati
ve Threat Reduction program at the Department of Defense, there is no question that we've made some great progress in securing th
ese weapons. These same leaders continue to work tirelessly on the problem to this day -- Senator Nunn through the Nuclear Threat
 Initiative and Senator Lugar through his Chairmanship of the Foreign Relations Committee.And so today, the situation in Russia a
nd the rest of the former Soviet Union today is drastically different that it was in 1991 or even 1996 or 2001.But the threat is 
still extremely dangerous and extremely real. In March of this year, a senior Russian commander concluded that 39 of 46 key Russi
an weapons facilities had serious security shortcomings. Many Russian nuclear research sites frequently have doors propped open, 
security sensors turned off, and guards patrolling without ammunition in their weapons.Meanwhile, the fanatical terrorist organiz
ations who want these weapons continue to search every corner of the Earth, resorting to virtually any means necessary. The nucle
ar programs of nations such as Iran and North Korea threaten to destabilize key regions of the world. And, we are still learning 
about the tremendous damage caused by A.Q. Kahn, the rogue Pakistani weapons scientist.Looking back over the past decade and a ha
lf, it is clear that we could and should have done more.And so as the President returns from his trip to Russia, we should be thi
nking - on a bipartisan basis - about some of the critical issues that can guide us in the future to ensure that there are no mor
e missed opportunities.The situation is too dangerous. The threat to our security too grave.The first question that we should be 
thinking about is what is the future of the Cooperative Threat Reduction program? Where do we go from here? In other words, what 
is our plan?I believe that the Administration must spend more time working with Congress to chart out a road map and strategic vi
sion of the program.There are two things that the President can do to move on this issue. First, in the National Security Strateg
y to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction of 2002, the Administration said the National Security Council would prepare a 5 year gov
ernment-wide strategy by March, 2003. To my knowledge, this has not been completed.In addition, Congress required the Administrat
ion to submit an inter-agency coordination plan on how to more effectively deal with non-proliferation issues. This plan is due a
t the end of this month.Completing these plans will help U.S. better address critical day-to-day issues, such as liability, resou
rce allocation, and timetables.Having a better strategic vision will also help us work more efficiently and effectively with othe
r international donors, who have become increasingly involved and are making significant contributions to these efforts. This is 
an important issue, as the contributions of other donors could help us make up valuable lost time.Mr. President, the second set o
f questions I would like to raise concerns the U.S.-Russian relationship. Where is this relationship heading? Will Russia be an a
dversary? A partner? Or something in between?I don't ask these questions simply because I am a nice guy and I want to get along w
ith the Russians. I ask these questions because they directly impact our progress towards securing and destroying stockpiles of n
uclear weapons and materials.In the last few years, we have seen some disturbing trends in Russia - the rapid deterioration of de
mocracy and the rule of law; bizarre and troubling statements from President Putin about the fall of the Soviet Union; the abuses
 in Chechnya; and Russian meddling in the former Soviet Union from the Baltics to Ukraine to Georgia.The Russians must understand
 that their actions on some of these issues are completely unacceptable.At the same time, I believe that we have to do a better j
ob of working with the Russians to make sure that they are moving in the right direction. This starts by being thoughtful and con
sistent about what we say and what we do. Tone is important here.Some of the statements by our own officials have been confusing,
 contradictory, and problematic. At times, I have been left scratching my head about what exactly is our policy and how Administr
ation statements square with this policy.Another issue is the level of sustained engagement with Russia.I am glad that the Presid
ent and Secretary of State have made a number of trips to Russia.But, as these trips are but a few days every year or so, this is
 only one aspect of the relationship. An additional part, which has suffered in recent years, is our foreign assistance programs 
to Russia and the rest of the former Soviet Union.These programs are an essential way for the United States to maintain our engag
ement with Russia. They aren't just giveaways; they are programs that advance U.S. interests by strengthening democracy and civil
 society, enhancing economic development, and dealing with international health issues - in addition to curbing the nonproliferat
ion threat.At a time when these programs are desperately needed, their budgets have been cut dramatically. At a time when we shou
ld be doing more to engage and shape the future of Russia, we seem to be doing the exact opposite.The non-proliferation threat do
es not exist in a vacuum. The issues I just mentioned -- along with other important issues such as our own strategic nuclear arse
nal -- must also be considered as we move forward.Finally, Mr. President, I would like my colleagues to consider how our relation
ship with Russia, and our efforts to secure and destroy weapons and materials inside the former Soviet Union, fits in with our br
oader non-proliferation goals.Russia is a major player in the two of the biggest proliferation challenges we currently face - Ira
n and North Korea. Russia's dangerous involvement with Iran's nuclear program has been well documented, and there is no question 
that their actions will be pivotal if the President is to successfully resolve this deteriorating situation.The Russians are also
 an important voice in trying to make progress on the deteriorating situation in North Korea. The Russian city of Vladivostok is 
home to 590,000 people and is very close to the North Korean border - putting the Russians smack in the middle of a crisis that w
e need to resolve.In addition to all of this, Russia holds a veto on the UN Security Council, which could consider the Iranian an
d North Korean issues in the very near future.Developing strong bilateral and multilateral strategies that deal with Russia's rol
e in these growing crises will be extremely important, both in terms of resolving these crisis, advancing our non-proliferation g
oals within the former Soviet Union, and our long-term relationship with Russia.I realize that right now, none of us have all the
 answers to these extraordinarily difficult questions.But if we hope to successfully fight terror and avoid disaster before it ar
rives at our shores, we must start finding those answers. We have work to do.I believe that it is worth putting in place a proces
s - one that involves senior Administration officials, a bipartisan group of Members of Congress as well as retired senior milita
ry officers and diplomats - in an effort to dramatically improve progress on these issues.I am interested in hearing from the Pre
sident about his trip. I am also interested in hearing if he believes that an idea, similar to the one that I put forward, is wor
th considering.Delay is not an option. We need to start making more progress on this issue today. I urge my colleagues to act. Fl
oor Statement General Michael Hayden Nomination TOPIC: Foreign Policy & Defense May 25, 2006 Senator Barack Obama Floor Statement
 General Michael Hayden Nomination Complete Text Mr. President.Let me start by saying that General Hayden is extremely well quali
fied for this position. Having previously served as head of the National Security Agency and as Deputy Director of National Intel
ligence under John Negroponte, he has thirty years of experience in intelligence and national security matters. And he was nearly
 universally praised during his confirmation to deputy DNI.Unfortunately, General Hayden is being nominated under troubling circu
mstances as the architect and chief defender of a program of wiretapping and collection of phone records outside of FISA oversigh
t. This is a program that is still accountable to no one and no law.Now, there is no one in this Congress who doesn't want Presid
ent Bush to have every tool at his disposal to prevent terrorist attacks - including the use of a surveillance program. Every sin
gle American - Democrat and Republican -- who remembers the images of falling towers and needless death would gladly support incr
eased surveillance to prevent another attack.But over the last six months, Americans have learned that the National Security Agen
cy has been spying on Americans without judicial approval. We learned about this not from the Administration, but from the New Yo
rk Times and USA Today. Every time a revelation came out, President Bush refused to answer questions from Congress.This is part o
f a general stance by this Administration that it can operate with no restraints. President Bush is interpreting Article II of th
e Constitution as giving him authority with no bounds. The Attorney General and a hand full of scholars agree with this view, and
 I don't doubt the sincerity with which the President and his lawyers believe this constitutional interpretation. However, the ov
erwhelming weight of legal authority is against the President on his unbounded authority without any checks or balances. This is 
not how our Constitution is designed.We don't expect the President to give the American people every detail about a classified su
rveillance program. But we do expect him to place such a program within the rule of law, and to allow members of the other two co
equal branches of government - Congress and the Judiciary - to have the ability to monitor and oversee such a program. Our Consti
tution and our right to privacy as Americans require as much.Unfortunately, we were never given the chance to make that examinati
on. Time and again, President Bush has refused to come clean to Congress. Why was it that 14 of 16 members of the Intelligence Co
mmittee were kept in the dark for four and a half years? The only reason that some Senators are now being briefed is because the 
story was made public. Without that information it is impossible to make the decisions that allow us to balance the need to fight
 terrorism while still upholding the rule of law and privacy protections that make this country great.Every democracy is tested w
hen it is faced with a serious threat. As a nation, we have to find the right balance between privacy and security, between execu
tive authority to face threats and uncontrolled power. What protects us, and what distinguishes us, are the procedures we put in 
place to protect that balance, namely judicial warrants and congressional review. These aren't arbitrary ideas. These are the con
crete safeguards that make sure that surveillance hasn't gone too far. That someone is watching the watchers.The exact details of
 these safeguards are not etched in stone. They can be reevaluated from time to time. The last time we had a major overhaul of th
e intelligence apparatus was 30 years ago in the aftermath of Watergate. After those dark days, the White House worked in a colla
borative way with Congress through the Church Committee to study the issue, revise intelligence laws and set up a system of check
s and balances. It worked then and it could work now. But unfortunately, this Administration has made no effort to reach out to C
ongress and tailor FISA.I have no doubt that General Hayden will be confirmed. But I am going to reluctantly vote against him to 
send a signal to this Administration that even in these circumstances President Bush is not above the law. I am voting against Ha
yden in the hope that he will be more humble before the great weight of responsibility that he has, not only to protect our lives
, but to protect our democracy.Americans fought a Revolution in part over the right to be free from unreasonable searches - to en
sure that our government couldn't come knocking in the middle of the night for no reason. We need to find a way forward to make s
ure that we can stop terrorists while protecting the privacy, and liberty, of innocent Americans. We have to find a way to give t
he President the power he needs to protect us, while making sure he doesn't abuse that power. It is possible to do that. We have 
done it before, we could do it again. January 2006 Trip to Iraq and Kuwait - Podcast Transcript TOPIC: Iraq January 9, 2006 From 
the Road: Speaking with American Troops in Iraq Complete Text PODCAST TRANSCRIPT: Hello, this is Senator Barack Obama, and I am r
esuming my podcasts after a couple weeks Christmas Break. And I am calling from a cell phone at a hotel overlooking the hills of 
Amman, Jordan. It's actually a beautiful city, Jordan. The sun is setting and I am just come back from my first trip into Iraq.Yo
u know, obviously Iraq has dominated our foreign policy for the last several years. Listeners to my regular podcasts or those who
 followed my campaign, I think, are aware of the fact that I have been deeply skeptical about the administration's policy towards
 Iraq and the initial invasion. I felt it was important for me to visit Iraq myself and get some sort of first hand report about 
what was happening there.So, I started the trip actually from Kuwait, where the US maintains several bases that are used to provi
de logistical support for what's happening in Iraq. I met with troops as well as some of the generals who are in charge of logist
ical support. They talked about the enormous efforts that are required to maintain our presence in Iraq. There are about 20,000 t
roops in this base in Kuwait and they typically provide initial training for troops before they deploy into Iraq as well as provi
ding water and fuel and are used as a launching site for operations in Iraq.I had the opportunity to meet with a number of troops
 from Illinois as well as play a little basketball with some of the troops in the gymnasium there. And so I had a chance to talk 
to them about their feelings about what was happening. I think it's fair to say that morale among almost every US troop that I me
t was high. I think everybody is very proud of the work that they're doing and understandably so. Because regardless of how you f
eel about the war, what's astonishing is just the pride that our men and women in uniform take about accomplishing the tasks befo
re them. The effort in Iraq is just an unbelievable logistical task.We flew into Baghdad and then I was helicoptered into the Gre
en Zone. And when you visit the Green Zone, which is several miles wide and long in the center of Baghdad, you really get a sense
 that US military operations have built an entire city within a city. There are thousands of US military personnel and coalition 
forces - everything from embassy personnel to logistical support to troops that are about to be deployed into other areas of the 
country.It's an impressive achievement and in conversations with US personnel there all of them felt a genuine sense of progress 
after this most recent election. The feeling was that there was a great opportunity for the first time in sometime to create a na
tional unity government that actually had some claim of legitimacy with the Iraqi people.I had a meeting then with Ambassador Kha
lilzad, the US Ambassador to Iraq, who discussed the meaning of the most recent election. His belief is that there is an opportun
ity to create a government that unifies Shiite, Sunni and Kurd, but that it's not going to be easy. That the election in and of i
tself doesn't create that unity. In fact the election was largely along sectarian lines. But that hopefully there is a recognitio
n on the part of the leadership in all these various factions that recognizes a unified Iraq is better than the alternative, rega
rdless of how difficult it is. And overall I was impressed with the work that he was doing.Later that evening I had dinner with t
he President or Iraq, President Talabani as well as a number of ministers in the current Iraqi government, representing various f
actions. And the general impression was that they recognized the need to arrive at accommodations; and that was a cause for some 
small optimism.The next day we took Blackhawk helicopters and went out to Fallujah, which is the site of some of the worst violen
ce in Iraq. I did not travel through the city proper but rather flew into the primary US military base out there, and had a brief
ing from both their general as well as the colonels who were in charge of troops out there. As we arrived we learned that just a 
day earlier five marines had been killed, and obviously people were pretty somber about that. It's still very dangerous work to b
e done.And in discussions with our military, one message that came across repeatedly was that there is not going to be a military
 solution to the problem of Iraq; that only political accommodations can solve some of these problems. One of the colonels that w
e met in Fallujah, who is in charge of intelligence, pointed out that you've got 50% unemployment rates in many of the western po
rtions of Iraq. And what that means is that the insurgency is going to continually grow unless the central government pays attent
ion to the concrete needs of the people in that area. It also means that despite the work of the US military in apprehending the 
leaders of the insurgency in that area, there are always young men who are willing to fill the shoes of those who are apprehended
. And as a consequence, the insurgency and the dangers posed by the explosive devices that they are setting throughout the countr
y will continue, as well as the suicide bombings. This colonel really felt very strongly that the problem we faced was not a matt
er of foreign fighters, but rather a combination of foreign Jihadists and, more importantly, the homegrown support that continues
 to be generated.We went to Kirkuk in northern Iraq where the situation is a little bit more stable, although there is significan
t tension there. Kirkuk is the site of a lot of oil wealth that the Kurdish want to incorporate into their regional government an
d is being resisted by Shiite and Sunni alike. And so a very complicated political process is taking place in that region.You kno
w, as you fly from Baghdad airport to the Green Zone and then out to places like Fallujah and you look down on the countryside an
d over the city, you realize how devastating this war has been for the country. It still looks shell-shocked. The land is muddy a
nd fallow and strewn with skeletons of old trucks and cars and the imprints of buildings that are now reduced to rubble. There is
 very little traffic on the streets; a few people are on foot. It reminds you of how devastating war is.The conversations that I 
had with troops who had lost friends and colleagues reminded me of how personally devastating war is to soldiers and their famili
es.And I think generally it emphasizes, in my mind at least, how our foreign policy has to be tough but it has to also be smart; 
and that we have to possess some element of humility about our capacity to remake other countries and other cultures.I think ther
e are several things that I at least learned from the trip, some of which reinforced some of my previous thoughts and some though
ts that are new:Number one, we have probably a six-month window in which to create the sort of national unity government that can
 actually deliver a basic government to the Iraqi people and deliver the sort of political accommodations that are the necessary 
precursor for any solution to the violence in Iraq. Whether that's going to happen or not will depend on the degree to which the 
Shiite majority shows restraint and recognizes the need to bring Sunnis into all levels of government, particularly the security 
forces. It's also going to depend on the degree that the Sunnis are willing to recognize that they are never going to have the sa
me degree of power given their numbers as they did under Saddam Hussein.The second thing that's going to need to happen if there 
is going to be any modicum of success in Iraq is that the security forces themselves have to be representative of all portions of
 Iraqi society. Right now the security forces are dominated by Shiite. There have been some disturbing reports about the Ministry
 of the Interior and the police being used as a vendetta force against Sunnis. That obviously helps to fan the insurgency, which 
raises a broader point.And that is that it's going to be important for whatever government that is elected to actually start buil
ding institutional capacity.We met with some of the officials that are in charge of reconstruction over there; and it's clear tha
t the basic structure of civil service - a non-corrupt, technocratic approach to solving problems and delivering services is not 
deeply imbedded there and has to be developed. And changing that culture is going to take time but it's going to have to start. A
nd whatever else the national unity government accomplishes it's got to recognize that it needs a basic structure of service deli
very to gain the confidence of the Iraqi people.Finally, and I think most importantly, what's clear is that there is not going to
 be a military solution to this problem. I heard this repeatedly, not just from civilians or observers, but from the military - o
ur military - the recognition that the insurgency cannot be defeated by armed might alone. And it is absolutely critical that our
 policies recognize that.I remember having a conversation with one of the colonels out in the field, and although he did not beli
eve that a rapid unilateral withdrawal would actually be helpful, there was no doubt that the US occupation in Iraq was becoming 
an increasing source of irritation. And that one of the things that we're going to need to do - and to do sooner rather than late
r - is to transition our troops out of the day-to-day operations in Iraq and to have a much lower profile and a smaller footprint
 in the country over the coming year.On the other hand, I did also ask some people who were not particularly sympathetic to the i
nitial war, but were now trying to make things work in Iraq - what they thought would be the result of a total withdrawal and I t
hink the general view was that we were in such a delicate situation right now and that there was so little institutional capacity
 on the part of the Iraqi government, that a full military withdrawal at this point would probably result in significant civil wa
r and potentially hundreds of thousands of deaths. This by the way was a message that was delivered also by the Foreign Minister 
of Jordan, who I've been meeting with while here in Amman, Jordan.The sense, I think, throughout the entire region among those wh
o opposed the US invasion, that now that we're there it's important that we don't act equally precipitously in our approach to wi
thdrawal, but that we actually stabilize the situation and allow time for the new Iraqi government to develop some sort of capaci
ty.I guess the final point I just want to make is how proud I am of the US troops there. One of the things that I continually emp
hasized to them was that regardless of how any of us feel about the administration's decision to go into Iraq, all of us are extr
aordinarily proud of the work that they're doing. What the US military accomplishes on a day-to-day basis, in just setting up and
 rebuilding portions of the country that have been destroyed and in carrying out extraordinarily difficult tasks on a day-to-day 
basis is amazing.And particularly when I was talking to the Illinois troops many of them are guardsmen and reservists - some of t
hem on their second or third rotation - it was important for me to emphasize to them that the folks back home fully support them 
even as we have, I think, a very legitimate debate back in Washington about what we're doing there.The fact is that our US milita
ry is probably the most capable institution on the planet in terms of carrying out extraordinarily difficult assignments. But it'
s incumbent on our civilian leadership in Washington to make sure that we don't provide them with assignments that are impossible
 to accomplish. And I continue to be concerned that we have set out for ourselves just an enormous task of rebuilding an extremel
y volatile and large country, and the military is not going to be able to do it alone so we're going to have to have some good po
licies from Washington to move it forward.Anyway, I hope everybody had a wonderful holiday. I will be returning to Washington aft
er several days in Israel and the Palestinian territories. It's obviously a difficult time there, given the grave illness that Ar
iel Sharon is suffering. It's thrown the entire Middle East into tumult and I may have some more to say about that when I get bac
k. So hopefully I'll be able to deliver a podcast next week and look forward to being back home to see my wife and kids next week
 as well.Take care everybody. Bye-bye. Non-Proliferation and Russia TOPIC: Foreign Policy & Defense November 1, 2005 Non-Prolifer
ation and Russia: The Challenges Ahead Council on Foreign Relations Washington, DC Complete Text Good morning. As some of you kno
w, Senator Lugar and I recently traveled to Russia, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan to witness firsthand both the progress we're making i
n securing the world's most dangerous weapons, as well as the serious challenges that lie ahead.Now, few people understand these 
challenges better than the co-founder of the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, Dick Lugar, and this is something that became 
particularly clear to me during one incident on the trip.We were in Ukraine, visiting a pathogen laboratory in Kiev. This is a ci
ty of two and a half million, and in a non-descript building right in the middle of town stood this facility that once operated o
n the fringes of the Soviet biological weapons program.We entered through no fences or discernible security, and once we did, we 
found ourselves in a building with open first-floor windows and padlocks that many of us would not use to secure our own luggage.
Our guide then brought us right up to what looked like a mini-refrigerator. Inside, staring right at us, were rows upon rows of t
est tubes. She picked them up, clanked them around, and we listened to the translator explain what she was saying. Some of the tu
bes, he said, were filled with anthrax. Others, the plague.At this point I turned around and said "Hey, where's Lugar? Doesn't he
 want to see this?" I found him standing about fifteen feet away, all the way in the back of the room. He looked at me and said, 
"Been there, done that."Of course, Dick has been there and he has done that, and thanks to the Cooperative Threat Reduction Progr
ams he co-founded with Senator Sam Nunn, we've made amazing progress in finding, securing, and guarding some of the deadliest wea
pons that were left scattered throughout the former Soviet Union after the Cold War.But this is one story that shows our job is f
ar from finished at a time when demand for these weapons has never been greater.Right now, rogue states and despotic regimes are 
looking to begin or accelerate their own nuclear programs. And as we speak, members of Al Qaeda and other terrorists organization
s are aggressively pursuing weapons of mass destruction, which they would use without hesitation.We've heard the horror stories -
 attempts by rogue states to recruit former Soviet weapons scientists; terrorists shopping for weapons grade materials on the bla
ck market. Some weapons experts believe that terrorists are likely to find enough fissile material to build a bomb in the next te
n years - and we can imagine with horror what the world will be like if they succeed.Today, experts tell us that we're in a race 
against time to prevent this scenario from unfolding. And that is why the nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons within the bo
rders of the former Soviet Union represent the greatest threat to the security of the United States - a threat we need to think s
eriously and intelligently about in the months to come.Fortunately, the success of Cooperative Threat Reduction - especially in s
ecuring nuclear weapons - serves as a model of how we can do this. And so the question we need to be asking ourselves today is, w
hat is the future of this program? With the situation in Russia and the rest of the former Soviet Union so drastically different 
than it was in 1991, or even in 1996 or 2001, what must we do to effectively confront this threat in the days and years to come?T
he answers to these questions will require sustained involvement by the Executive Branch, Congress, non-governmental organization
s, and the international community. Everyone has a role to play, and everyone must accelerate this involvement.For my part, I wou
ld suggest three important elements that should be included in such a discussion.First, the Nunn-Lugar program should be more eng
aged in containing proliferation threats from Soviet-supplied, civilian research reactors throughout Russia and the Independent S
tates.The Department of Energy and others have certainly made progress in converting civilian reactors to low-enriched uranium, t
aking back spent fuel, and closing unnecessary facilities.Yet, a serious threat still remains. Many of these aging research facil
ities have the largest, least secure quantities of highly enriched uranium in the world - the quickest way to a nuclear weapon. F
or a scientist or other employee to simply walk out of the lab with enough material to construct a weapon of mass destruction is 
far too easy, and the consequences would be far too devastating. Not to mention the environmental and public health and safety ca
tastrophe that could come from a failure to store and transport these materials safely and securely.In a way that balances the ne
eds of science and security, more needs to be done to bring these materials - as well as other sources that can be used to constr
uct improvised nuclear weapons and radiological devices -- under control and dramatically reduce the proliferation threat they po
se.In the years ahead, this should become an increasing priority for the Nunn-Lugar program, the Congress, and the Russians, who 
are already taking important steps to help implement these programs.I want to turn to a second critical area: biological weapons 
threat reduction programs.Throughout the Cold War, the Soviet Union was engaged in a massive undertaking in the field of germ war
fare.At its height in the late 1980's, this program stockpiled of some of the most dangerous agents known to man - plague, smallp
ox, and anthrax - to name just a few. As one book says, "disease by the ton was its industry."Besides the devastation they can ca
use to a civilian population, biological agents can also be effective in asymmetrical warfare against U.S. troops. While they are
 often difficult to use, they are easy to transport, hard to detect, and, as we saw in Kiev, not always well secured.Here in Wash
ington, we saw what happened when just two letters filled with just a few grams of Anthrax were sent to the U.S. Senate. Five pos
tal employees were killed and the Senate office buildings were closed for months.This was two letters.Fortunately, however, we've
 made some good progress on this front. For years, Nunn-Lugar programs have been effectively upgrading security at sites in six c
ountries across the former Soviet Union. And the Kiev story is heading in the right direction - while we were in Ukraine, Dick, t
hrough his tireless and personal intervention, was able to achieve a breakthrough with that government, bringing that facility an
d others under the Cooperative Threat Reduction program.But because of the size, secrecy, and scope of the Soviet biological weap
ons program, we are still dangerously behind in dealing with this proliferation threat. We need to be sure that Nunn-Lugar is inc
reasingly focused on these very real non-proliferation and bioterrorism threats.One of the most important steps is for Russia to 
permit the access and transparency necessary to deal with the threat.Additional steps should also be taken to consolidate and sec
ure dangerous pathogen collections, strengthen bio-reconnaissance networks to provide early warning of bio-attack and natural dis
ease outbreaks, and have our experts work together to develop improved medical countermeasures. As the Avian Influenza outbreak d
emonstrates, even the zealous Russian border guard is helpless against the global sweep of biological threats.My third recommenda
tion - which I'll just touch briefly on and let Senator Lugar talk about in more detail - is that we need to start thinking creat
ively about some of the next-generation efforts on nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.On our trip, we saw two areas where 
this is possible: elimination of heavy conventional weapons, and interdiction efforts to help stop the flow of dangerous material
s across borders.In Donetsk, I stood among piles of conventional weapons that were slowly being dismantled. While the government 
of Ukraine is making progress here, the limited funding they have means that at the current pace, it will take sixty years to dis
mantle these weapons. But we've all seen how it could take far less time for these weapons to leak out and travel around the worl
d, fueling insurgencies and violent conflicts from Africa to Afghanistan. By destroying these inventories, this is one place we c
ould be making more of a difference.One final point. For any of these efforts that I've mentioned to work as we move forward, we 
must also think critically and strategically about Washington's relationship with Moscow.Right now, there are forces within the f
ormer Soviet Union and elsewhere that want these non-proliferation programs to stop. Our detention for three hours in Perm is a t
estament to these forces. Additionally, in the last few years, we've seen some disturbing trends from Russia itself - the deterio
ration of democracy and the rule of law, the abuses that have taken place in Chechnya, Russian meddling in the former Soviet Unio
n - that raise serious questions about our relationship.But when we think about the threat that these weapons pose to our global 
security, we cannot allow the U.S.-Russian relationship to deteriorate to the point where Russia does not think it's in their bes
t interest to help us finish the job we started. We must safeguard these dangerous weapons, material, and expertise. .One way we 
could strengthen this relationship is by thinking about the Russians as more of a partner and less of a subordinate in the Cooper
ative Threat Reduction effort.This does not mean that we should ease up one bit on issues affecting our national security. Outsta
nding career officials who run the Nunn-Lugar program -- people like Col. Jim Reid and Andy Weber who are here this morning -- wi
ll be there every step of the way to ensure that U.S. interests are protected.Time and time again on the trip, I saw their skill 
and experience when negotiating with the Russians. I also saw their ability to ensure that shortcomings were addressed and progra
ms were implemented correctly.But thinking of the Russians more as partners does mean being more thoughtful, respectful, and cons
istent about what we say and what we do. It means that the Russians can and should do more to support these programs. And it mean
s more sustained engagement, including more senior-level visits to Nunn-Lugar program sites.It's important for senior officials t
o go and visit these sites, to check their progress and shortcomings; to see what's working and what's not. But lately we haven't
 seen many of these visits. We need to see more.We also need to ensure that the Cooperative Threat Reduction umbrella agreement, 
due to expire in 2006, is renewed in a timely manner.And we need to work together to obtain a bilateral agreement on biological t
hreat reduction.There is no doubt that there is a tough road ahead. It will be difficult. And it will be dangerous.But, when I th
ink about what is at stake I am reminded by a quote from the late President Kennedy given in a speech at American University in 1
963 about threats posed by the Soviet Union. "Let us not be blind to our differences--but let us also direct attention to our com
mon interests and to the means by which those differences can be resolved...For in the final analysis, our most basic common link
 is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mort
al.''Much of what President Kennedy described in 1963 remains true to this day - and we owe it to ourselves and our children to g
et it right.Thank you. Opening Statement - Lugar-Obama legislation S1949 TOPIC: Foreign Policy & Defense February 9, 2006 Foreign
 Relations Committee Lugar-Obama legislation S.1949 Complete Text Mr. Chairman, I can't do a better job of laying out the issue t
han you just did, so I am going to keep my opening remarks relatively short.I want to thank you for your tireless leadership on t
his issue; for holding this hearing; and for working with me to introduce what I believe is a very good bill. I also want to than
k Senator Biden for his insightful comments and his long track record of good work on nonproliferation issues.The Lugar-Obama leg
islation, S.1949, does two basic things.First, it enhances our ability, working with friends and allies, to detect and intercept 
illegal shipments of weapons and materials of mass destruction. Second, the bill bolsters ongoing efforts to destroy conventional
 weapons such as lightweight anti-aircraft missiles.As the Chairman pointed out in his opening statement, many of these efforts a
re under-funded, fragmented, and in need of high-level support. I take note of the Chairman's comments that new threat reduction 
proposals - even the Nunn-Lugar program - are not always warmly received by the Executive Branch.I agree with your testimony Secr
etary Joseph that the Department does need flexibility to deal effectively with global threats and international diplomacy. But t
hat isn't the issue here before us today. Every Member of this Committee wants to give the State Department the flexibility it ne
eds.This issue here today is whether the State Department could use additional resources and coordination to more effectively dea
l with two critically important threats - interdiction of WMD and destruction of conventional weapons. I believe it can.I am also
 concerned that the issue just simply does not get the attention it deserves within the State Department.I know that both the Pre
sident and Secretary Rice have expressed their commitment to nonproliferation issues. But, four key State Department interdiction
 and nonproliferation programs are either flat-lined or slated for only modest of increases in the President's budget. Meanwhile,
 a $1.2 billion increase is proposed for the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA), which will provide funding to nations such as Ca
pe Verde, Madagascar, and Vanuatu.I am supportive of the MCA, and I am not saying that these countries aren't worthy of U.S. assi
stance. But, a budget is about prioritizing strategic objectives. And, in my view, the priorities don't appropriately align with 
the strategic threats we confront today.Secretary Joseph, despite my concerns, I am hopeful that we can work together to make adj
ustments to our budget priorities. With regard to Lugar-Obama, I am also confident that we can work in a collaborative spirit to 
make a good bill even better. I look forward to your testimony. Time Has Come for Universal Health Care TOPIC: Healthcare & Healt
h Issues January 25, 2007 The Time Has Come for Universal Health Care Families USA Conference, Washington, DC Complete Text Thank
 you Ron Pollack and thank you Families USA for inviting me to speak here this morning.On this January morning of two thousand an
d seven, more than sixty years after President Truman first issued the call for national health insurance, we find ourselves in t
he midst of an historic moment on health care. From Maine to California, from business to labor, from Democrats to Republicans, t
he emergence of new and bold proposals from across the spectrum has effectively ended the debate over whether or not we should ha
ve universal health care in this country.Plans that tinker and halfway measures now belong to yesterday. The President's latest p
roposal that does little to bring down cost or guarantee coverage falls into this category. There will be many others offered in 
the coming campaign, and I am working with experts to develop my own plan as we speak, but let's make one thing clear right here,
 right now:In the 2008 campaign, affordable, universal health care for every single American must not be a question of whether, i
t must be a question of how. We have the ideas, we have the resources, and we must find the will to pass a plan by the end of the
 next president's first term.I know there's a cynicism out there about whether this can happen, and there's reason for it. Every 
four years, health care plans are offered up in campaigns with great fanfare and promise. But once those campaigns end, the plans
 collapse under the weight of Washington politics, leaving the rest of America to struggle with skyrocketing costs.For too long, 
this debate has been stunted by what I call the smallness of our politics - the idea that there isn't much we can agree on or do 
about the major challenges facing our country. And when some try to propose something bold, the interests groups and the partisan
s treat it like a sporting event, with each side keeping score of who's up and who's down, using fear and divisiveness and other 
cheap tricks to win their argument, even if we lose our solution in the process.Well we can't afford another disappointing charad
e in 2008. It's not only tiresome, it's wrong. Wrong when businesses have to layoff one employee because they can't afford the he
alth care of another. Wrong when a parent cannot take a sick child to the doctor because they cannot afford the bill that comes w
ith it. Wrong when 46 million Americans have no health care at all. In a country that spends more on health care than any other n
ation on Earth, it's just wrong.And yet, in recent years, what's caught the attention of those who haven't always been in favor o
f reform is the realization that this crisis isn't just morally offensive, it's economically untenable. For years, the can't-do c
rowd has scared the American people into believing that universal health care would mean socialized medicine and burdensome taxes
 - that we should just stay out of the way and tinker at the margins.You know the statistics. Family premiums are up by nearly 87
% over the last five years, growing five times faster than workers' wages. Deductibles are up 50%. Co-payments for care and presc
riptions are through the roof.Nearly 11 million Americans who are already insured spent more than a quarter of their salary on he
alth care last year. And over half of all family bankruptcies today are caused by medical bills.But they say it's too costly to a
ct.Almost half of all small businesses no longer offer health care to their workers, and so many others have responded to rising 
costs by laying off workers or shutting their doors for good. Some of the biggest corporations in America, giants of industry lik
e GM and Ford, are watching foreign competitors based in countries with universal health care run circles around them, with a GM 
car containing twice as much health care cost as a Japanese car.But they say it's too risky to act.They tell us it's too expensiv
e to cover the uninsured, but they don't mention that every time an American without health insurance walks into an emergency roo
m, we pay even more. Our family's premiums are $922 higher because of the cost of care for the uninsured.We pay $15 billion more 
in taxes because of the cost of care for the uninsured. And it's trapped us in a vicious cycle. As the uninsured cause premiums t
o rise, more employers drop coverage. As more employers drop coverage, more people become uninsured, and premiums rise even furth
er.But the skeptics tell us that reform is too costly, too risky, too impossible for America.Well the skeptics must be living som
ewhere else. Because when you see what the health care crisis is doing to our families, to our economy, to our country, you reali
ze that caution is what's costly. Inaction is what's risky. Doing nothing is what's impossible when it comes to health care in Am
erica.It's time to act. This isn't a problem of money, this is a problem of will. A failure of leadership. We already spend $2.2 
trillion a year on health care in this country. My colleague, Senator Ron Wyden, who's recently developed a bold new health care 
plan of his own, tells it this way:For the money Americans spent on health care last year, we could have hired a group of skilled
 physicians, paid each one of them $200,000 to care for just seven families, and guaranteed every single American quality, afford
able health care.So where's all that money going? We know that a quarter of it - one out of every four health care dollars - is s
pent on non-medical costs; mostly bills and paperwork. And we also know that this is completely unnecessary. Almost every other i
ndustry in the world has saved billions on these administrative costs by doing it all online. Every transaction you make at a ban
k now costs them less than a penny. Even at the Veterans Administration, where it used to cost nine dollars to pull up your medic
al record, new technology means you can call up the same record on the internet for next to nothing.But because we haven't update
d technology in the rest of the health care industry, a single transaction still costs up to twenty-five dollars - not one dime o
f which goes toward improving the quality of our health care.This is simply inexcusable, and if we brought our entire health care
 system online, something everyone from Ted Kennedy to Newt Gingrich believes we should do, we'd already be saving over $600 mill
ion a year on health care costs.The federal government should be leading the way here. If you do business with the federal employ
ee health benefits program, you should move to an electronic claims system. If you are a provider who works with Medicare, you sh
ould have to report your patient's health outcomes, so that we can figure out, on a national level, how to improve health care qu
ality. These are all things experts tell us must be done but aren't being done. And the federal government should lead.Another, m
ore controversial area we need to look at is how much of our health care spending is going toward the record-breaking profits ear
ned by the drug and health care industry. It's perfectly understandable for a corporation to try and make a profit, but when thos
e profits are soaring higher and higher each year while millions lose their coverage and premiums skyrocket, we have a responsibi
lity to ask why.At a time when businesses are facing increased competition and workers rarely stay with one company throughout th
eir lives, we also have to ask if the employer-based system of health care itself is still the best for providing insurance to al
l Americans. We have to ask what we can do to provide more Americans with preventative care, which would mean fewer doctor's visi
ts and less cost down the road. We should make sure that every single child who's eligible is signed up for the children's health
 insurance program, and the federal government should make sure that our states have the money to make that happen. And we have t
o start looking at some of the interesting ideas on comprehensive reform that are coming out of states like Maine and Illinois an
d California, to see what we can replicate on a national scale and what will move us toward that goal of universal coverage for a
ll.But regardless of what combination of policies and proposals get us to this goal, we must reach it. We must act. And we must a
ct boldly. As one health care advocate recently said, "The most expensive course is to do nothing." But it wasn't a liberal Democ
rat or union leader who said this.It was the president of the very health industry association that funded the "Harry and Louise"
 ads designed to kill the Clinton health care plan in the early nineties.The debate in this country over health care has shifted.
 The support for comprehensive reform that organizations like Families USA have worked so hard to build is now widespread, and th
e diverse group of business and health industry interests that are part of your Health Care Coverage Coalition is a testament to 
that success. And so Washington no longer has an excuse for caution. Leaders no longer have a reason to be timid. And America can
 no longer afford inaction. That's not who we are - and that's not the story of our nation's improbable progress.Half a century a
go, America found itself in the midst of another health care crisis. For millions of elderly Americans, the single greatest cause
 of poverty and hardship was the crippling cost of health care and the lack of affordable insurance. Two out of every three elder
ly Americans had annual incomes of less than $1,000, and only one in eight had health insurance.As health care and hospital costs
 continued to rise, more and more private insurers simply refused to insure our elderly, believing they were too great of a risk 
to care for.The resistance to action was fierce. Proponents of health care reform were opposed by well-financed, well-connected i
nterest groups who spared no expense in telling the American people that these efforts were "dangerous" and "un-American," "revol
utionary" and even "deadly."And yet the reformers marched on. They testified before Congress and they took their case to the coun
try and they introduced dozens of different proposals but always, always they stood firm on their goal to provide health care for
 every American senior. And finally, after years of advocacy and negotiation and plenty of setbacks, President Lyndon Johnson sig
ned the Medicare bill into law on July 30th of 1965.The signing ceremony was held in Missouri, in a town called Independence, wit
h the first man who was bold enough to issue the call for universal health care - President Harry Truman.And as he stood with Tru
man by his side and signed what would become the most successful government program in history - a program that had seemed imposs
ible for so long - President Johnson looked out at the crowd and said, "History shapes men, but it is a necessary faith of leader
ship that men can help shape history."Never forget that we have it within our power to shape history in this country. It is not i
n our character to sit idly by as victims of fate or circumstance, for we are a people of action and innovation, forever pushing 
the boundaries of what's possible.Now is the time to push those boundaries once more. We have come so far in the debate on health
 care in this country, but now we must finally answer the call first issued by Truman, advanced by Johnson, and fought for by so 
many leaders and Americans throughout the last century. The time has come for universal health care in America. And I look forwar
d to working with all of you to meet this challenge in the weeks and months to come. Thank you. 098-Floor-Statement-on-Iraq-War-D
eescalation-Act-of-2007-Obama-Speech.htmFloor Statement on Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007- Complete TextTOPIC: Iraq Tuesday, 
January 30, 2007 Floor Statement on Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007 Complete Text Mr. President, today in Iraq, we sadly find 
ourselves at the very point I feared most when I opposed giving the President the open-ended authority to wage this war in 2002 -
 an occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences in the midst of a country torn by civ
il war.The American people have waited and the American people have been patient. We have given chance after chance for a resolut
ion that has not come, and, more importantly, watched with horror and grief the tragic loss of thousands of brave young American 
soldiers.The time for waiting in Iraq is over. The days of our open-ended commitment must come to a close. And the need to bring 
this war to an end is here.That is why today, I'm introducing the Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007.This plan would not only pla
ce a cap on the number of troops in Iraq and stop the escalation, more importantly, it would begin a phased redeployment of U.S. 
forces with the goal of removing of all U.S. combat forces from Iraq by March 31st, 2008 - consistent with the expectations of th
e bipartisan Iraq study group that the President has so assiduously ignored.The redeployment of troops to the United States, Afgh
anistan, and elsewhere in the region would begin no later than May 1st of this year, toward the end of the timeframe I first prop
osed in a speech more than two months ago. In a civil war where no military solution exists, this redeployment remains our best l
everage to pressure the Iraqi government to achieve the political settlement between its warring factions that can slow the blood
shed and promote stability.My plan allows for a limited number of U.S. troops to remain as basic force protection, to engage in c
ounter-terrorism, and to continue the training of Iraqi security forces.And if the Iraqis are successful in meeting the thirteen 
benchmarks for progress laid out by the Bush Administration itself, this plan also allows for the temporary suspension of the red
eployment, provided Congress agrees that the benchmarks have actually been met and that the suspension is in the national securit
y interest of the United States.The U.S. military has performed valiantly and brilliantly in Iraq. Our troops have done all that 
we have asked them to do and more. But no amount of American soldiers can solve the political differences at the heart of somebod
y else's civil war, nor settle the grievances in the hearts of the combatants.It is my firm belief that the responsible course of
 action - for the United States, for Iraq, and for our troops - is to oppose this reckless escalation and to pursue a new policy.
 This policy that I've laid out is consistent with what I have advocated for well over a year, with many of the recommendations o
f the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, and with what the American people demanded in the November election.When it comes to the war i
n Iraq, the time for promises and assurances, for waiting and patience, is over. Too many lives have been lost and too many billi
ons have been spent for us to trust the President on another tried and failed policy opposed by generals and experts, Democrats a
nd Republicans, Americans and many of the Iraqis themselves.It is time for us to fundamentally change our policy.It is time to gi
ve Iraqis their country back.And it is time to refocus America's efforts on the challenges we face at home and the wider struggle
 against terror yet to be won. Vote against the Gulf of Mexico Energy Bill TOPIC: Oil & Alternative Fuels August 1, 2006 Statemen
t of Senator Barack Obama Vote against the Gulf of Mexico Energy Bill Complete Text Every one of us in Congress has heard from ou
r constituents about the high cost of gas. A gallon is now $3 or more in most parts of the country, and there is every reason to 
believe that figure will continue to climb throughout the rest of the summer.Americans are asking their members of Congress to he
lp lower some of these costs. And we should do that. But let's not kid ourselves. This is a problem that was decades in the makin
g, and short-term political solutions - whether it's a tax rebate or more legislation to stop price gouging - aren't going to be 
the complete answer.To be sure, most of these proposals would do no harm, and many would provide Americans some temporary relief 
at the pump. But in the long term, we can't rely solely on quick fixes designed to placate an anxious public.We need solutions de
signed to permanently lessen our dependence on foreign oil. Unfortunately, both Congress and the White House have been unwilling 
to take the politically difficult steps necessary to confront one of the most pressing economic and national security challenges 
of the 21st century.A perfect example is the bill before us. It does do some good things: it marginally increases the supply of o
il, and it provides a financial boost to Gulf Coast states that could use the help.But fundamentally, the bill only focuses on pa
rt of the problem - our inadequate supply of oil. Unfortunately, increasing supply can't be our only answer. Even if we opened up
 every square inch of this country for drilling, America only has 3% of the world's oil reserves. With our own Energy Department 
telling us that our demand for oil will jump 40% over the next 20 years and countries like China and India adding millions of car
s to their roads, this means that if we truly hope to solve this problem, we must focus on reducing demand.Members on both sides 
of the aisle have suggested some innovative ways to do this. Senator Lugar and I introduced the America Fuels Act to increase the
 production of homegrown biofuels. And Senator Bunning and I have worked on a bill to produce liquid fuels from coal.Unfortunatel
y, we're not going to have a debate this week on how to reduce the demand for oil, because we weren't allowed to add any amendmen
ts to this bill that would focus on that problem. Because contrary to the judgment of every credible person who has examined our 
nation's energy woes, the Republican leadership in the Senate believes we can solve our energy problems by just drilling more. Th
at's not only dishonest -- it's a disservice to our constituents who want us to work together to solve this crisis.I'd like to sp
end a few minutes today discussing two of the proposals that should have been part of this energy debate - two proposals that cou
ld have made this bill worthwhile.First, we need to start producing cars that use less oil. Thirty-three years ago, this nation f
aced an energy crisis that affected every American. In the shadow of a war against Israel, the Arab nations of OPEC chose to emba
rgo shipments of crude oil to the West. The shocks were felt in national economies worldwide. Washington lawmakers responded by c
reating daylight savings time and a national speed limit. A new Department of Energy and a Strategic Petroleum Reserve was establ
ished. And Congress enacted Corporate Average Fuel Economy - or CAFE - standards, the first-ever requirements to reduce petroleum
 consumption in the vehicles we drive.As a result, the gas mileage of cars doubled from 14 miles per gallon in 1976 to 27.5 mpg f
or cars in 1985. Today, CAFE saves us about 3 million barrels of oil per day, making it among the most successful energy-saving m
easures ever adopted. But that decade's worth of fuel consumption improvements ended more than 20 years ago, because CAFE standar
ds are the same today as they were in 1985 - 27.5 mpg for cars.To address this problem, I have joined with Senator Lugar and a bi
partisan coalition of senators to propose the Fuel Economy Reform Act, which we have also filed as an amendment to the OCS bill.T
his amendment would establish regular, continual, and incremental progress in fuel economy, but still preserve the expertise and 
flexibility of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration - or NHTSA - to determine how to meet those targets.Under this 
proposal, CAFE standards would increase by 4 percent every year unless NHTSA can justify a deviation in that rate by proving that
 the increase is either technologically unachievable, would materially reduce the safety of automobiles, or is not cost-effective
. For too long, the presumption has been that the public would have to prove to the auto industry why it should raise fuel econom
y standards. This proposal would flip that presumption by asking the auto industry to prove why it can't raise those standards.Un
der this system, if the 4 percent annualized improvement occurs for ten years, we would save 1.3 million barrels of oil per day -
 an astounding 20 billion gallons of gasoline per year. If gasoline is just $2.50 per gallon, consumers would save $50 billion at
 the pump in 2018. By 2018, we would be cutting global warming pollution by 220 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 
gases.And yet, auto executives are right when they say that transitioning to more fuel-efficient automobiles would be costly at a
 time of sagging profits and stiff competition, and that's precisely why the federal government shouldn't let the industry face t
hese challenges on their own.The Fuel Economy Act provides tax incentives to retool parts and assembly plants. But we should do m
ore than that. We need to help the Big Three automakers with one of their largest expenses, namely, retiree health care costs, wh
ich ran almost $6.7 billion just last year. For GM, these health care costs represent $1,500 of the price of every GM car that's 
made, which is more than what they pay for the steel.To that end, I also have filed an amendment to this bill based on the Health
 Care for Hybrids Act that I introduced last year. That proposal would set up a voluntary program in which automakers could choos
e to receive federal financial assistance towards their retiree healthcare costs. In return, the automakers would be required to 
reinvest these savings into developing fuel-efficient vehicles.With the American consumer demanding more hybrid vehicles - and th
at demand currently being filled by foreign automakers - this proposal could jumpstart the Big Three to commercialize new technol
ogy. More American hybrid cars also ensure that there is competition in this growing market, and would help keep car prices affor
dable.If we had adopted these two proposals decades ago, when the call for energy independence was first issued in this country, 
today we wouldn't be nearly as beholden to the whims of oil-rich dictators and surging gas prices. And if we don't take these ste
ps now, we will someday look back on today's $3 per gallon gasoline as the good old days. At that point, no amount of drilling on
 the Outer Continental Shelf will solve our problems.We could have taken these common-sense steps now to reduce the demand for oi
l. We have the need, we have the technology, we have the resources - but with this bill, we refused to find the political will to
 get it done. We still owe it to the American public to find that will.Unfortunately, this bill sends the wrong message. Instead 
of making tough political decisions about how to reduce our insatiable demand for oil, this bill continues to lull the American p
eople into thinking that we can drill our way out of our energy problems. We can't, and for that reason, I plan to vote against t
his bill. Honest Leadership and Open Government - Podcast Transcript TOPIC: Ethics & Lobbying Reform January 18, 2006 Honest Lead
ership and Open Government Podcast - Complete TranscriptAs most of you know, I'm from Chicago - a city that hasn't always had the
 cleanest reputation when it comes to politics in this country. In fact, one of the most famous moments in Chicago political life
 came back in the 50s, when one of Chicago's old-time ward bosses, a guy named Paddy Bauer, was reported to have danced on his ch
air after the Chicago machine defeated a reform candidate and shouted out for the entire chamber to hear, that "Chicago ain't rea
dy for reform."I stand here today with my colleagues to say that the American people are ready for reform.In fact, the American p
eople think reform is long overdue.Now, let me say at the outset that none of us claim that the Democrats have a monopoly on virt
ue. Moreover, political corruption is not unique to Washington. During my first year in the Illinois State Senate, I helped lead 
the fight to pass Illinois' first ethics reform bill in twenty-five years - in part to address some of the questionable practices
 that were going on in Springfield.But I think it's fair to say that the scandals that we've seen, both legal and illegal, under 
the current White House and Congress, are far worse than most of us could have imagined.Americans may have grown accustomed to bi
g money and special interests exerting too much influence in Washington, but even they have been shocked by what appears to be a 
systematic takeover of our democracy by high-priced lobbyists.Think about it. In the past several months, we've seen politicians 
resigning for taking millions of dollars in bribes.We've seen the head of the White House procurement office arrested. We've seen
 some of our most powerful leaders of both the House and the Senate under federal investigation. We've seen the number of registe
red lobbyists in Washington double since George Bush came into office. And of course, we've seen the indictment of Jack Abramoff.
Over the past few days, there have been suggestions by Republican operatives and commentators that this is somehow a bipartisan s
candal.But let's be clear - while the Democrats certainly are not without sin when it comes to money in politics, Jack Abramoff a
nd Michael Scanlon and the K Street project - these are Republican sins, and Republican sins alone.What is also true is that the 
offenses involved go beyond Jack Abramoff. They are bigger than golf junkets to Scotland and lavish gifts for lawmakers.The recen
t scandals have shaken the very foundation of the American people's faith in a government that will look out for their interests 
and uphold their values.Because they don't just lead to morally offensive conduct on the part of politicians. They lead to morall
y offensive legislation that hurts hardworking Americans.When big oil companies are invited into the White House for secret energ
y meetings, it's no wonder they end up with billions in tax breaks while Americans still struggle to fill up their gas tanks and 
heat their homes.When the halls of Congress are filled with high-priced lobbyists from the pharmaceutical industry - some who use
d to be members of Congress - it's hardly a surprise that they get taxpayer-funded giveaways in the same Medicare bill that forbi
ds seniors from banding together to negotiate for better drug prices.When the people running Washington are accountable only to t
he special interests that fund their campaigns, of course they'll spend your tax dollars with reckless abandon; of course they'll
 load up bills with pet projects and driving us into deficit with the hope that no one will notice.At this point, the well-connec
ted CEOs and hired guns on K Street who've helped write our laws have gotten what they paid for. They got all the tax breaks and 
loopholes and access they could ever want. But outside this city, the people who can't afford the high-priced lobbyists and don't
 want to break the law are wondering, "When is it our turn? When will someone in Washington stand up for me?"We're here today to 
answer that call because let's face it - for the last few years, the people running Washington simply haven't. And while only som
e are to blame for the corruption that has plagued this city, all are responsible for fixing it.That's why we're asking Republica
ns to put an end to the pay-to-play schemes and join us in passing the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, which should go
 a long way toward correcting some of the most egregious offenses of the last few years.You've already heard some of the key prov
isions in our proposal. It will prevent former Members of Congress from lobbying for legislation they were voting on just a year 
ago, it will provide more transparency to allow the public to see exactly what their representatives are doing in Washington, and
 it will end the gifts and trips that allowed people like Jack Abramoff to influence politicians.I realize that our friends on th
e other side of the aisle have suddenly found religion on this topic, and I think that's commendable. In fact, I look forward to 
working in a bipartisan fashion to get a solid bill passed. But let me close by saying that it's going to take much more than gif
t bans and lobbying reform to restore the public's faith in a government of, by, and for the American people.To earn back that tr
ust - to show people that we're working for them and looking out for their interests - we have to start acting like it.That means
 instead of meeting with lobbyists, it's time to start meeting with some of the 45 million Americans with no health care. Instead
 of hitting up the big firms on K Street, it's time to start visiting the workers on Main Street who are wondering how they'll se
nd their kids to college or whether their pension will be around when they retire. All these people have done to earn access and 
gain influence is cast their ballot, but in this democracy, it's all anyone should have to do. The people running this town need 
to realize that, and if we hope to be real reformers, that's the place we need to start. Election Night Victory Speech Grant Park
, Illinois November 4, 2008If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible; w
ho still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time; who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is yo
ur answer.Its the answer told by lines that stretched around schools and churches in numbers this nation has never seen; by peopl
e who waited three hours and four hours, many for the very first time in their lives, because they believed that this time must b
e different; that their voice could be that difference.Its the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republ
ican, black, white, Latino, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled Americans who sent a message to the 
world that we have never been a collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be, the United States of Americ
a.Its the answer that led those who have been told for so long by so many to be cynical, and fearful, and doubtful of what we can
 achieve to put their hands on the arc of history and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day.Its been a long time comi
ng, but tonight, because of what we did on this day, in this election, at this defining moment, change has come to America.I just
 received a very gracious call from Senator McCain. He fought long and hard in this campaign, and hes fought even longer and hard
er for the country he loves. He has endured sacrifices for America that most of us cannot begin to imagine, and we are better off
 for the service rendered by this brave and selfless leader. I congratulate him and Governor Palin for all they have achieved, an
d I look forward to working with them to renew this nations promise in the months ahead.I want to thank my partner in this journe
y, a man who campaigned from his heart and spoke for the men and women he grew up with on the streets of Scranton and rode with o
n that train home to Delaware, the Vice President-elect of the United States, Joe Biden.I would not be standing here tonight with
out the unyielding support of my best friend for the last sixteen years, the rock of our family and the love of my life, our nati
ons next First Lady, Michelle Obama. Sasha and Malia, I love you both so much, and you have earned the new puppy thats coming wit
h us to the White House. And while shes no longer with us, I know my grandmother is watching, along with the family that made me 
who I am. I miss them tonight, and know that my debt to them is beyond measure.To my campaign manager David Plouffe, my chief str
ategist David Axelrod, and the best campaign team ever assembled in the history of politics you made this happen, and I am foreve
r grateful for what youve sacrificed to get it done.But above all, I will never forget who this victory truly belongs to it belon
gs to you.I was never the likeliest candidate for this office. We didnt start with much money or many endorsements. Our campaign 
was not hatched in the halls of Washington it began in the backyards of Des Moines and the living rooms of Concord and the front 
porches of Charleston.It was built by working men and women who dug into what little savings they had to give five dollars and te
n dollars and twenty dollars to this cause. It grew strength from the young people who rejected the myth of their generations apa
thy; who left their homes and their families for jobs that offered little pay and less sleep; from the not-so-young people who br
aved the bitter cold and scorching heat to knock on the doors of perfect strangers; from the millions of Americans who volunteere
d, and organized, and proved that more than two centuries later, a government of the people, by the people and for the people has
 not perished from this Earth. This is your victory. I know you didnt do this just to win an election and I know you didnt do it 
for me. You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the
 challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in 
a century. Even as we stand here tonight, we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of
 Afghanistan to risk their lives for us. There are mothers and fathers who will lie awake after their children fall asleep and wo
nder how theyll make the mortgage, or pay their doctors bills, or save enough for college. There is new energy to harness and new
 jobs to be created; new schools to build and threats to meet and alliances to repair.The road ahead will be long. Our climb will
 be steep. We may not get there in one year or even one term, but America I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that w
e will get there. I promise you we as a people will get there.There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who wont ag
ree with every decision or policy I make as President, and we know that government cant solve every problem. But I will always be
 honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And above all, I will ask you j
oin in the work of remaking this nation the only way its been done in America for two-hundred and twenty-one years block by block
, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand.What began twenty-one months ago in the depths of winter must not end on this 
autumn night. This victory alone is not the change we seek it is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happ
en if we go back to the way things were. It cannot happen without you.So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism; of service and
 responsibility where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves, but each other. Let us r
emember that if this financial crisis taught us anything, its that we cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffer
s in this country, we rise or fall as one nation; as one people.Let us resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanshi
p and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long. Let us remember that it was a man from this state who 
first carried the banner of the Republican Party to the White House a party founded on the values of self-reliance, individual li
berty, and national unity. Those are values we all share, and while the Democratic Party has won a great victory tonight, we do s
o with a measure of humility and determination to heal the divides that have held back our progress. As Lincoln said to a nation 
far more divided than ours, We are not enemies, but friendsthough passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affect
ion. And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn I may not have won your vote, but I hear your voices, I need your he
lp, and I will be your President too.And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces to th
ose who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of our world our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and 
a new dawn of American leadership is at hand. To those who would tear this world down we will defeat you. To those who seek peace
 and security we support you. And to all those who have wondered if Americas beacon still burns as bright tonight we proved once 
more that the true strength of our nation comes not from our the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the endur
ing power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity, and unyielding hope.For that is the true genius of America that America
 can change. Our union can be perfected. And what we have already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve tomorro
w.This election had many firsts and many stories that will be told for generations. But one thats on my mind tonight is about a w
oman who cast her ballot in Atlanta. Shes a lot like the millions of others who stood in line to make their voice heard in this e
lection except for one thing Ann Nixon Cooper is 106 years old.She was born just a generation past slavery; a time when there wer
e no cars on the road or planes in the sky; when someone like her couldnt vote for two reasons because she was a woman and becaus
e of the color of her skin.And tonight, I think about all that shes seen throughout her century in America the heartache and the 
hope; the struggle and the progress; the times we were told that we cant, and the people who pressed on with that American creed:
 Yes we can.At a time when womens voices were silenced and their hopes dismissed, she lived to see them stand up and speak out an
d reach for the ballot. Yes we can.When there was despair in the dust bowl and depression across the land, she saw a nation conqu
er fear itself with a New Deal, new jobs and a new sense of common purpose. Yes we can.When the bombs fell on our harbor and tyra
nny threatened the world, she was there to witness a generation rise to greatness and a democracy was saved. Yes we can.She was t
here for the buses in Montgomery, the hoses in Birmingham, a bridge in Selma, and a preacher from Atlanta who told a people that 
We Shall Overcome. Yes we can.A man touched down on the moon, a wall came down in Berlin, a world was connected by our own scienc
e and imagination. And this year, in this election, she touched her finger to a screen, and cast her vote, because after 106 year
s in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how America can change. Yes we can.America, we have c
ome so far. We have seen so much. But there is so much more to do. So tonight, let us ask ourselves if our children should live t
o see the next century; if my daughters should be so lucky to live as long as Ann Nixon Cooper, what change will they see? What p
rogress will we have made?This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment. This is our time to put our people back to 
work and open doors of opportunity for our kids; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American Dr
eam and reaffirm that fundamental truth that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope, and where we are met with c
ynicism, and doubt, and those who tell us that we cant, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a peo
ple:Yes We Can. Thank you, God bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America. HURRICANE KATRINA RELIEF EFFORTS TOPIC:
 Katrina & Gulf Recovery September 6, 2005 Statement of Senator Barack Obama Hurricane Katrina Relief Efforts Complete Text I jus
t got back from a trip to Houston with former Presidents Clinton and Bush. And as we wandered through the crowd, we heard in very
 intimate terms the heart-wrenching stories that all of us have witnessed from a distance over the past several days: mothers sep
arated from babies, adults mourning the loss of elderly parents, descriptions of the heat and filth and fear of the Superdome and
 the Convention Center. There was an overriding sense of relief, for the officials in Houston have done an outstanding job of cre
ating a clean and stable place for these families in the short-term. But a conversation I had with one woman captured the realiti
es that are settling into these families as they face the future. She told me "We had nothing before the hurricane. Now we got le
ss than nothing."We had nothing before the hurricane. Now we got less than nothing.In the coming weeks, as the images of the imme
diate crisis fade and this chamber becomes consumed with other matters, we will be hearing a lot about lessons learned and steps 
to be taken. I will be among those voices calling for action.In the most immediate term, we will have to assure that the efforts 
at evacuating families from the affected states proceeds - that these Americans are fed, clothed, housed, and provided with the i
mmediate care and medicine that they need. We're going to have to make sure that we cut through red tape. I can say from personal
 experience how frustrating, how unconscionable it is, that it has been so difficult to get medical supplies to those in need qui
ckly enough. We should make certain that any impediments that may continue to exist in preventing relief efforts from moving rapi
dly are eliminated.Once we stabilize the situation, this country will face an enormous challenge in providing stability for displ
aced families over the months and years that it will take to rebuild. Already, the state of Illinois has committed to accepting 1
0,000 families that are displaced. There are stories in Illinois as there are everywhere of churches, mosques, synagogues and ind
ividual families welcoming people with open arms and no strings attached. Indeed, if there's any bright light that has come out o
f this disaster, it's the degree to which ordinary Americans have responded with speed and determination even as their government
 has responded with unconscionable ineptitude.Which brings me to the next point. Once the situation is stable, once families are 
settled - at least for the short term - once children are reunited with their parents and enrolled in schools and the wounds have
 healed, we're gonna have to do some hard thinking about how we could have failed our fellow citizens so badly, and how we will p
revent such a failure from ever occurring again.It is not politics to insist that we have an independent commission to examine th
ese issues. Indeed, one of the heartening things about this crisis has been the degree to which the outrage has come from across 
the political spectrum; across races; across incomes. The degree to which the American people sense that we can and must do bette
r, and a recognition that if we cannot cope with a crisis that has been predicted for decades - a crisis in which we're given fou
r or five days notice - how can we ever hope to respond to a serious terrorist attack in a major American city in which there is 
no notice, and in which the death toll and panic and disruptions may be far greater?Which brings me to my final point. There's be
en much attention in the press about the fact that those who were left behind in New Orleans were disproportionately poor and Afr
ican American. I've said publicly that I do not subscribe to the notion that the painfully slow response of FEMA and the Departme
nt of Homeland Security was racially-based. The ineptitude was colorblind.But what must be said is that whoever was in charge of 
planning and preparing for the worst case scenario appeared to assume that every American has the capacity to load up their famil
y in an SUV, fill it up with $100 worth of gasoline, stick some bottled water in the trunk, and use a credit card to check in to 
a hotel on safe ground. I see no evidence of active malice, but I see a continuation of passive indifference on the part of our g
overnment towards the least of these.And so I hope that out of this crisis we all begin to reflect - Democrat and Republican - on
 not only our individual responsibilities to ourselves and our families, but to our mutual responsibilities to our fellow America
ns. I hope we realize that the people of New Orleans weren't just abandoned during the Hurricane. They were abandoned long ago - 
to murder and mayhem in their streets; to substandard schools; to dilapidated housing; to inadequate health care; to a pervasive 
sense of hopelessness.That is the deeper shame of this past week - that it has taken a crisis like this one to awaken us to the g
reat divide that continues to fester in our midst. That's what all Americans are truly ashamed about, and the fact that we're ash
amed about it is a good sign. The fact that all of us - black, white, rich, poor, Republican, Democrat - don't like to see such a
 reflection of this country we love, tells me that the American people have better instincts and a broader heart than our current
 politics would indicate.We had nothing before the Hurricane. Now we have even less.I hope that we all take the time to ponder th
e truth of that message. LITERACY AND EDUCATION IN A 21ST-CENTURY ECONOMY TOPIC: Education Saturday, June 25th, 2005 "Literacy an
d Education in a 21st-Century Economy" Complete Text Thank you. It's an honor to be here with the hundreds of dedicated librarian
s who make up the American Library Association. Before we begin, I'd like to say a special hello to ALA member Nancy Gibbs, who i
s the mother of my communications director, Robert Gibbs. Believe me, I have no idea how the biggest mouth in our office came fro
m a family of two librarians, but we're proud to have him on board and I'm sure you are too. I'd also like to give a shout-out to
 my librarians from the Punahou School in Hawaii - Molly Lyman, Joan Kaaua, and Lillian Hiratani. I'd like to offer them an apolo
gy too, for all those times I couldn't keep myself out of trouble and ended up sitting in their library on a timeout, trying to c
ause even more trouble there. Sorry ladies.It is a pleasure to address you today because of what libraries represent. More than a
 building that houses books and data, the library has always been a window to a larger world - a place where we've always come to
 discover big ideas and profound concepts that help move the American story forward.And at a time when truth and science are cons
tantly being challenged by political agendas and ideologies; a time where so many refuse to teach evolution in our schools, where
 fake science is used to beat back attempts to curb global warming or fund life-saving research; libraries remind us that truth i
sn't about who yells the loudest, but who has the right information. Because even as we're the most religious of people, America'
s innovative genius has always been preserved because we also have a deep faith in facts.And so the moment we persuade a child, a
ny child, to cross that threshold into a library, we've changed their lives forever, and for the better. This is an enormous forc
e for good.So I'm here to gratefully acknowledge the importance of libraries and the work you do. I also want to work with you to
 insure that libraries continue to be sanctuaries for learning, where we are free to read and consider what we please, without th
e fear of Big Brother peering menacingly over our shoulders.Now, some of you might have heard about this speech I gave at the Dem
ocratic Convention last summer. It ended up making some news here and there, and one of the lines that people seem to remember wa
s when I said that "We don't like federal agents poking around our libraries in the Red States."What many people don't remember i
s that for years, librarians are the ones who've been on the frontlines of this fight for privacy and freedom. There have always 
been dark times in our history where America has strayed from the ideals that make us a great nation. But the question has always
 been, can we overcome? And you have always been a group of Americans who have answered a resounding "yes" to that question.When 
political groups try to censor great works of literature, you're the ones putting Huck Finn and Catcher in the Rye back on the sh
elves, making sure that our right to free thought and free information is protected. And ever since we've had to worry about our 
own government looking over our shoulders in the library, you've been there to stand up and speak out on privacy issues. You're f
ull-time defenders of the most fundamental American liberties, and for that, you deserve America's deepest gratitude.You also des
erve our protection. That's why I've been working with Republicans and Democrats to make sure we have a Patriot Act that helps us
 track down terrorists without trampling on our civil liberties. This is an issue that Washington always tries to make "either-or
." Either we protect our people from terror or we protect our most cherished principles. But this kind of choice asks too little 
of us and assumes too little about America. We can harness new technologies and a new toughness to find terrorists before they st
rike while still protecting the very freedoms we're fighting for in the first place.I know that some of you here have been subjec
t to FBI or other law enforcement orders asking for reading records. And so I hope we can pass a provision like the House of Repr
esentatives did that would require federal agents to get these kinds of search warrants from a real judge in a real court, just l
ike everyone else does. In the Senate, the bipartisan bill that we're working on, known as the SAFE Act, will prevent the federal
 government from freely rifling through emails and library records without first obtaining such a warrant. Giving law enforcement
 the tools they need to investigate suspicious activity is one thing; but doing it without the approval of our judicial system se
riously jeopardizes the rights of all Americans and the ideals America stands for.Now, in addition to the line about federal agen
ts poking around in our libraries, there was also another line in the convention speech that received a lot of attention - a line
 I'd like to talk more about today. At one point in the speech, I mentioned that the people I've met all across Illinois know tha
t government can't solve all their problems. They know that, quote, "...parents have to parent, that children can't achieve unles
s we raise their expectations and turn off the television sets and eradicate the slander that says a black youth with a book is a
cting white."I included this line in the speech because I believe that we have a serious challenge to meet. I believe that if we 
want to give our children the best possible chance in life; if we want to open doors of opportunity while they're young and teach
 them the skills they'll need to succeed later on, then one of our greatest responsibilities as citizens, as educators, and as pa
rents is to ensure that every American child can read and read well.This isn't just another education debate where the answer lie
s somewhere between more money and less bureaucracy. It's a responsibility that begins at home - one that we need to take on befo
re our kids ever step foot in a classroom; one that we need to carry through well into their teenage years.That's because literac
y is the most basic currency of the knowledge economy we're living in today. Only a few generations ago, it was okay to enter the
 workforce as a high school dropout who could only read at a third-grade level. Whether it was on a farm or in a factory, you cou
ld still hope to find a job that would allow you to pay the bills and raise your family.But that economy is long gone. As revolut
ions in technology and communication began breaking down barriers between countries and connecting people all over the world, new
 jobs and industries that require more skill and knowledge have come to dominate the economy. Whether it's software design or com
puter engineering or financial analysis, corporations can locate these jobs anywhere there's an internet connection. And so as co
untries like China and India continue to modernize their economies and educate their children longer and better, the competition 
American workers face will grow more intense; the necessary skills more demanding.These new jobs are about what you know and how 
fast you can learn what you don't know. They require innovative thinking, detailed comprehension, and superior communication.But 
before our children can even walk into an interview for one of these jobs; before they can ever fill out an application or earn t
he required college degree; they have to be able to pick up a book, read it, and understand it. Nothing is more basic; no ability
 more fundamental.Reading is the gateway skill that makes all other learning possible, from complex word problems and the meaning
 of our history to scientific discovery and technological proficiency. In a knowledge economy where this kind of learning is nece
ssary for survival, how can we send our kids out into the world if they're only reading at a fourth grade level?I don't know, but
 we do. Day after day, year after year.Right now, one out of every five adults in the United States can't read a simple story to 
their child. During the last twenty years or so, over ten million Americans reached the 12th grade without having learned to read
 at a basic level.But these literacy problems start far before high school. In 2000, only 32% of all fourth graders tested as rea
ding proficient. And the story gets worse when you take race and income into consideration. Children from low-income families sco
re 27 points below the average reading level, while students from wealthy families score fifteen points above the average. And wh
ile only one in twelve white seventeen-year-olds has the ability to pick up the newspaper and understand the science section, for
 Hispanics the number jumps to one in fifty; for African Americans it's one in one hundred.In this new economy, teaching our kids
 just enough so that they can get through Dick and Jane isn't going to cut it. Over the last ten years, the average literacy requ
ired for all American occupations is projected to rise by 14%. It's not enough just to recognize the words on the page anymore - 
the kind of literacy necessary for 21st century employment requires detailed understanding and complex comprehension. But too man
y kids simply aren't learning at that level.And yet, every year we pass more of these kids through school or watch as more dropou
t. These kids who will pour through the Help Wanted section and cross off job and after job that requires skills they just don't 
have. And others who will have to take that Help Wanted section, walk it over to someone else, and find the courage to ask, "Will
 you read this for me?"We have to change our whole mindset in this country. We're living in a 21st century knowledge economy, but
 our schools, our homes, and our culture are still based around 20th century expectations. It might seem like we're doing kids a 
favor by teaching them just enough to count change and read a food label, but in this economy, it's doing them a huge disservice.
 Instead, we need to start setting high standards and inspirational examples for our children to follow. While there's plenty tha
t can be done to improve our schools and reform education in America, this isn't just an issue where we can turn to the governmen
t and ask for help. Reading has to begin at home.We know that children who start Kindergarten with an awareness of letters and ba
sic language sounds become better readers and face fewer challenges in the years ahead. We also know that the more reading materi
al kids are exposed to at home, the better they score on reading tests throughout their lives. So we need to make investments in 
family literacy programs and early childhood education so that kids aren't left behind before they even go to school. And we need
 to get books in our kids' hands early and often.I know that this is often easier said than done. Parents today still have the to
ughest job in the world - and no one ever thanks you enough for doing it. You're working longer and harder than ever, juggling jo
b and family responsibilities, and trying to be everywhere at once. When you're home, you might try to get your kids to read, but
 you're competing with the other byproducts of the technological revolution: video games and DVDs that they just have to have; TV
s in every room of the household. Children eight to eighteen now spend three hours a day watching TV, while they only spend 43 mi
nutes reading.Our kids aren't just seeing these temptations at home - they're everywhere. Whether it's their friends or the peopl
e they see on TV or a general culture that glorifies anti-intellectualism, it's too easy for kids today to put down a book and tu
rn their attention elsewhere. And it's too easy for the rest of us to make excuses for it - pretending that putting a baby in fro
nt of a DVD is educational, letting a twelve-year-old skip reading as long as he's playing good video games, or substituting dinn
er in front of the TV for family conversation.We know that's not what our kids need. We know that's not what's best for them. And
 so as parents, we need to find the time and the energy to step in and find ways to help our kids love reading. We can read to th
em, talk to them about what they're reading and make time for this by turning off the TV ourselves.Libraries can help parents wit
h this. Knowing the constraints we face from busy schedules and a TV culture, we need to think outside the box here - to dream bi
g like we always have in America. Right now, children come home from their first doctor's appointment with an extra bottle of for
mula. But imagine if they came home with their first library card or their first copy of Goodnight Moon?What if it was as easy to
 get a book as it is to rent a DVD or pick up McDonalds? What if instead of a toy in every Happy Meal, there was a book? What if 
there were portable libraries that rolled through parks and playgrounds like ice cream trucks? Or kiosks in stores where you coul
d borrow books? What if during the summer, when kids often lose much of the reading progress they've made during the year, every 
child had a list of books they had to read and talk about and an invitation to a summer reading club at the local library?Librari
es have a special role to play in our knowledge economy. Your institution has been and should be the place where parents and kids
 come to read together and learn together. We should take our kids here more, and we should make sure politicians aren't closing 
libraries down because they had to spend a few extra bucks on tax cuts instead.Each of you has a role here too. You can get more 
kids to walk through your doors by building on the ideas so many of you are already pursuing - book clubs and contests, homework 
help and advertising your services throughout the community. In the years ahead, this is our challenge - and this must be our res
ponsibility.As a librarian or as a parent, every one of you here today can probably remember the look on a child's face after fin
ishing a first book. They turn that last page and stare up at you with those wide eyes, and in that look you find such a sense of
 accomplishment and pride; of great potential and so much possibility.And in that moment, there's nothing we want more than to nu
rture that hope; to make all those possibilities and all those opportunities real for our children; to have the ability to answer
 the question, "What can I be when I grow up?" with "Anything you want - anything you can dream of."It's a hope that's as old as 
the American story itself. From the moment the first immigrants arrived on these shores, generations of parents have worked hard 
and sacrificed whatever is necessary so that their children could have the same chances they had; or the chances they never had. 
Because while we could never ensure that our children would be rich or successful; while we could never be positive that they wou
ld do better than their parents, America is about making it possible to give them the chance. To give every child the opportunity
 to try.Education is still the foundation of this opportunity. And the most basic building block that holds that foundation toget
her is still reading. At the dawn of the 21st century, in a world where knowledge truly is power and literacy is the skill that u
nlocks the gates of opportunity and success, we all have a responsibility as parents and librarians, educators and citizens, to i
nstill in our children a love of reading so that we can give them the chance to fulfill their dreams. Thank you. Take Back Americ
a Speech TOPIC: Our Past, Our Future & Vision for America June 14, 2006 Remarks of Senator Barack Obama: Take Back America Comple
te Text Thank you. Thank you Roger Hickey and Bob Borosage for bringing us all together today and thank you for your leadership i
n the cause of a more progressive America.My friends, we meet here today at a time where we find ourselves at a crossroads in Ame
rica's history.It's a time where you can go to any town hall or street corner or coffee shop and hear people express the same anx
iety about the future; hear them convey the same uncertainty about the direction we're headed as a country. Whether it's the war 
or Katrina or their health care or their jobs, you hear people say that we've finally arrived at a moment where something must ch
ange.These are Americans who still believe in an America where anything's possible - they just don't think their leaders do. Thes
e are Americans who still dream big dreams -they just sense their leaders have forgotten how.I remember when I first ran for the 
state Senate - my very first race. A seat had opened up, and some friends asked me if I'd be interested in running. Well, I thoug
ht about it, and then I did what every wise man does when faced with a difficult decision: I prayed, and I asked my wife.And afte
r consulting with these higher powers, I threw my hat in the ring and I did what every person on a campaign does - I talked to an
yone who'd listen.I went to bake sales and barber shops and if there were two guys standing on the corner I'd pull up and hand th
em literature. And everywhere I went I'd get two questions:First, they'd ask, "Where'd you get that funny name, Barack Obama?" Be
cause people just couldn't pronounce it. They'd call me "Alabama," or they'd call me "Yo Mama." And I'd have to explain that I go
t the name from my father, who was from Kenya.And the second thing people would ask me was, "You seem like a nice young man.You t
each law school, you're a civil rights attorney, you organize voter registration, you're a family man - why would you wanna go in
to something dirty and nasty like politics?"And I understood the question because it revealed the cynicism people feel about publ
ic life today. That even though we may get involved out of civic obligation every few years, we don't always have confidence that
 government can make a difference in our lives.So I understand the cynicism. But whenever I get in that mood, I think about somet
hing that happened to me on the eve of my election to the United States Senate.We had held a large rally the night before in the 
Southside of Chicago, which is where I live. And in the midst of this rally, someone comes up to me and says that there's a woman
 who'd like to come meet you, and she's traveled a long way and she wants to take a picture and shake your hand.And so I said fin
e, and I met her, and we talked.And all of this would have been unremarkable except for the fact that this woman, Marguerite Lewi
s, was born in 1899 and was 105 years old.And ever since I met this frail, one-hundred-and-five-year-old African-American woman w
ho had found the strength to leave her house and come to a rally because she believed that her voice mattered, I've thought about
 all she's seen in her life.I've thought about the fact that when she was born, there weren't cars on the road, and no airplanes 
in the sky. That she was born under the cloud of Jim Crow, free in theory but still enslaved in so many ways. That she was born a
t a time for black folks when lynchings were not uncommon, but voting was.I've thought about how she lived to see a world war and
 a Great Depression and a second world war, and how she saw her brothers and uncles and nephews and cousins coming home from thos
e wars and still have to sit at the back of a bus.And I thought about how she saw women finally win the right to vote. And how sh
e watched FDR lift this nation out of fear and send millions to college on the GI Bill and lift millions out of poverty with Soci
al Security. How she saw unions rise up and a middle-class prosper, and watched immigrants leave distant shores in search of an i
dea known as America.She believed in this idea with all her heart and she saw this progress around her and she had faith that som
eday it would be her turn. And when she finally she saw hope breaking through the horizon in the Civil Rights Movement, she thoug
ht, "Maybe it's my turn."And in that movement, she saw women who were willing to walk instead of ride the bus after a day of doin
g somebody else's laundry and looking after somebody else's children because they walked for freedom. And she saw young people of
 every race and every creed take a bus down to Mississippi and Alabama to register voters because they believed. She saw four lit
tle girls die in a Sunday school and catalyze a nation.And at last - at last - she saw the passage of the Civil Rights Act and th
e Voting Rights Act.And she saw people lining up to vote for the first time - and she got in that line - and she never forgot it.
 She kept on voting in each and every election because she believed. She believed that over a span of three centuries, she had se
en enough to know that there is no challenge too great, no injustice too crippling, no destiny too far out of reach for America.S
he believed that we don't have to settle for equality for some or opportunity for the lucky or freedom for the few.And she knew t
hat during those moments in history where it looked like we might give up hope or settle for less, there have always been America
ns who refused. Who said we're going to keep on dreaming, and we're going to keep on building, and we're going to keep on marchin
g, and we're going to keep on working because that's who we are. Because we've always fought to bring all of our people under the
 blanket of the American Dream.And I think that we face one of those moments today.In a century just six years old, our faith has
 been shaken by war and terror, disaster and despair, threats to the middle-class dream, and scandal and corruption in our govern
ment.The sweeping changes brought by revolutions in technology have torn down walls between business and government and people an
d places all over the globe. And with this new world comes new risks and new dangers.No longer can we assume that a high-school e
ducation is enough to compete for a job that could easily go to a college-educated student in Bangalore or Beijing. No more can w
e count on employers to provide health care and pensions and job training when their bottom-lines know no borders. Never again ca
n we expect the oceans that surround America to keep us safe from attacks on our own soil.The world has changed. And as a result,
 we've seen families work harder for less and our jobs go overseas. We've seen the cost of health care and child care and gasolin
e skyrocket. We've seen our children leave for Iraq and terrorists threaten to finish the job they started on 9/11.But while the 
world has changed around us, too often our government has stood still. Our faith has been shaken, but the people running Washingt
on aren't willing to make us believe again.It's the timidity - the smallness - of our politics that's holding us back right now. 
The idea that some problems are just too big to handle, and if you just ignore them, sooner or later, they'll go away.That if you
 give a speech where you rattle off statistics about the stock market being up and orders for durable goods being on the rise, no
 one will notice the single mom whose two jobs won't pay the bills or the student who can't afford his college dreams.That if you
 say the words "plan for victory" and point to the number of schools painted and roads paved and cell phones used in Iraq, no one
 will notice the nearly 2,500 flag-draped coffins that have arrived at Dover Air Force base.Well it's time we finally said we not
ice, and we care, and we're not gonna settle anymore.You know, you probably never thought you'd hear this at a Take Back America 
conference, but Newt Gingrich made a great point a few weeks ago. He was talking about what an awful job his own party has done g
overning this country, and he said that with all the mistakes and misjudgments the Republicans have made over the last six years,
 the slogan for the Democrats should come down to just two words:Had enough?I don't know about you, but I think old Newt is onto 
something here. Because I think we've all had enough. Enough of the broken promises. Enough of the failed leadership. Enough of t
he can't-do, won't-do, won't-even-try style of governance.Four years after 9/11, I've had enough of being told that we can find t
he money to give Paris Hilton more tax cuts, but we can't find enough to protect our ports or our railroads or our chemical plant
s or our borders.I've had enough of the closed-door deals that give billions to the HMOs when we're told that we can't do a thing
 for the 45 million uninsured or the millions more who can't pay their medical bills.I've had enough of being told that we can't 
afford body armor for our troops and health care for our veterans and benefits for the wounded heroes who've risked their lives f
or this country. I've had enough of that.I've had enough of giving billions away to the oil companies when we're told that we can
't invest in the renewable energy that will create jobs and lower gas prices and finally free us from our dependence on the oil w
ells of Saudi Arabia.I've had enough of our kids going to schools where the rats outnumber the computers. I've had enough of Katr
ina survivors living out of their cars and begging FEMA for trailers. And I've had enough of being told that all we can do about 
this is sit and wait and hope that the good fortune of a few trickles on down to everyone else in this country.You know, we all r
emember that George Bush said in 2000 campaign that he was against nation-building. We just didn't know he was talking about this
 one.Now, let me say this - I don't think that George Bush is a bad man. I think he loves his country. I don't think this adminis
tration is full of stupid people - I think there are a lot of smart folks in there. The problem isn't that their philosophy isn't
 working the way it's supposed to - it's that it is. It's that it's doing exactly what it's supposed to do.The reason they don't 
believe government has a role in solving national problems is because they think government is the problem. That we're better off
 if we dismantle it - if we divvy it up into individual tax breaks, hand 'em out, and encourage everyone to go buy your own healt
h care, your own retirement security, your own child care, their own schools, your own private security force, your own roads, th
eir own levees...It's called the Ownership Society in Washington. But in our past there has been another term for it - Social Dar
winism - every man or women for him or herself.It allows us to say to those whose health care or tuition may rise faster than the
y can afford - life isn't fair. It allows us to say to the child who didn't have the foresight to choose the right parents or be 
born in the right suburb - pick yourself up by your bootstraps. It lets us say to the guy who worked twenty or thirty years in th
e factory and then watched his plant move out to Mexico or China - we're sorry, but you're on your own.It's a bracing idea. It's 
a tempting idea. And it's the easiest thing in the world.But there's just one problem. It doesn't work. It ignores our history. Y
es, our greatness as a nation has depended on individual initiative, on a belief in the free market. But it has also depended on 
our sense of mutual regard for each other, of mutual responsibility. The idea that everybody has a stake in the country, that we'
re all in it together and everybody's got a shot at opportunity.Americans know this. We know that government can't solve all our 
problems - and we don't want it to.But we also know that there are some things we can't do on our own. We know that there are som
e things we do better together.We know that we've been called in churches and mosques, synagogues and Sunday schools to love our 
neighbors as ourselves; to be our brother's keeper; to be our sister's keeper. That we have individual responsibility, but we als
o have collective responsibility to each other.That's what America is.And so I am eager to have this argument not just with the P
resident, but the entire Republican Party over what this country is about.Because I think that this is our moment to lead.The tim
e for our party's identity crisis is over. Don't let anyone tell you we don't know what we stand for and don't doubt it yourselve
s. We know who we are. And in the end, we know that it isn't enough to just say that you've had enough.So let it be said that we 
are the party of opportunity. That in a global economy that's more connected and more competitive - we are the party that will gu
arantee every American an affordable, world-class, top-notch, life-long education - from early childhood to high school, from col
lege to on-the-job training.Let it be said that we are the party of affordable, accessible health care for all Americans. The par
ty that won't make Americans choose between a health care plan that bankrupts the government and one that bankrupts families. The
 party that won't just throw a few tax breaks at families who can't afford their insurance, but modernizes our health care system
 and gives every family a chance to buy insurance at a price they can afford.Let it be said that we are the party of an energy in
dependent America. The party that's not bought and paid for by the oil companies. The party that will harness homegrown, alternat
ive fuels and spur the production of fuel-efficient, hybrid cars to break our dependence on the world's most dangerous regimes.Le
t it be said that we will conduct a smart foreign policy that battles the forces of terrorism and fundamentalism wherever they ma
y exist by matching the might of our military with the power of our diplomacy and the strength of our alliances. And when we do g
o to war, let us always be honest with the American people about why we are there and how we will win.And let it be said that we 
are the party of open, honest government that doesn't peddle the agenda of whichever lobbyist or special interest can write the b
iggest check. The party who believes that in this democracy, influence and access should begin and end with the power of the ball
ot.If we do all this, if we can be trusted to lead, this will not be a Democratic Agenda, it will be an American agenda. Because 
in the end, we may be proud Democrats, but we are prouder Americans. We're tired of being divided, tired of running into ideologi
cal walls and partisan roadblocks, tired of appeals to our worst instincts and greatest fears.Americans everywhere are desperate 
for leadership. They are longing for direction. And they want to believe again. A while ago, I was reading through Jonathan Kozol
's new book, Shame of a Nation, which tells of his travels to underprivileged schools across America.At one point, Kozol tells ab
out his trip to Fremont High School in Los Angeles, where he met a girl who tells him that she'd taken hairdressing twice, becaus
e there were actually two different levels offered by the high school. The first was in hairstyling; the other in braiding.Anothe
r girl, Mireya, listened as her friend told this story. And she began to cry. When asked what was wrong, she said, "I don't want 
to take hairdressing. I did not need sewing either. I knew how to sew. My mother is a seamstress in a factory. I'm trying to go t
o college. I don't need to sew to go to college. My mother sews. I hoped for something else."I hoped for something else.I've ofte
n thought about Mireya and her simple dream and all those before her who've shared that dream too.And I've wondered - if she is l
ucky enough to live as long as 105-year-old Marguerite Lewis, if she someday has the chance to look back across the twenty-first 
century, what will she see? Will she see a country that is freer and kinder, more tolerant and more just than the one she grew up
 in? Will she see greater opportunities for every citizen of this country? Will all her childhood hopes be fulfilled?We are here 
tonight because we believe that in this country, we have it within our power to say "yes" to those questions - to forge our own d
estiny - to begin the world anew.Ladies and gentlemen, this is our time.Our time to make a mark on history.Our time to write a ne
w chapter in the American story.Our time to leave our children a country that is freer and kinder, more prosperous and more just 
than the place we grew up.And then someday, someday, if our kids get the chance to stand where we are and look back at the beginn
ing of the 21st century, they can say that this was the time when America renewed its purpose.They can say that this was the time
 when America found its way.They can say that this was the time when America learned to dream again. Honoring Our Commitment to V
eterans - Podcast - Transcript TOPIC: Veterans May 18, 2006 Honoring Our Commitment to Veterans Complete Transcript Hello, this i
s Senator Barack Obama and today is Thursday, May 18th, 2006.We've been having some big debates here in Washington; obviously Ira
q and Iran are still high on the list. We've also been immersed in the immigration bill, which is actually making more progress t
han I had expected. I'll be frank with you - I was concerned that after negotiations broke down that we were not going to be able
 to get a bill out of the Senate. I think, actually, at this point that we may get a comprehensive bill out of the Senate, then t
he challenge is going to be making sure that we're able to negotiate with House members to reconcile differences and ensure that 
we've got a piece of legislation that both deals with border security, ensures that employers have to verify the employment statu
s of their employees, and also gives a pathway to citizenship to the 11 to 12 million people who are already here but undocumente
d.But I want to just shift gears today. This is an issue that is important to an awful lot of people in Illinois, its also import
ant to a lot of people in states around the country. Some of you may recall, if you've been following the work that we've been do
ing, that I'm on the Veterans Affairs Committee and however you feel about the war in Iraq, however you feel about past wars, I t
hink all of us, Republican, Democrat, urban, rural, whatever your demographic, should share in the belief that when a young man o
r woman goes off and serves our country in the military, that they should be treated with the utmost dignity and respect when the
y come home. That should especially be true for those who have suffered disabilities on the battlefield. Anybody who's ever visit
ed Walter Reed Hospital here in Washington and has seen twenty year-olds and twenty-two year-olds who have had legs amputated or 
suffered severe nerve damage I think understands they have made an unbelievable sacrifice on our behalf and that we've got an obl
igation to make sure that just as they are fighting on our behalf that we are going to make sure that we fight for their behalf w
hen they come home.It turned out that a number of veterans in states including Illinois had been apparently short-changed in term
s of their disability payments. Typically, veterans who've been injured receive some sort of disability payment. They are evaluat
ed by various regional offices of Veterans Affairs, and they are awarded a certain percentage based on the kind of injury they've
 received and the severity of the injury.It turns out that in Illinois, for a wide range of reasons, you had veterans who had bee
n injured getting paid much lower disability payments than veterans in some other states - and these differences were substantial
. Illinois veterans, for example, were receiving 42 percent less per year than some of the leading states. So, to give you an exa
mple, an average disability payment to Illinois veterans would be $6,961. In New Mexico, the top ranked state - same veteran, sam
e disability - on average, was getting $12,000 a year. So, obviously this wasn't acceptable to me as a senator from Illinois, but
 it was unacceptable, I think, to anybody who believes that any veteran who has served our country, wherever they live, should be
 treated fairly and equitably. As a consequence, we've moved forward and passed legislation last year ensuring that, in fact, som
e of these differentials were dealt with. We asked the VA to come to Illinois and other states that had suffered some of these pr
oblems and made sure that, in fact, they started assigning and retraining some of the people who were doing the evaluations. The 
other thing is we insisted that the Veterans Administration do outreach to people who have received disability payments all these
 years and may have been short-changed. And so what happened is starting this month, you had the Department of Veterans Affairs s
ending out letters to disabled veterans in Illinois and several other states indicating to them that they live in a state that ha
s received low average disability compensation and that they have the right to open new claims, appeal what a veteran may conside
r to be a bad decision, to get help from veterans service organizations, in terms of processing these reevaluations that have bee
n requested.And so today I just wanted to make sure that veterans were aware of this. I hope that we've got some veterans on the 
podcast who may have been disabled and are receiving benefits. If you live in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Connecticut, Ohio or N
ew Jersey, than you live in a state in which the average disability payment is substantially lower than payments to disabled vete
rans in other states. It doesn't mean that your individual payment is necessarily too low; it may have been that you actually wer
e treated fairly by the VA, but there is a possibility that because you live in one of these states (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,
 Connecticut, Ohio or New Jersey) that, in fact, you were getting a lower disability payment than you should have received. The V
A should have sent a letter to you to contact you, to give you an opportunity to have your claim reevaluated and if you have not 
received a letter but you are a disabled veteran that was awarded a disability payment in one of those states, then you can call 
1-800-827-1000. That's 1-800-827-1000, or you can get on the following website: www.vba.va.gov/specialoutreach. I know that's a m
outhful, so what you can do is get on our website and we will post on the website, the VA website that is designed to do this out
reach. I hope that all of you take a look at this if you are a disabled veteran because we want to make sure that you have been t
reated fairly by the VA.And for those of you who aren't veterans, I hope that you will continue to be supportive of our veterans.
 Many of them have a very difficult time adjusting when they first come back home. I think any of us who can imagine being on the
 battlefield in a place like Baghdad, perhaps seeing one of your friends injured or killed, seeing yourself lose a leg or an arm,
 experiencing Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, you can only imagine the difficulties in making the adjustment to civilian life.In f
act, one of the things that I'm going to be monitoring very closely is how are we treating the 100,000 plus veterans who are goin
g to be coming home and to make sure the VA has the capacity to provide transition services for veterans who are leaving the serv
ice and reentering civilian life, particularly National Guardsmen and Reservists who perhaps did not expect to be fighting in a p
lace like Iraq. It turns out that if you catch a veteran and provide them good services on the way out, they are much less likely
 to suffer Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and can make the adjustment. If some of the problems they may have as a consequence of b
eing on the battlefield are not dealt with early, then they can have long-term problems, which is one of the reasons why veterans
 are seven times more likely to be homeless than non-veterans. So, that's an amazing statistic to think about. It indicates the e
normous toll that war, of any sort, can take on our young men and women. It's also a reminder for those of us who are in civilian
 life but have the authority to authorize war do so with a great sense of responsibility and caution.Anyway, it's great to talk t
o you guys as always. I will be back on this podcast next week. In the meantime, I hope everybody will continue to monitor this i
mmigration debate. I may have something more to say about it next week. In the meantime, I hope everybody will continue to monito
r this immigration debate. I may have something more to say about it next week. Bye-bye. DEATH OF ROSA PARKS SENATE FLOOR STATEME
NT TOPIC: Civil Rights October 25, 2005 Statement of Senator Obama Death of Rosa Parks - Senate Floor Statement Complete Text Mr.
 President, today the nation mourns a genuine American hero. Rosa Parks died yesterday in her home in Detroit. Through her courag
e and by her example, Rosa Parks helped lay the foundation for a country that could begin to live up to its creed.Her life, and h
er brave actions, reminded each and every one of us of our personal responsibilities to stand up for what is right and the centra
l truth of the American experience that our greatness as a nation derives from seemingly ordinary people doing extraordinary thin
gs.Rosa Parks' life was a lesson in perseverance. As a child, she grew up listening to the Ku Klux Klan ride by her house and lyi
ng in bed at night fearing that her house would be burnt down. In her small hometown in Alabama, she attended a one-room school f
or African-American children that only went through the sixth grade. When she moved to Montgomery, Alabama, to continue her schoo
ling, she was forced to clean classrooms after school to pay her tuition. Although she attended Alabama State Teachers College, R
osa Parks would later make her living as a seamstress and housekeeper.But she didn't accept that her opportunities were limited t
o sewing clothes or cleaning houses. In her forties, Rosa Parks was appointed secretary of the Montgomery branch of the NAACP and
 was active in voter registration drives with the Montgomery Voters League. In the summer of 1955, she attended the Highlander Fo
lk School, where she took classes in workers' rights and racial equality. Well before she made headlines across the country, she 
was a highly respected member of the Montgomery community and a committed member of the civil rights effort.Of course, her name b
ecame permanently etched in American history on December 1, 1955, when she was arrested for refusing to give up her seat to a whi
te passenger on a Montgomery bus. It wasn't the first time Rosa Parks refused to acquiesce to the Jim Crow system. The same bus d
river who had her arrested had thrown her off a bus the year before for refusing to give up her seat.Some schoolchildren are taug
ht that Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat because her feet were tired. Our nation's schoolbooks are only getting it half rig
ht. She once said: "The only tired I was, was tired of giving in."This solitary act of civil disobedience became a call to action
. Her arrest led a then relatively unknown pastor, Martin Luther King, Jr., to organize a boycott of the Montgomery bus system. T
hat boycott lasted 381 days and culminated in a landmark Supreme Court decision finding that the city's segregation policy was un
constitutional.This solitary act of civil disobedience was also the spark that ignited the beginning of the end for segregation a
nd inspired millions around the country and ultimately around the world to get involved in the fight for racial equality.Rosa Par
ks' persistence and determination did not end that day in Montgomery, nor did it end with the passage of the Civil Rights Act and
 Voting Rights Act years later. She stayed active in the NAACP and other civil rights groups for years. From 1965 to 1988, Ms. Pa
rks continued her public service by working for my good friend Congressman John Conyers. And in an example of her low-key demeano
r, her job in Congressman Conyers' office did not involve appearances as a figurehead or celebrity; she helped homeless folks fin
d housing.At the age of 74, she opened the Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute for Self-Development, which offers education and job 
training programs for disadvantaged youth. And even into her 80s, Rosa Parks gave lectures and attended meetings with civil right
s groups.At the age of 86, Rosa Parks' courage and fortitude was recognized by President Bill Clinton, who awarded her the nation
's highest honor for a civilian - the Congressional Gold Medal.As we honor the life of Rosa Parks, we should not limit our commem
orations to lofty eulogies. Instead, let us commit ourselves to carrying on her fight, one solitary act at a time, and ensure tha
t her passion continues to inspire as it did a half-century ago. That, in my view, is how we can best thank her for her immense c
ontributions to our country.Rosa Parks once said: "As long as there is unemployment, war, crime and all things that go to the inf
liction of man's inhumanity to man, regardless - there is much to be done, and people need to work together." Now that she's pass
ed, it's up to us to make sure that her message is shared. While we will miss her cherished spirit, let's work to ensure that her
 legacy lives on in the heart of the nation.As a personal note, I think it is fair to say were it not for that quiet moment of co
urage by Mrs. Parks, I would not be standing here today. I owe her a great thanks, as does the Nation. She will be sorely missed.
Thank you. I yield the floor. An Honest Government - A Hopeful Future - University of Nairobi TOPIC: Our Past, Our Future & Visio
n for America August 28, 2006 An Honest Government, A Hopeful Future University of Nairobi Nairobi, Kenya Complete Text The first
 time I came to Kenya was in 1987. I had just finished three years of work as a community organizer in low-income neighborhoods o
f Chicago, and was about to enroll in law school. My sister, Auma, was teaching that year at this university, and so I came to st
ay with her for a month.My experience then was very different than it has been on this trip. Instead of a motorcade, we traveled 
in my sister's old VW Beetle, which even then was already ten years old. When it broke down in front of Uhuru Park, we had to pus
h until some joakalis came to fix it by the side of the road. I slept on the couch of my sister's apartment, not a fancy hotel, a
nd often took my meals at a small tea-house in downtown Nairobi. When we went upcountry, we traveled by train and matatu, with ch
ickens and collard greens and sometimes babies placed in my lap.But it was a magical trip. To begin with, I discovered the warmth
 and sense of community that the people of Kenya possess - their sense of hopefulness even in the face of great difficulty. I dis
covered the beauty of the land, a beauty that haunts you long after you've left.And most importantly for me, I discovered the sto
ry of my father's life, and the story of his father before him.I learned that my grandfather had been a cook for the British and,
 although he was a respected elder in his village, he was called "boy" by his employers for most of his life. I learned about the
 brutal repression of Operation Anvil, the days of rape and torture in the "Pipeline" camps, the lives that so many gave, and how
 my grandfather had been arrested briefly during this period, despite being at the periphery of Kenya's liberation struggles.I le
arned how my father had grown up in a tiny village called Alego, near Siaya, during this period of tumult. I began to understand 
and appreciate the distance he had traveled - from being a boy herding goats to a student at the University of Hawaii and Harvard
 University to the respected economist that he was upon his return to Kenya. In many ways, he embodied the new Africa of the earl
y Sixties, a man who had obtained the knowledge of the Western world, and sought to bring it back home, where he hoped he could h
elp create a new nation.And yet, I discovered that for all his education, my father's life ended up being filled with disappointm
ents. His ideas about how Kenya should progress often put him at odds with the politics of tribe and patronage, and because he sp
oke his mind, sometimes to a fault, he ended up being fired from his job and prevented from finding work in the country for many,
 many years. And on a more personal level, because he never fully reconciled the traditions of his village with more modern conce
ptions of family - because he related to women as his father had, expecting them to obey him no matter what he did - his family l
ife was unstable, and his children never knew him well.In many ways, then, my family's life reflects some of the contradictions o
f Kenya, and indeed, the African continent as a whole. The history of Africa is a history of ancient kingdoms and great tradition
s; the story of people fighting to be free from colonial rule; the heroism of not only of great men like Nkrumah and Kenyatta and
 Mandela, but also ordinary people who endured great hardship, from Ghana to South Africa, to secure self-determination in the fa
ce of great odds.But for all the progress that has been made, we must surely acknowledge that neither Kenya nor the African conti
nent have yet fulfilled their potential - that the hopefulness of the post-colonial era has been replaced by cynicism and sometim
es despair, and that true freedom has not yet been won for those struggling to live on less than a few shillings a day, for those
 who have fallen prey to HIV/AIDS or malaria, to those ordinary citizens who continue to find themselves trapped in the crossfire
 of war or ethnic conflict.One statistic powerfully describes this unfulfilled promise. In early 1960's, as Kenya was gaining its
 independence, its gross national product was not very different from that of South Korea. Today, South Korea's economy is forty 
times larger than Kenya's.How can we explain this fact? Certainly it is not due to lack of effort on the part of ordinary Kenyans
 - we know how hard Kenyans are willing to work, the tremendous sacrifices that Kenyan mothers make for their children, the Hercu
lean efforts that Kenyan fathers make for their families. We know as well the talent, the intelligence, and the creativity that e
xists in this country. And we know how much this land is blessed - just as the entire African continent is blessed - with great g
ifts and riches.So what explains this? I believe there a number of factors at work.Kenya, like many African nations did not come 
of age under the best historical circumstances. It suffers from the legacy of colonialism, of national boundaries that were drawn
 without regard to the political and tribal alignments of indigenous peoples, and that therefore fed conflict and tribal strife.K
enya was also forced to rapidly move from a highly agrarian to a more urban, industrialized nation. This means that the education
 and health care systems - issues that my own nation more than 200 years old still struggles with - lag behind, impacting its dev
elopment.Third, Kenya is hurt from factors unique to Africa's geography and place in the world -- disease, distance from viable m
arkets and especially terms of trade. When African nations were just gaining independence, industrialized nations had decades of 
experience building their domestic economies and navigating the international financial system. And, as Frederick Douglass once s
tated: "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did, and it never will." As a result, many African nations have been as
ked to liberalize their markets without reciprocal concessions from mature economies. This lack of access for Africa's agricultur
e and commodities has restricted an important engine of economic growth. Other issues, such as resource extraction and the drain 
of human capital have also been major factors.As a Senator from the United States, I believe that my country, and other nations, 
have an obligation and self-interest in being full partners with Kenya and with Africa. And, I will do my part to shape an intell
igent foreign policy that promotes peace and prosperity. A foreign policy that gives hope and opportunity to the people of this g
reat continent.But, Kenya must do its part. It cannot wait for other nations to act first. The hard truth is that nations, by and
 large, will act in their self-interest and if Kenya does not act, it will fall behind.It's more than just history and outside in
fluences that explain why Kenya lags behind. Like many nations across this continent, where Kenya is failing is in its ability to
 create a government that is transparent and accountable. One that serves its people and is free from corruption.There is no doub
t that what Kenyans have accomplished with this independence is both impressive and inspiring. Among African nations, Kenya remai
ns a model for representative democracy - a place where many different ethnic factions have found a way to live and work together
 in peace and stability. You enjoy a robust civil society; a press that's free, fair, and honest; and a strong partnership with m
y own country that has resulted in critical cooperation on terrorist issues, real strides in fighting disease and poverty, and an
 important alliance on fostering regional stability.And yet, the reason I speak of the freedom that you fought so hard to win is 
because today that freedom is in jeopardy. It is being threatened by corruption.Corruption is not a new problem. It's not just a 
Kenyan problem, or an African problem. It's a human problem, and it has existed in some form in almost every society. My own city
 of Chicago has been the home of some of the most corrupt local politics in American history, from patronage machines to question
able elections. In just the last year, our own U.S. Congress has seen a representative resign after taking bribes, and several ot
hers fall under investigation for using their public office for private gain.But while corruption is a problem we all share, here
 in Kenya it is a crisis - a crisis that's robbing an honest people of the opportunities they have fought for - the opportunity t
hey deserve.I know that while recent reports have pointed to strong economic growth in this country, 56% of Kenyans still live in
 poverty. And I know that the vast majority of people in this country desperately want to change this.It is painfully obvious tha
t corruption stifles development - it siphons off scarce resources that could improve infrastructure, bolster education systems, 
and strengthen public health. It stacks the deck so high against entrepreneurs that they cannot get their job-creating ideas off 
the ground. In fact, one recent survey showed that corruption in Kenya costs local firms 6% of their revenues, the difference bet
ween good-paying jobs in Kenya or somewhere else. And corruption also erodes the state from the inside out, sickening the justice
 system until there is no justice to be found, poisoning the police forces until their presence becomes a source of insecurity ra
ther than comfort.Corruption has a way of magnifying the very worst twists of fate. It makes it impossible to respond effectively
 to crises -- whether it's the HIV/AIDS pandemic or malaria or crippling drought.What's worse - corruption can also provide oppor
tunities for those who would harness the fear and hatred of others to their agenda and ambitions.It can shield a war criminal - e
ven one like Felicien Kabuga, suspected of helping to finance and orchestrate the Rwandan genocide - by allowing him to purchase 
safe haven for a time and robbing all humanity of the opportunity to bring the criminal to justice.Terrorist attacks - like those
 that have shed Kenyan blood and struck at the heart of the Kenyan economy - are facilitated by customs and border officers who c
an be paid off, by police forces so crippled by corruption that they do not protect the personal safety of Kenyans walking the st
reets of Nairobi, and by forged documents that are easy to find in a climate where graft and fraud thrive.Some of the worst actor
s on the international stage can also take advantage of the collective exhaustion and outrage that people feel with official corr
uption, as we've seen with Islamic extremists who promise purification, but deliver totalitarianism. Endemic corruption opens the
 door to this kind of movement, and in its wake comes a new set of distortions and betrayals of public trust.In the end, if the p
eople cannot trust their government to do the job for which it exists - to protect them and to promote their common welfare - all
 else is lost. And this is why the struggle against corruption is one of the great struggles of our time. The good news is that t
here are already signs of progress here. Willingness to report corruption is increasingly significantly in Kenya. The Kenyan medi
a has been courageous in uncovering and reporting on some of the most blatant abuses of the system, and there has been a growing 
recognition among people and politicians that this is a critical issue.Among other things, this recognition resulted in the coali
tion that came to power in the December elections of 2002. This coalition succeeded by promising change, and their early gestures
 - the dismissal of the shaky judges, the renewed vigor of the investigation into the Goldenberg scandal, the calls for real disc
losure of elected officials' personal wealth - were all promising.But elections are not enough. In a true democracy, it is what h
appens between elections that is the true measure of how a government treats its people.Today, we're starting to see that the Ken
yan people want more than a simple changing of the guard, more than piecemeal reforms to a crisis that's crippling their country.
 The Kenyan people are crying out for real change, and whether one voted orange or banana in last year's referendum, the message 
that many Kenyans seemed to be sending was one of dissatisfaction with the pace of reform, and real frustration with continued to
lerance of corruption at high levels.And so we know that there is more work to be done - more reforms to be made. I don't have al
l the solutions or think that they'll be easy, but there are a few places that a country truly committed to reform could start.We
 know that the temptation to take a bribe is greater when you're not making enough on the job. And we also know that the more peo
ple there are on the government payroll, the more likely it is that someone will be encouraged to take a bribe. So if the governm
ent found ways to downsize the bureaucracy - to cut out the positions that aren't necessary or useful - it could use the extra mo
ney to increase the salary of other government officials.Of course, the best way to reduce bureaucracy and increase pay is to cre
ate more private sector jobs. And the way to create good jobs is when the rules of a society are transparent - when there's a cle
ar and advertised set of laws and regulations regarding how to start a business, what it takes to own property, how to go about g
etting a loan - there is less of a chance that some corrupt bureaucrat will make up his own rules that suit only his interests. C
larifying these rules and focusing resources on building a judicial system that can enforce them and resolve disputes should be a
 primary goal of any government suffering from corruption.In addition, we know that the more information the public is provided, 
the easier it will be for your Kenyan brothers and sisters out in the villages to evaluate whether they are being treated fairly 
by their public servants or not. Wealth declarations do little good if no one can access them, and accountability in government s
pending is not possible if no one knows how much was available and allocated to a given project in the first place.Finally, ethni
c-based tribal politics has to stop. It is rooted in the bankrupt idea that the goal of politics or business is to funnel as much
 of the pie as possible to one's family, tribe, or circle with little regard for the public good. It stifles innovation and fract
ures the fabric of the society. Instead of opening businesses and engaging in commerce, people come to rely on patronage and payb
ack as a means of advancing. Instead of unifying the country to move forward on solving problems, it divides neighbor from neighb
or.An accountable, transparent government can break this cycle. When people are judged by merit, not connections, then the best a
nd brightest can lead the country, people will work hard, and the entire economy will grow - everyone will benefit and more resou
rces will be available for all, not just select groups.Of course, in the end, one of the strongest weapons your country has again
st corruption is the ability of you, the people, to stand up and speak out about the injustices you see. The Kenyan people are th
e ultimate guardians against abuses.The world knows the names of Wangari Maathai and John Githongo, who are fighting against the 
insidious corruption that has weakened Kenya. But there are so many others, some of whom I'm meeting during my visit here - Betty
 Murungi, Ken Njau, Jane Onyango, Maina Kiai, Milly Odhiombo, and Hussein Khalid. As well as numerous Kenyan men and women who ha
ve refused to pay bribes to get civil servants to perform their duties; the auditors and inspectors general who have done the job
 before them accurately and fairly, regardless of where the facts have led; the journalists who asked questions and pushed for an
swers when it may have been more lucrative to look the other way, or whip up a convenient fiction. And then there are anonymous K
enyan whistleblowers who show us what is, so that we can all work together to demand what should be.By rejecting the insulting id
ea that corruption is somehow a part of Kenyan culture, these heroes reveal the very opposite - they reveal a strength and integr
ity of character that can build a great country, a great future. By focusing on building strong, independent institutions - like 
an anti-corruption commission with real authority - rather than cults of personality, they make a contribution to their country t
hat will last longer than their own lives. They fight the fight of our time.Looking out at this crowd of young people, I have fai
th that you will fight this fight too.You will decide if your leaders will be held accountable, or if you will look the other way
.You will decide if the standards and the rules will be the same for everyone - regardless of ethnicity or of wealth.And you will
 determine the direction of this country in the 21st century - whether the hard work of the many is lost to the selfish desires o
f a few, or whether you build an open, honest, stronger Kenya where everyone rises together.This is the Kenya that so many who ca
me before you envisioned - all those men and women who struggled and sacrificed and fought for the freedom you enjoy today.I know
 that honoring their memory and making that freedom real may seem like an impossible task - an effort bigger than you can imagine
 - but sometimes all it takes to move us there is doing what little you can to right the wrongs you see.As I said at the outset, 
I did not know my father well - he returned to Kenya from America when I was still young. Since that time I have known him throug
h stories - those my mother would tell and those I heard from my relatives here in Kenya on my last trip to this country.I know f
rom these stories that my father was not a perfect man - that he made his share of mistakes and disappointed his share of people 
in his lifetime.As our parents' children, we have the opportunity to learn from these mistakes and disappointments. We have the o
pportunity to muster the courage to fulfill the promise of our forefathers and lead our great nations towards a better future.In 
today's Kenya - a Kenya already more open and less repressive than in my father's day - it is that courage that will bring the re
form so many of you so desperately want and deserve. I wish all of you luck in finding this courage in the days and months to com
e, and I want you to know that as your ally, your friend, and your brother, I will be there to help in any way I can. Thank you. 
Pennsylvania Primary Night Evansville, Indiana April 22, 2008I want to start by congratulating Senator Clinton on her victory ton
ight, and I want to thank the hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvanians who stood with our campaign today.There were a lot of folks
 who didn't think we could make this a close race when it started. But we worked hard, and we traveled across the state to big ci
ties and small towns, to factory floors and VFW halls. And now, six weeks later, we closed the gap. We rallied people of every ag
e and race and background to our cause. And whether they were inspired for the first time or for the first time in a long time, w
e registered a record number of voters who will lead our party to victory in November.These Americans cast their ballot for the s
ame reason you came here tonight; for the same reason that millions of Americans have gone door-to-door and given whatever small 
amount they can to this campaign; for the same reason that we began this journey just a few hundred miles from here on a cold Feb
ruary morning in Springfield - because we believe that the challenges we face are bigger than the smallness of our politics, and 
we know that this election is our chance to change it.After fourteen long months, it's easy to forget this from time to time - to
 lose sight of the fierce urgency of this moment. It's easy to get caught up in the distractions and the silliness and the tit-fo
r-tat that consumes our politics; the bickering that none of us are immune to, and that trivializes the profound issues - two war
s, an economy in recession, a planet in peril.But that kind of politics is not why we're here. It's not why I'm here and it's not
 why you're here.We're here because of the more than one hundred workers in Logansport, Indiana who just found out that their com
pany has decided to move its entire factory to Taiwan.We're here because of the young man I met in Youngsville, North Carolina wh
o almost lost his home because he has three children with cystic fibrosis and couldn't pay their medical bills; who still doesn't
 have health insurance for himself or his wife and lives in fear that a single illness could cost them everything.We're here beca
use there are families all across this country who are sitting around the kitchen table right now trying to figure out how to pay
 their insurance premiums, and their kids' tuition, and still make the mortgage so they're not the next ones in the neighborhood 
to put a For Sale sign in the front yard; who will lay awake tonight wondering if next week's paycheck will cover next month's bi
lls.We're not here to talk about change for change's sake, but because our families, our communities, and our country desperately
 need it. We're here because we can't afford to keep doing what we've been doing for another four years. We can't afford to play 
the same Washington games with the same Washington players and expect a different result. Not this time. Not now.We already know 
what we're getting from the other party's nominee. John McCain has offered this country a lifetime of service, and we respect tha
t, but what he's not offering is any meaningful change from the policies of George W. Bush.John McCain believes that George Bush'
s Iraq policy is a success, so he's offering four more years of a war with no exit strategy; a war that's sending our troops on t
heir third tour, and fourth tour, and fifth tour of duty; a war that's costing us billions of dollars a month and hasn't made us 
any safer.John McCain said that George Bush's economic policies have led to "great progress" over the last seven years, and so he
's promising four more years of tax cuts for CEOs and corporations who didn't need them and weren't asking for them; tax cuts tha
t he once voted against because he said they "offended his conscience."Well they may have stopped offending John McCain's conscie
nce somewhere along the road to the White House, but George Bush's economic policies still offend ours. Because I don't think tha
t the 232,000 Americans who've lost their jobs this year are seeing the great progress that John McCain has seen. I don't think t
he millions of Americans losing their homes have seen that progress. I don't think the families without health care and the worke
rs without pensions have seen that progress. And if we continue down the same reckless path, I don't think that future generation
s who'll be saddled with debt will see these as years of progress.We already know that John McCain offers more of the same. The q
uestion is not whether the other party will bring about change in Washington - the question is, will we?Because the truth is, the
 challenges we face are not just the fault of one man or one party. How many years - how many decades - have we been talking abou
t solving our health care crisis? How many Presidents have promised to end our dependence on foreign oil? How many jobs have gone
 overseas in the 70s, and the 80s, and the 90s? And we still haven't done anything about it. And we know why.In every election, p
oliticians come to your cities and your towns, and they tell you what you want to hear, and they make big promises, and they lay 
out all these plans and policies. But then they go back to Washington when the campaign's over. Lobbyists spend millions of dolla
rs to get their way. The status quo sets in. And instead of fighting for health care or jobs, Washington ends up fighting over th
e latest distraction of the week. It happens year after year after year.Well this is your chance to say "Not this year." This is 
your chance to say "Not this time." We have a choice in this election.We can be a party that says there's no problem with taking 
money from Washington lobbyists - from oil lobbyists and drug lobbyists and insurance lobbyists. We can pretend that they represe
nt real Americans and look the other way when they use their money and influence to stop us from reforming health care or investi
ng in renewable energy for yet another four years.Or this time, we can recognize that you can't be the champion of working Americ
ans if you're funded by the lobbyists who drown out their voices. We can do what we've done in this campaign, and say that we won
't take a dime of their money. We can do what I did in Illinois, and in Washington, and bring both parties together to rein in th
eir power so we can take our government back. It's our choice.We can be a party that thinks the only way to look tough on nationa
l security is to talk, and act, and vote like George Bush and John McCain. We can use fear as a tactic, and the threat of terrori
sm to scare up votes.Or we can decide that real strength is asking the tough questions before we send our troops to fight. We can
 see the threats we face for what they are - a call to rally all Americans and all the world against the common challenges of the
 21st century - terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease. That's what it takes to keep us 
safe in the world. That's the real legacy of Roosevelt and Kennedy and Truman.We can be a party that says and does whatever it ta
kes to win the next election. We can calculate and poll-test our positions and tell everyone exactly what they want to hear.Or we
 can be the party that doesn't just focus on how to win but why we should. We can tell everyone what they need to hear about the 
challenges we face. We can seek to regain not just an office, but the trust of the American people that their leaders in Washingt
on will tell them the truth. That's the choice in this election.We can be a party of those who only think like we do and only agr
ee with all our positions. We can continue to slice and dice this country into Red States and Blue States. We can exploit the div
isions that exist in our country for pure political gain.Or this time, we can build on the movement we've started in this campaig
n - a movement that's united Democrats, Independents, and Republicans; a movement of young and old, rich and poor; white, black, 
Hispanic, Asian, and Native American. Because one thing I know from traveling to forty-six states this campaign season is that we
're not as divided as our politics suggests. We may have different stories and different backgrounds, but we hold common hopes fo
r the future of this country.In the end, this election is still our best chance to solve the problems we've been talking about fo
r decades - as one nation; as one people. Fourteen months later, that is still what this election is about.Millions of Americans 
who believe we can do better - that we must do better - have put us in a position to bring about real change. Now it's up to you,
 Indiana. You can decide whether we're going to travel the same worn path, or whether we chart a new course that offers real hope
 for the future.During the course of this campaign, we've all learned what my wife reminds me of all the time - that I am not a p
erfect man. And I will not be a perfect President. And so while I will always listen to you, and be honest with you, and fight fo
r you every single day for the next for years, I will also ask you to be a part of the change that we need. Because in my two dec
ades of public service to this country, I have seen time and time again that real change doesn't begin in the halls of Washington
, but on the streets of America. It doesn't happen from the top-down, it happens from the bottom-up.I also know that real change 
has never been easy, and it won't be easy this time either. The status quo in Washington will fight harder than they ever have to
 divide us and distract us with ads and attacks from now until November.But don't ever forget that you have the power to change t
his country.You can make this election about how we're going to help those workers in Logansport; how we're going to re-train the
m, and educate them, and make our workforce competitive in a global economy.You can make this election about how we're going to m
ake health care affordable for that family in North Carolina; how we're going to help those families sitting around the kitchen t
able tonight pay their bills and stay in their homes.You can make this election about how we plan to leave our children and all c
hildren a planet that's safer and a world that still sees America the same way my father saw it from across the ocean - as a beac
on of all that is good and all that is possible for all mankind.It is now our turn to follow in the footsteps of all those genera
tions who sacrificed and struggled and faced down the greatest odds to perfect our improbable union. And if we're willing to do w
hat they did; if we're willing to shed our cynicism and our doubts and our fears; if we're willing to believe in what's possible 
again; then I believe that we won't just win this primary election, we won't just win this election in November, we will change t
his country, and keep this country's promise alive in the twenty-first century. Thank you, and may God Bless the United States of
 America. Military Commission Legislation TOPIC: Homeland Security September 28, 2006 Military Commission Legislation Statement C
omplete Text Mr. President, I am proud to be sponsoring this amendment with the senior senator from West Virginia. He's absolutel
y right that Congress has abrogated its oversight responsibilities, and one way to reverse that troubling trend is to adopt a sun
set provision in this bill. We did that in the Patriot Act, and that allowed us to make important revisions to the bill that refl
ected our experience about what worked and didn't work during the previous 5 years. We should do that again with this important p
iece of legislation.But I want to take a few minutes to speak more broadly about the bill before us.I may have only been in this 
body for a short while, but I am not naive to the political considerations that go along with many of the decisions we make here.
 I realize that soon, we will adjourn for the fall, and the campaigning will begin in earnest. And there will be 30-second attack
 ads and negative mail pieces, and we will be criticized as caring more about the rights of terrorists than the protection of Ame
ricans. And I know that the vote before us was specifically designed and timed to add more fuel to that fire.And yet, while I kno
w all of this, I'm still disappointed. Because what we're doing here today - a debate over the fundamental human rights of the ac
cused - should be bigger than politics. This is serious.If this was a debate with obvious ideological differences - heartfelt con
victions that couldn't be settled by compromise - I would understand. But it's not.All of us - Democrats and Republicans - want t
o do whatever it takes to track down terrorists and bring them to justice as swiftly as possible. All of us want to give our Pres
ident every tool necessary to do this. And all of us were willing to do that in this bill. Anyone who says otherwise is lying to 
the American people.In the five years that the President's system of military tribunals has existed, not one terrorist has been t
ried. Not one has been convicted. And in the end, the Supreme Court of the United found the whole thing unconstitutional, which i
s why we're here today.We could have fixed all of this in a way that allows us to detain and interrogate and try suspected terror
ists while still protecting the accidentally accused from spending their lives locked away in Guantanamo Bay. Easily. This was no
t an either-or question.Instead of allowing this President - or any President - to decide what does and does not constitute tortu
re, we could have left the definition up to our own laws and to the Geneva Conventions, as we would have if we passed the bill th
at the Armed Services committee originally offered.Instead of detainees arriving at Guantanamo and facing a Combatant Status Revi
ew Tribunal that allows them no real chance to prove their innocence with evidence or a lawyer, we could have developed a real mi
litary system of justice that would sort out the suspected terrorists from the accidentally accused.And instead of not just suspe
nding, but eliminating, the right of habeas corpus - the seven century-old right of individuals to challenge the terms of their o
wn detention, we could have given the accused one chance - one single chance - to ask the government why they are being held and 
what they are being charged with.But politics won today. Politics won. The Administration got its vote, and now it will have its 
victory lap, and now they will be able to go out on the campaign trail and tell the American people that they were the ones who w
ere tough on the terrorists.And yet, we have a bill that gives the terrorist mastermind of 9/11 his day in court, but not the inn
ocent people we may have accidentally rounded up and mistaken for terrorists - people who may stay in prison for the rest of thei
r lives.And yet, we have a report authored by sixteen of our own government's intelligence agencies, a previous draft of which de
scribed, and I quote, "...actions by the United States government that were determined to have stoked the jihad movement, like th
e indefinite detention of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay..."And yet, we have Al Qaeda and the Taliban regrouping in Afghanistan whil
e we look the other way. We have a war in Iraq that our own government's intelligence says is serving as Al Qaeda's best recruitm
ent tool. And we have recommendations from the bipartisan 9/11 commission that we still refuse to implement five years after the 
fact.The problem with this bill is not that it's too tough on terrorists. The problem with this bill is that it's sloppy. And the
 reason it's sloppy is because we rushed it to serve political purposes instead of taking the time to do the job right.I've heard
, for example, the argument that it should be military courts, and not federal judges, who should make decisions on these detaine
es. I actually agree with that. The problem is that the structure of the military proceedings has been poorly thought through. In
deed, the regulations that are supposed to be governing administrative hearings for these detainees, which should have been issue
d months ago, still haven't been issued. Instead, we have rushed through a bill that stands a good chance of being challenged onc
e again in the Supreme Court.This is not how a serious Administration would approach the problem of terrorism. I know the Preside
nt came here today and was insisting that this is supposed to be our primary concern. He's absolutely right it should be our prim
ary concern - which is why we should be approaching this with a somberness and seriousness that this Administration has not displ
ayed with this legislation.Now, let me be clear - for those who plot terror against the United States, I hope God has mercy on th
eir soul, because I certainly do not. And for those who our government suspects of terror, I support whatever tools are necessary
 to try them and uncover their plot.But we also know that some have been detained who have no connection to terror whatsoever. We
've already had reports from the CIA and various generals over the last few years saying that many of the detainees at Guantanamo
 shouldn't have been there - as one U.S. commander of Guantanamo told the Wall Street Journal, "Sometimes, we just didn't get the
 right folks." And we all know about the recent case of the Canadian man who was suspected of terrorist connections, detained in 
New York, sent to Syria, and tortured, only to find out later that it was all a case of mistaken identity and poor information.In
 the future, people like this may never have a chance to prove their innocence. They may remain locked away forever.And the sad p
art about all of this is that this betrayal of American values is unnecessary. We could've drafted a bipartisan, well-structured 
bill that provided adequate due process through the military courts, had an effective review process that would've prevented friv
olous lawsuits being filed and kept lawyers from clogging our courts, but upheld the basic ideals that have made this country gre
at.Instead, what we have is a flawed document that in fact betrays the best instincts of some of my colleagues on both sides of t
he aisle - those who worked in a bipartisan fashion in the Armed Services Committee to craft a bill that we could have been proud
 of. And they essentially got steamrolled by this Administration and by the imperatives of November 7th.That is not how we should
 be doing business in the U.S. Senate, and that's not how we should be prosecuting this war on terrorism. When we're sloppy and c
ut corners, we are undermining those very virtues of America that will lead us to success in winning this war. At bare minimum, I
 hope we can at least pass this provision so that cooler heads can prevail after the silly season of politics is over. Thank you.
 Real Solution for High Gas Prices - Podcast - Transcript TOPIC: Oil & Alternative Fuels May 11, 2006 A Real Solution for High Ga
s Prices Complete Transcript Hello, this is Senator Barack Obama and today is Thursday, May 11, 2006.The other day I went to the 
gas station. Gas was $3.08 a gallon in the station where I stopped. It is rough on Americans across the country right now. Chicag
o has some of the highest gasoline prices in the country. I'm fortunate that I am able to afford spending $50 on a tank of gas; t
here are a lot of families out there that can't. People who have to drive to work long distances, people who don't have the money
 to buy more fuel-efficient cars right now and they've seen their standard of living drop substantially as a consequence of highe
r gas prices.Now, the only thing as predictable as rising gas prices are the short-term political solutions that usually come alo
ng with them. Every year you had the same headlines, "Pain at the Pump" and then Americans start emptying their wallets to fill u
p their tanks and politicians go through the standard responses: tax rebates and tax holidays, investigating price-gauging bio-oi
l companies.None of these proposals are going to do any harm. Some will provide Americans temporary relief at the pump, but, in t
he long term, we can't keep on relying solely on quick fixes designed to placate an anxious public. We need proactive solutions t
hat are designed to lessen our dependence on foreign oil and bring down prices for good. Washington privately understands this bu
t perhaps because of the influence of the oil companies, some of it having to do with ideology, Washington has just been unwillin
g to take the hard steps necessary to confront what I consider to be one of the most pressing economic and national security chal
lenges in the 21st century. So, the time for excuses is over. Now's not the moment where we should be afraid of what is going to 
seem politically difficult or controversial. Now's the time to call for innovation and sacrifice from those institutions that can
 make a difference: the auto industry, the oil industry, the federal government.The first place to start is with cars. We've got 
to build cars that use less gasoline. The auto industry hasn't been asked to raise fuel-economy standards in seventeen years and 
frankly, lately Republicans and Democrats seem to have stopped asking. Today, we've got no choice. Starting in 2008, we should ra
ise CAFE standards (that's the fuel-efficiency standards on cars) a modest 3 percent a year. If we did that over the next 12 year
s, by 2020 passenger vehicles would average 40 miles per gallon, light trucks would average 32 miles per gallon. That's not a dra
matic increase; it's easily achievable through existing technology and it can be done without compromising passenger safety.Now, 
there are going to be transition costs involved in making more fuel-efficient automobiles, especially for Detroit, which has reli
ed heavily on the sale of SUVs for its profits. So I've proposed what I call the "Healthcare for Hybrids" bill, where we'd strike
 a grand bargain with U.S. auto-makers. We tell them we're going to pickup part of the tab for the retiree healthcare costs, a ta
b which, by the way, ran 6.7 billion dollars last year but, in exchange, you've got to use the money to invest in transitioning t
o fuel-efficient cars. So that would be point number one.Point number two: we should just replace the use of oil altogether as Am
erica's fuel of choice. This doesn't mean singing the praises of ethanol, and hoping that it finds its way into our fuel supply o
n its own. It means taking some serious steps now to put a national bio-fuel infrastructure into place. Already some cars on the 
road have flexible fuel tanks necessary for them to run on E85, which is a cheaper, cleaner blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 pe
rcent gasoline. But millions upon millions of cars still don't have these tanks. So its time for auto-makers to install those tan
ks in every single car that they make and the government can help cover this small cost which currently runs at just around $100 
per car. It's also time to start making E85 fueling stations more available to the American public. Currently only 681 out of the
 170,000 fueling stations in America offer E85 pumps. That's not acceptable. Every American should have the choice when they pull
 up to fill up their car with E85. That should be true at any fueling station and the oil companies should stop standing in the w
ay and join us in making this happen. If the big oil companies would devote just one percent of their first quarter profits this 
year to install E85 pumps, more than 7,000 service stations would be able to serve E85 to motorists who could use it.Finally, we 
need to reduce the risk of investing in renewable fuels by providing loan guarantees and venture capital to those entrepreneurs w
ith the best plans to develop cell-bio fuel and we should start creating a market for renewable fuels by ramping up the renewable
 fuel standard and creating an alternative diesel standard in this country, a national standard, that together would blend 65 bil
lion gallons of renewable fuels into the petroleum supply every year.If we had taken all these steps decades ago, like Brazil did
 when the call for energy independence was first issued, we'd be immune right now to the whims of oil-rich dictators and surging 
gas prices. If we don't take these steps now there's going to be a day when we look back at that $3.05 or $3.15 gasoline as the g
ood old days. At some point there's not going to be a tax rebate that's big enough or a tax holiday that's long enough to solve t
hese problems. The American people shouldn't have to wait for this day to come. When it comes to reducing our dependence of forei
gn oil, the resources are there, the technology is there, the demand is there. Now we just need a little bit of political will an
d I hope that you guys will help me provide it.Thanks for downloading and listening to the podcast. I will talk to you soon. Bye-
bye. LOBBYING REFORM SUMMIT TOPIC: Ethics & Lobbying Reform January 26, 2006 Lobbying Reform Summit Lobbying Reform Summit Nation
al Press Club Washington, DC Complete Text Good morning. I want to start by thanking American University and the Committee for Ec
onomic Development for hosting this panel today. It's an honor to be here and an honor to be among such great company.Over one hu
ndred years ago, at the dawn of the last century, the Industrial Revolution was beginning to take hold of America, creating unima
ginable wealth in sprawling metropolises all across the country.As factories multiplied and profits grew, the winnings of the new
 economy became more and more concentrated in the hands of a few robber barons, railroad tycoons and oil magnates. In the cities,
 power was maintained by a corrupt system of political machines and ward bosses. And in the state of New York, there existed a yo
ung governor who was determined to give government back to the people.In just his first year, he had already begun to antagonize 
the state's political machine by attacking its system of favors and corporate giveaways. He also signed a workers' compensation b
ill, and even fired the superintendent of insurance for taking money from the very industry he was supposed to be regulating.None
 of this sat too well with New York's powerful party boss, who finally plotted to get rid of the reform-minded governor by making
 sure he was nominated for the Vice Presidency that year.What no one could have expected is that soon after the election, when Pr
esident William McKinley was assassinated, the greatest fears of the corrupt machine bosses and powerbrokers came true when that 
former governor became President of the United States and went on to bust trusts, break up monopolies, and return the government 
to its people.His name, of course, was Theodore Roosevelt. He was a Republican. And throughout his public life, he demonstrated a
 willingness to put party and politics aside in order to battle corruption and give people an open, honest government that would 
fight for their interests and uphold their values.Today, we face a similar crisis of corruption. And I believe that we deserve si
milar leadership from those in power as well.The American people are tired of a Washington that's only open to those with the mos
t cash and the right connections. They're tired of a political process where the vote you cast isn't as important as the favors y
ou can do. And they're tired of trusting us with their tax dollars when they see them spent on frivolous pet projects and corpora
te giveaways.It's not that the games that are played in this town are new or surprising to the public. People are not naive to th
e existence of corruption and they know it has worn the face of both Republicans and Democrats over the years.Moreover, the under
lying issue of how extensively money influences politics is the original sin of everyone who's ever run for office - myself inclu
ded. In order to get elected, we need to raise vast sums of money by meeting and dealing with people who are disproportionately w
ealthy. This is a problem that predates George Bush or Jack Abramoff, and I believe that a serious, bipartisan conversation about
 campaign finance reform is one that this town would do well to have in the months to come.Yet, while people are familiar with th
ese problems and they encompass both parties, I do think it's fair to say that the scandals we've seen under the current White Ho
use and Congress - both legal and illegal - are far worse than most of us could have imagined.Think about it. In the past several
 months, we've seen politicians resigning for taking millions of dollars in bribes. We've seen the head of the White House procur
ement office arrested. We've seen some of our most powerful leaders of both the House and the Senate under federal investigation.
 We've seen the number of registered lobbyists in Washington double since George Bush came into office. And of course, we've seen
 the indictment of Jack Abramoff and his cronies.Now, there's an argument made that somehow this is a bipartisan scandal. And the
 defense here is that everybody does it. Well, not everybody does it. And people shouldn't lump together those of us who have to 
raise funds to run campaigns but do so in a legal and ethical way with those who invite lobbyists in to write bad legislation. Th
ose aren't equivalent, and we're not being partisan by pointing that out.The fact is, since this Republican leadership has come t
o power, this kind of scandal has been the regular order of business in this town. For years now, they have openly bragged about 
stocking K Street lobbying firms with former leadership staffers to increase their power in Washington.And yet, what is truly off
ensive to the American people about all of this goes far beyond people like Jack Abramoff. It's bigger than how much time he'll s
pend in jail or how many Republicans he'll turn in. Bigger than the K Street project and golf junkets to Scotland and lavish gift
s for lawmakers.What's truly offensive about these scandals is that they don't just lead to morally offensive conduct on the part
 of politicians; they lead to morally offensive legislation that hurts hardworking Americans.Because when big oil companies are i
nvited into the White House for secret energy meetings, it's no wonder they end up with billions in tax breaks while Americans st
ill struggle to fill up their gas tanks and heat their homes.When a Committee Chairman negotiates a Medicare bill at the same tim
e he's negotiating for a job as the drug industry's lobbyist, it's hardly a surprise when that industry gets taxpayer-funded give
aways in the same bill that forbids seniors from bargaining for better drug prices.When the people running Washington are account
able only to the special interests that fund their campaigns, of course they'll spend your tax dollars with reckless abandon; of 
course they'll load up bills with pet projects and drive us into deficit with the hope that no one will notice.In 2004, over $2.1
 billion was spent lobbying Congress. That amounts to over $4.8 million per Member of Congress. $4.8 million per member so that o
il companies can still run our energy policy and pharmaceutical companies can still raise our drug prices and special interests c
an still waste our tax dollars on pet projects.How much do you think the American people were able to spend on their Senator or R
epresentative last year? How much money could the folks who can't fill up their gas tanks spend? How much could the seniors force
d to choose between their medications and their groceries spend?Not $4.8 million. Not even close.This is the bigger story here, a
nd this is why the recent scandals have shaken the American people's faith in a government that will look out for their interests
 and uphold their values.The well-connected CEOs and hired guns on K Street who've helped write our laws have gotten what they pa
id for. They got all the tax breaks and loopholes and access they could ever want. But outside this city, the people who can't af
ford the high-priced lobbyists and don't want to break the law are wondering, "When is it our turn? When will someone in Washingt
on stand up for me?"We need to answer that call because let's face it - for the last few years, the people running Washington sim
ply haven't. And while only some are to blame for the corruption that has plagued this city, all are responsible for fixing it.No
w, I've been asked by my caucus to take a role in lobbying reform - a role I'm proud to have. As many of you know I'm from Chicag
o - a city that hasn't always had the cleanest reputation when it comes to politics in this country. But during my first year in 
the Illinois State Senate, I helped lead the fight to pass Illinois' first ethics reform bill in twenty-five years. I hope we can
 do something like that here.I realize there are many proposals floating around out there, and I also realize that our friends on
 the other side of the aisle have many of their own. I think that's commendable. In fact, I look forward to working in a bipartis
an fashion to get a solid bill passed.But this has to be a serious bill, and it has to go a long way toward correcting some of th
e most egregious offenses of the last few years. This is not a time for window-dressing or putting a band-aid on a problem just t
o score political points. This is a time for real reform, and I think the Democrats' Honest Leadership and Open Government Act do
es this by including provisions that so far the Republican proposals do not.Real reform means making sure that Members of Congres
s and the Administration tell us when they're negotiating for jobs with industries they're responsible for regulating. That way w
e don't have people writing a drug bill during the day and meeting with pharmaceutical companies about their future salary at nig
ht.Real reform means giving the public access to now-secret conference committee meetings and posting all bills on the Internet 2
4 hours before they're voted on, so the public can scrutinize what's in them.Real reform means passing a bill that eliminates all
 gifts and meals from lobbyists, not just the expensive ones. If the we truly agree that having a lobbyist constantly pick up the
 tab for lunch can help influence legislation, then they'll have no problem changing their position so that the ban includes meal
s of any price.Real reform means ending the no-bid contracts for well-connected contributors that have wasted millions of taxpaye
r dollars in both Iraq and the Gulf Coast. And it means ending the practice of appointing your political buddies to positions the
y are wholly unqualified for. It means no more Brownies.Finally, I think that real reform must include real oversight and account
ability. Our bill sets up an independent Office of Public Integrity to keep an eye on lobbyists and to make sure they comply with
 the rules.Now, personally, I think that there's an opportunity for us to go even further than some of the proposals that have co
me from both parties. And that's why last week I introduced the CLEAN UP Act, which would build on the Democrats' reform bill by 
giving the American public a clearer view of what's going on here in Washington.See, one of the reasons why lobbyists like Abramo
ff and their allies in Congress have been able to manipulate the system is because most of their backroom deals are done in secre
t. Just the other day, we heard that because of pressure from health care industry lobbyists, Republican negotiators met behind c
losed doors and changed a budget bill to provide a $22 billion giveaway to HMOs -- $22 billion that would come right out of the p
ockets of American taxpayers. But of course, no one knew about the change until much later, and no lawmaker would admit to making
 it.This is an outrage, and my bill would change this by identifying secret provisions like these that weren't in the original bi
ll, and it would let the public know who put them there, so that special interest giveaways couldn't be slipped in at the last mi
nute. My bill also would shine the spotlight on those pet projects that lawmakers sneak into every spending bill by requiring tha
t they earmarks be posted on the internet 72 hours before they're voted on. The watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and E
thics in Washington, recently endorsed this bill, and I hope that the Senate will take it up soon.Let me close with one final poi
nt. Even if we pass a good bill and rid Washington of the Jack Abramoffs of the world, it's going to take much more than gift ban
s and lobbying reform to restore the public's faith in a government. It will take not simply a change in laws, but a change in at
titudes.To do this - to earn back that trust - to show people that we're working for them and looking out for their interests - w
e have to start acting like it.That means instead of meeting with lobbyists, it's time to start meeting with some of the 45 milli
on Americans with no health care.Instead of finding cushy political jobs for unqualified buddies, it's time to start finding good
-paying jobs for hardworking Americans trying to raise a family.Instead of hitting up the big firms on K Street, it's time to sta
rt visiting the workers on Main Street who wonder how they'll send their kids to college or whether their pension will be around 
when they retire.All these people have done to earn access and gain influence is cast their ballot. But in this democracy, it's a
ll anyone should have to do.A century ago, that young, reform-minded governor of New York who later became our twenty-sixth Presi
dent gave us words about our country everyone in this town would do well to listen to today. Teddy Roosevelt said that,"No republ
ic can permanently endure when its politics are corrupt and base...we can afford to differ on the currency, the tariff, and forei
gn policy, but we cannot afford to differ on the question of honesty. There is a soul in the community, a soul in the nation, jus
t exactly as their is a soul in the individual; and exactly as the individual hopelessly mars himself if he lets his conscience b
e dulled by the constant repetition of unworthy acts, so the nation will hopelessly blunt the popular conscience if it permits it
s public men continually to do acts which the nation in its heart of hearts knows are acts which cast discredit upon our whole pu
blic life."I can only hope that in the weeks to come, the work we do here and in Congress will once again strengthen this nation'
s soul and bring credit back to our public life. Thank you. University of Massachusetts at Boston Commencement Address TOPIC: Com
mencement June 2, 2006 University of Massachusetts at Boston Commencement Address Complete Text Good morning President Wilson, Ch
ancellor Collins, the Board of Trustees, faculty, parents, family, friends, and the Class of 2006. Congratulations on your gradua
tion, and thank you for allowing me the honor to be a part of it.It's always great to be back in Boston. As some of you may have 
heard, I was here a few years ago to give the keynote address at the 2004 Democratic Convention.It was an amazing experience for 
me. A humbling honor. A tremendous opportunity. And if you had come up to me a few years earlier and told me I'd be there, I woul
d've politely told you that you were out of your mind.Let me tell you what happened at the last convention I had been to.It was t
he year 2000, and I had just gotten my rear-end handed to me in my very first race for Congress. Didn't even make it past the pri
mary. I was a little depressed, and more than a little broke, but some friends suggested that I get my mind off it by going to Lo
s Angeles, where that year's Democratic Convention was being held.So I decided to go. And when my plane landed in LA, I got my lu
ggage, walked on over to the Hertz counter, filled out all the forms to rent a car, gave my credit card to the nice woman behind 
the counter who, moments later, handed it back to me and said, "Mr. Obama, it seems we have a problem."That's right, my credit ca
rd was denied.After thirty more minutes of haggling, I finally made it to the convention, only to learn that I was thought of so 
highly by the Democratic Party that my credentials barely granted me access to the men's room - let alone backstage where all the
 action was. And so, being the VIP that I was, I spent the rest of the week as the guy in the room who nobody knew, but everyone 
knew didn't belong.Needless to say, when they asked me to be the convention's keynote speaker just four years later, I made sure 
I was getting a car.All joking aside, receiving that honor was a welcome change - and, as MasterCard could attest, more than a li
ttle unlikely.But of course, America is an unlikely place - a country built on defiance of the odds; on a belief in the impossibl
e. And I remind you of this because as you set out to live your own stories of success and achievement, it's now your turn to hel
p keep it this way.It's your turn to keep this daringly radical but unfailingly simple notion of America alive - that no matter w
here you're born or how much your parents have; no matter what you look like or what you believe in, you can still rise to become
 whatever you want; still go on to achieve great things; still pursue the happiness you hope for.Today, this dream sounds common 
- perhaps even cliche - yet for most of human history it's been anything but. As a servant of Rome, a peasant in China, or a subj
ect of King George, there were very few unlikely futures. No matter how hard you worked or struggled for something better, you kn
ew you'd spend your life forced to build somebody else's empire; to sacrifice for someone else's cause.But as the centuries passe
d, the people of the world grew restless. They were tired of tyranny and weary of their lot in life. And as they saw merchants st
art to sail across oceans and explorers set off in search of new worlds, they followed.It was right here, in the waters around us
, where the American experiment began. As the earliest settlers arrived on the shores of Boston and Salem and Plymouth, they drea
med of building a City upon a Hill. And the world watched, waiting to see if this improbable idea called America would succeed.Fo
r over two hundred years, it has. Not because our dream has progressed perfectly. It hasn't. It has been scarred by our treatment
 of native peoples, betrayed by slavery, clouded by the subjugation of women, wounded by racism, shaken by war and depression.Yet
, the true test of our union is not whether it's perfect, but whether we work to perfect it. Whether we recognize our failings, i
dentify our shortcomings, and then rise to meet the challenges of our time.And so we've broadened the American family by winning 
civil rights and voting rights for women and then African Americans; by choosing to welcome waves of new immigrants to our shores
.We've pushed the boundaries of opportunity by providing free education for our children and health care for our seniors and our 
poor; and we've won bargaining rights and wage hikes and retirement security for our workers.None of this progress happened on it
s own. Much of it seemed impossible at the time. But all of it came about because ordinary men and women had faith that here in A
merica, our imperfect dream could be perfected.Now, there may be some who doubt that much has changed - those who doubt that thin
gs are better today than they were yesterday. To them I say take a look at this class of 2006.More than half of you represent the
 very first member of your family to ever attend college. In the most diverse university in all of New England, I look out at a s
ea of faces that are African-American and Hispanic-American and Asian-American and Arab-American. I see students that have come h
ere from over 100 different countries, believing like those first settlers that they too could find a home in this City on a Hill
 - that they too could find success in this unlikeliest of places.All of this has occurred in the midst of a city where No Irish 
Need Apply signs once hung from stores. All of this in a city where, just thirty years ago, buses of black students were pelted w
ith rocks as they pulled into schools in South Boston; where the Red Sox were once the team who refused to sign the great Jackie 
Robinson.But the problem isn't that we've made progress. The problem is that progress isn't good enough. There is more work to be
 done, more justice to be had, more barriers to break. And now it's your generation's turn to bring these changes about.The last 
century was undoubtedly an American century. Our victory over fascism and communism liberated millions. At home, we built a share
d prosperity that created the largest middle-class in history. Ours was a nation of liberators; of free people; of prosperous peo
ple - and the world took notice.But today, just a few years into the twenty-first century, we already find ourselves in a differe
nt and precarious position. As revolutions in communications and technology have broken down barriers across the world, it has gi
ven more power to both our competitors and our enemies.No longer can we assume that a high-school education in Boston is enough t
o compete for a job that could easily go to a college-educated student in Bangalore or Beijing. No more can we count on employers
 to provide health care and pensions and job training when their bottom-lines know no borders. Never again can we expect the ocea
ns that surround America to keep us safe from attacks on our own soil.So what does this mean for you? What role will you play in 
meeting these challenges?I do not pretend to have the answers. Each of you will have to discover your own. But perhaps I can offe
r a few suggestions that may be useful along the way.First, take risks. When I was on the brink of graduating from college, I had
 this crazy idea that I wanted to be a community organizer and work in low-income neighborhoods.My mother and grandparents though
t I should go to law school, and my friends were all busy applying for jobs on Wall Street. But I went ahead and wrote letters to
 every organization in the country that I thought was working to empower low-income people. And finally, this small group of chur
ches on the south side of Chicago wrote back and offered me a job helping them deal with the consequences of steel plants that ha
d closed and put thousands out of work.The churches didn't have much money - so they offered me a grand sum of $12,000 a year plu
s $1,000 to buy a car. So I bought a beat up old car, packed up my belongings, got out a map, and started driving west to Chicago
 - a place I had never been and where I didn't know a living soul.About halfway between New York City and Chicago, I stopped for 
the night in a small town in Pennsylvania whose name I no longer remember. I found a motel that looked cheap and clean, I pulled 
into the driveway, and went to the counter, where there was an old guy doing crossword puzzles.I asked him for a room, and as he 
was filling out my information, he asked me where I was headed. I said I was going to Chicago, and I told him I was going there t
o work as a community organizer. And he looked at me and he said, "You know, you look like a nice clean-cut young man, and you've
 got a nice voice. So let me give you a piece of advice - forget this community organizing business. You can't change the world, 
and people won't appreciate you trying. What you should do is go into television broadcasting. I'm telling you, you've got a futu
re."I could've taken my mother's advice and I could've taken my grandparents advice. I could've taken the path my friends travele
d. And I could've taken the words of wisdom from that old man in Pennsylvania. And, objectively speaking, I'm sure he was right. 
But I knew there was something in me that wanted to try for something bigger. So don't let people talk you into doing the safe th
ing. Listen to what's in you and decide what it is that you care so much about that you're willing to take a chance.My second pie
ce of advice is to stay global. As the world continues to change and we become more connected to each other, globalization will b
ring both benefits and disruptions to our lives. But either way, it's here, and it's not going away.We can try to build walls aro
und us, and we can look inward, and we can respond by being frightened and angry about those disruptions.But that's not what we'r
e about. We are a confident country, not a fearful one. We can meet these challenges. And that means every single one of us needs
 to learn more so we can compete more. It means we need an energy policy that will create new jobs in this country and end our de
pendence on oil from the Middle East. And it means we need to update our social contract to make sure that people have health car
e and pensions and training no matter where they work or how many times they switch jobs.But it doesn't mean we should ever withd
rawal. We are better than that.My third piece of advice is to cultivate a sense of empathy - to put yourself in other people's sh
oes - to see the world from their eyes.Empathy is a quality of character that can change the world - one that makes you understan
d that your obligations to others extend beyond people who look like you and act like you and live in your neighborhood.I know th
at, especially on this campus, so many of you have been serving at homeless shelters and high schools and youth centers and job p
lacement organizations all over the Boston area. And I hope this spirit of service lives on long after you leave here.But as you 
continue on in life, it's not always easy. In the years to come, you will encounter all kinds of obstacles in the way of empathy.
 You will find people who, out of fear or need for power, try to divide us and deny what we have in common. You'll hear that the 
Americans who sleep in the streets and beg for food got there because they're all lazy or weak of spirit. That the immigrants who
 risk their lives to cross a desert have nothing to contribute to this country and no desire to embrace our ideals. That the inne
r-city children who are trapped in the nation's most dilapidated schools can't learn and won't learn and so we should just give u
p on them entirely. That the innocent people being slaughtered and expelled from their homes half a world away are somebody else'
s problem to take care of.You'll hear all of this, and you'll have to choose. You'll have to decide where your obligations lie.An
d let me tell you - the easiest thing in the world is to do nothing at all. To turn off the TV, put down the paper, and walk away
 from the stories about Iraq or Darfur or poverty or violence or joblessness or hopelessness. To go about your busy lives, wishin
g these problems away but expecting someone else to do it. To remain detached; to remain indifferent; to remain safe.But I hope y
ou don't do what's easy. I hope you do what's hard.I often imagine the young Americans - teenagers and college kids not much olde
r than you - from all over the country, watching the Civil Rights Movement unfold before them on their television sets. I imagine
 that they would've seen the marchers and heard the speeches, but they also probably saw the dogs and the fire hoses, or the foot
age of innocent people being beaten within an inch of their lives, or maybe they would've heard the news the day those four littl
e girls died when someone threw a bomb into their church.Instinctively, they knew that it was safer and smarter to stay at home; 
to watch the movement from afar. But somewhere in their hearts, they also understood that these people in Georgia and Alabama and
 Mississippi were their brothers and sisters; that what was happening was wrong; and that they had an obligation to make it right
. And so when the buses pulled up for a Freedom Ride down South, they got on. And they rode. Thousands of them. And they changed 
the world.We need you to do the same. As Robert F. Kennedy once told a crowd of South Africans no older than you, "The world dema
nds the qualities of youth; not a time of life but a state of mind, a temper of the will, a quality of the imagination, a predomi
nance of courage over timidity, of the appetite for adventure over the love of ease."Finally, my last piece of advice is to stay 
amazed - to remain in wonder at this unlikely place we call America. I think it's easy for some people to look at all the challen
ges we face; to look at poverty and war and racism and inequality and hatred and helplessness, and to get down on this country as
 a result - to think that there's something wrong with us - that there is little hope to make things better.And if you ever feel 
like that yourselves, I ask you to remember all the amazing and unlikely things that have happened in this country. This country 
where a young man from Illinois who failed at so many of the business and political ventures he attempted still went on to become
 the president who freed a people and saved a union. This country where a young black minister from Georgia who had nothing but a
 dream in his heart went on to lead his people to the promised land of civil rights and voting rights. This country where hundred
s of parents all over the world who never had the chance to further their education could still watch their children become the f
irst in their family to earn a degree on a hopeful Boston day in June.This is America. A place where millions of restless adventu
rers from all over the world, still weary of their lot in life - still hoping for something better - have longed to travel great 
distances and take great risks for a chance to arrive on our shores.My father was one of them. Born and raised in Kenya before th
at nation was freed from the shackles of colonialism, he grew up herding his father's goats and, from time to time, attending loc
al schools.But he wanted more. He dreamed of coming to America so he could further his education, improve his skills, and then re
turn to help lead the next generation of newly independent Kenyans.I didn't know my father very well. My parents separated when I
 was very young. But before I went to law school, I traveled back to Kenya to learn his story and to meet my relatives there. And
 I went to a tiny village called Alego where my grandmother lives. And I visited my father's grave and my grandfather's grave. An
d I asked my grandmother if there was anything left from my father.She opened a trunk and took out a stack of letters, which she 
handed to me. There were more than thirty of them, all handwritten by my father, all addressed to colleges and universities all a
cross America. They were letters not so different than those I would write twenty-five years later, trying to find a job that wou
ld give meaning to my life.And I read these letters, which were in the simple, sometimes awkward, voice of somebody desperate for
 a chance to come and live his unlikely dream.It is because someone answered that dream that I stand before you today, hopeful fo
r our collective future, excited for your individual prospects, and eager for you to keep the legacy of this country alive in the
 years to come.You will be tested. You won't always succeed. But know that you have it within your power to try. That generations
 who have come before you faced these same fears and uncertainties in their own time. And that through our collective labor, and 
through God's providence, and our willingness to shoulder each other's burdens, America will continue on its journey towards that
 distant horizon, and a better day.Thank you so much to the class of 2006, and congratulations on your graduation. JOHN LEWIS 65T
H BIRTHDAY GALA Monday, February 21, 2005John Lewis's 65th Birthday GalaCompete TextThank you. It's an honor to be here tonight t
o celebrate one of the most courageous and compassionate Americans of our time. Happy Birthday John. When I was first asked to sp
eak here, I thought to myself, never in a million years would I have guessed that I'd be serving in Congress with John Lewis.And 
then I thought, you know, there was once a time when John Lewis might never have guessed that he'd be serving in Congress. And th
ere was a time not long before that when people might never have guessed that someday, African-Americans would be able to go to t
he polls, pick up a ballot, make their voice heard, and elect that Congress.But we can, and I'm here, because people like John Le
wis believed. Because people like John Lewis feared nothing and risked everything for those beliefs. Because they were willing to
 spend sleepless nights in lonely jail cells, endure the searing pain of billy clubs cracked against their bones, and face down d
eath simply so that all of us could share equally in the joys of life.How far we've come because of your courage, John.How far we
've come from the days when the son of sharecroppers would huddle by the radio as the crackle of Dr. King's dreams filled his hea
rt with hope. He was often forced to leave school to work in the fields and the public library was off-limits to his kind, and ye
t young John Lewis sought knowledge. His parents were never the type to complain or try to stir up any trouble, and yet their son
 sought justice.And so he organized, even when so many tried to stop his efforts. He spoke truths, even when they tried to silenc
e his words. And he marched, even when they tried to knock him down again and again and again.The road John chose for himself was
 not easy. But the road to change never is.I think it's simple for us to look back forty years and think that it was all so clear
 then. That while there may be room for moral ambiguity in the issues we debate today, civil rights was different. That people ge
nerally knew what was right and what was wrong, who the good guys and the bad guys were. But the moral certainties we now take fo
r granted - that separate can never be equal, that the blessings of liberty enshrined in our Constitution belong to all of us, th
at our children should be able to go to school together and play together and grow up together - were anything but certain when J
ohn Lewis was a boy.And so there was struggle and sacrifice, discipline and tremendous courage. And there was the culmination of 
it all one Sunday afternoon on a bridge in Alabama.I've often thought about the people on the Edmund Pettus Bridge that day. Not 
only John and Hosea Williams leading the march, but the hundreds of everyday Americans who left their homes and their churches to
 join it. Blacks and whites, teenagers and children, teachers and bankers and shopkeepers - a beloved community of God's children
 ready to stand for freedom.And I wonder, where did they find that kind of courage? When you're facing row after row of state tro
opers on horseback armed with billy clubs and tear gas...when they're coming toward you spewing hatred and violence, how do you s
imply stop, kneel down, and pray to the Lord for salvation? Truly, this is the audacity of hope.But the most amazing thing of all
 is that after that day - after John Lewis was beaten within an inch of his life, after people's heads were gashed open and their
 eyes were burned and they watched their children's innocence literally beaten out of them...after all that, they went back to ma
rch again.They marched again. They crossed the bridge. They awakened a nation's conscience, and not five months later, the Voting
 Rights Act of 1965 was signed into law.And so it was, in a story as old as our beginnings and as timeless as our hopes, that cha
nge came about because the good people of a great nation willed it so.Thank you, John, for going back. Thank you for marching aga
in.Thank you for reminding us that in America, ordinary citizens can somehow find in their hearts the courage to do extraordinary
 things. That in the face of the fiercest resistance and the most crushing oppression, one voice can be willing to stand up and s
ay that's wrong and this is right and here's why. And say it again. And say it louder. And keep saying it until other voices join
 the chorus to sing the songs that set us free.Today, I'm sure you'll all agree that we have songs left to sing and bridges left 
to cross. And if there's anything we can learn from this living saint sitting beside me, it is that change is never easy, but alw
ays possible. That it comes not from violence or militancy or the kind of politics that pits us against each other and plays on o
ur worst fears; but from great discipline and organization, from a strong message of hope, and from the courage to turn against t
he tide so that the tide eventually may be turned.Today, we need that courage. We need the courage to say that it's wrong that on
e out of every five children is born into poverty in the richest country on Earth. And it's right to do whatever necessary to pro
vide our children the care and the education they need to live up to their God-given potential.It's wrong to tell hardworking fam
ilies who are earning less and paying more in taxes that we can't do anything to help them buy their own home or send their kids 
to college or care for them when they're sick. And it's right to expect that if you're willing to work hard in this country of Am
erican Dreamers, the sky is the limit on what you can achieve.It's wrong to tell those brave men and women who are willing to fig
ht and die for this country that when they come home, we may not have room for them at the VA hospitals or the benefits we promis
ed them. And it's right to always provide the very best care for the very best of America.My friends, we have not come this far a
s a people and a nation because we believe that we're better off simply fending for ourselves. We are here because we believe tha
t all men are created equal, and that we are all connected to each other as one people. And we need to say that more. And say it 
again. And keep saying it.And where will our courage come from to speak these truths? When we stand on our own Edmund Pettus Brid
ge, what hope will sustain us?I believe it is the hope of knowing that people like John Lewis have stood on that same bridge and 
lived to cross it.For me, this kind of hope often comes from a memory of a trip I took during the campaign. About a week after th
e primary, Dick Durbin and I embarked on a nineteen city tour of Southern Illinois. And one of the towns we went to was a place c
alled Cairo, which, as many of you might know, achieved a certain notoriety during the late 60s and early 70s as having one of th
e worst racial climates in the country. You had an active white citizen's council there, you had cross burnings, Jewish families 
were being harassed, you had segregated schools, race riots, you name it - it was going on in Cairo.And we're riding down to Cair
o and Dick Durbin turns to me and says, "Let me tell you about the first time I went to Cairo. It was about 30 years ago. I was 2
3 years old and Paul Simon, who was Lieutenant Governor at the time, sent me down there to investigate what could be done to impr
ove the racial climate in Cairo."And Dick tells me how he diligently goes down there and gets picked up by a local resident who t
akes him to his motel. And as Dick's getting out of the car, the driver says "excuse me, let me just give you a piece of advice. 
Don't use the phone in your motel room because the switchboard operator is a member of the white citizen's council, and they'll r
eport on anything you do."Well, this obviously makes Dick Durbin upset, but he's a brave young man, so he checks in to his room, 
unpacks his bags and a few minutes later he hears a knock on the door. He opens up the door and there's a guy standing there who 
just stares at Dick for a second, and then says, "What the hell are you doing here?" and walks away.Well, now Dick is really feel
ing concerned and so am I because as he's telling me this story, we're pulling in to Cairo. So I'm wondering what kind of recepti
on we're going to get. And we wind our way through the town and we go past the old courthouse, take a turn and suddenly we're in 
a big parking lot and about 300 people are standing there. About a fourth of them are black and three fourths are white and they 
all are about the age where they would have been active participants in the epic struggle that had taken place thirty years earli
er.And as we pull closer, I see something. All of these people are wearing these little buttons that say "Obama for U.S. Senate."
 And they start smiling. And they start waving. And Dick and I looked at each other and didn't have to say a thing. Because if yo
u told Dick thirty years ago that he - the son of Lithuania immigrants born into very modest means in east St. Louis - would be r
eturning to Cairo as a sitting United States Senator, and that he would have in tow a black guy born in Hawaii with a father from
 Kenya and a mother from Kansas named Barack Obama, no one would have believed it.But it happened. And it happened because John L
ewis and scores of brave Americans stood on that bridge and lived to cross it.You know, two weeks after Bloody Sunday, when the m
arch finally reached Montgomery, Martin Luther King Jr. spoke to the crowd of thousands and said "The arc of the moral universe i
s long, but it bends towards justice." He's right, but you know what? It doesn't bend on its own. It bends because we help it ben
d that way. Because people like John Lewis and Hosea Williams and Martin Luther King and Coretta Scott King and Rosa Parks and th
ousands of ordinary Americans with extraordinary courage have helped bend it that way. And as their examples call out to us from 
across the generations, we continue to progress as a people because they inspire us to take our own two hands and bend that arc. 
Thank you John. May God Bless you, and may God Bless these United States of America. MEMORIAL DAY ABRAHAM LINCOLN NATIONAL CEMETE
RY TOPIC: Our Past, Our Future & Vision for America Monday, May 30th, 2005 - Memorial Day Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery Elwoo
d, Illinois Complete Text Thank you for allowing me the honor of joining you here today. This is my first time visiting the Abrah
am Lincoln National Cemetery, and as I was driving through I thought to myself that the staff and the volunteers who have made th
is possible should feel very proud of the work they're doing - this is a beautiful place for our veterans to come home to.Among r
ed maples and sturdy oaks, over 10,000 Americans now lay here, resting peacefully under an endless Illinois sky.They rest in sile
nce. On a typical day, except for scattered footsteps or the soft gurgling of a stream, I imagine you could walk row after row of
 headstones without hearing a single sound.It isn't until you come across another visitor - a widow watering the plant she brough
t for her husband; a little girl planting a flag at her father's headstone; a mother shedding tears on the wreath she will lay fo
r her son - that you realize something: In this place we have come to associate with the quiet of death, the memories of loved on
es speak to us so strongly that when we stop and listen, we can't help but hear life.And once a year on this day, in the fullness
 of spring, in the presence of those who never really leave us, it is life that we honor. Lives of courage, lives of sacrifice, a
nd the ultimate measure of selflessness - lives that were given to save others.What led these men and women to wear their country
's uniform?What is it that leads anyone to put aside their own pursuit of happiness; to subordinate their own sense of survival, 
for something larger - something greater?Behind each stone is one of these stories; a personal journey that eventually led to the
 decision to fight for one's country and defend the freedoms we enjoy. Most of the Americans who rest here were like my grandfath
er, a WWII vet who volunteered after Pearl Harbor, fought in Patton's Army, but was lucky enough to came back in one piece, and w
ent on to live well into his twilight years.My grandfather never boasted about it. He treated the fact that he served in the mili
tary like it was only a matter of fact.And so it is easy for us to forget sometimes that, like my grandfather, the men and women 
resting here, whose service spans a century of conflict from the Civil War to the War in Iraq, chose their path at a very young a
ge.These were kids who went to war.They had a whole life ahead of them - birthdays and weddings, holidays with children and grand
children, homes and jobs and happiness of their own. And yet, at one moment or another, they felt the tug. Maybe it was a Preside
nt's call to save the Union and to free the slaves. Maybe it was the day of infamy that awakened a nation to the dangers of Fasci
sm. Or maybe it was the morning we saw our security dissappear then the twin towers collapsed.And at that moment, whatever the mo
ment was, these men and women thought of a mom or a dad, a husband or a wife, or a child not yet born. They thought of a landscap
e, or a way of life, or a flag, or the words of freedom they'd learned to love. And they determined that it was time to go. They 
decided: "I must serve so that the people I love may live - happily, safely, freely."Oliver Wendell Holmes once remarked that "To
 fight out a war, you must believe something and want something with all your might."The Americans who lay here believed.And when
 they waved goodbye to their families - some for the last time - they held those beliefs close as they crossed the ocean towards 
an unknown destiny.And they made us very proud.No matter how many veterans you may meet, or how many stories of heroism you may h
ear, every encounter reminds you that through their service, these men and women have lived out the ideals that stir our Nation -
 honor, duty, sacrifice.They're people like Seamus Ahern, who I met during the campaign at a V.F.W. hall in East Moline, Illinois
. He told me about how he'd joined the Marines because his country had given so much to him, and he felt that as a young person h
e needed to give something back. We became friends and we kept in touch over email while he was in Iraq. One day he sent me an em
ail that said "I'm sorry I haven't written more often - I've been a little busy over here in Falujah." I had to reply "I don't th
ink it's necessary to apologize."They're people like Major Tammy Duckworth, a helicopter pilot with the Illinois Army Guard. Four
 months ago, she lost both of her legs when a rocket was shot through the floor of her Black Hawk helicopter over Iraq. And yet, 
last month she came to the United States Senate to testify about ways we can improve the process of rehabilitating injured vets, 
and as we speak she has already begun training so that she can fly again for her country one day.They're the people I had the hon
or of meeting at Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington. Young men and women who may have lost limbs or broken their backs or s
evered their nerves, but have not lost the will to live, or the pride they feel in having served their country. They have no time
 for self-pity, but wish only to recuperate as quickly as they can, and meet the next challenge.It is this quintessentially Ameri
can optimism that stands out in our veterans. To meet these men and women gives you a clear sense of the quality of person we hav
e serving in the United States Armed Forces.No wonder, then, that when these men and women come home from war, they return to par
ades and salutes, the arms of loved ones and the waving flags of children.But today, on Memorial Day, we also remember that some 
come home in a different way. The news of their impending arrival is delivered with a soft knock on the door. Their return comes 
with the sound of a twenty-one gun salute and the lonely notes of taps.I won't pretend that simple words of condolence could ever
 ease the pain of the loss for the families they leave behind. I am the father of two little girls, and when I see the parents wh
o have come here today to lay wreaths for the children they lost, my heart breaks with theirs.But I will say to those parents tha
t here in Illinois and all across America, other children and other parents look to your children and their service as a shining 
example of what's best in this land.During the Civil War, President Lincoln took a moment to sit down and personally write a cond
olence letter to a Mrs. Bixby of Massachusetts after he had learned that she lost five of her sons in battle. In that letter, the
 President wrote:"I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished m
emory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom
."Here on this hallowed ground and in ceremonies across the nation, we choose this day to solemnly honor those costly sacrifices 
- sacrifices that were made on the fields of Gettysburg, the beaches of Normandy, the deserts of Iraq, and so many other distant 
lands. It makes our hearts heavy; our heads bow in respect.But amid the quiet of this spring day in Elwood, we also hear life. An
d as we are called by the memories of those who found the courage to lay down a life so that others may live, we thank God for bl
essing us with the privilege of knowing such heroic sons and daughters of America. Floor Statement on Immigration Reform TOPIC: I
mmigration April 3, 2006 Floor Statement of Senator Barack Obama Immigration Reform Complete Text Mr. President, I come to the fl
oor today to enter the debate on comprehensive immigration reform. It is a debate that will touch on the basic questions of moral
ity, the law, and what it means to be an American.I know that this debate evokes strong passions on all sides. The recent peacefu
l but passionate protests that we saw all across the country--500,000 in Los Angeles and 100,000 in my hometown of Chicago--are a
 testament to this fact, as are the concerns of millions of Americans about the security of our borders.But I believe we can work
 together to pass immigration reform in a way that unites the people in this country, not in a way that divides us by playing on 
our worst instincts and fears.Like millions of Americans, the immigrant story is also my story. My father came here from Kenya, a
nd I represent a State where vibrant immigrant communities ranging from Mexican to Polish to Irish enrich our cities and neighbor
hoods. So I understand the allure of freedom and opportunity that fuels the dream of a life in the United States. But I also unde
rstand the need to fix a broken system.When Congress last addressed this issue comprehensively in 1986, there were approximately 
4 million illegal immigrants living in the United States. That number had grown substantially when Congress again addressed the i
ssue in 1996. Today, it is estimated that there are more than 11 million undocumented aliens living in our country.The American p
eople are a welcoming and generous people. But those who enter our country illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the r
ule of law. And because we live in an age where terrorists are challenging our borders, we simply cannot allow people to pour int
o the United States undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. Americans are right to demand better border security and better enfo
rcement of the immigration laws.The bill the Judiciary Committee has passed would clearly strengthen enforcement. I will repeat t
hat, because those arguing against the Judiciary Committee bill contrast that bill with a strong enforcement bill. The bill the J
udiciary Committee passed clearly strengthens enforcement.To begin with, the agencies charged with border security would receive 
new technology, new facilities, and more people to stop, process, and deport illegal immigrants. But while security might start a
t our borders, it doesn't end there. Millions of undocumented immigrants live and work here without our knowing their identity or
 their background. We need to strike a workable bargain with them. They have to acknowledge that breaking our immigration laws wa
s wrong. They must pay a penalty, and abide by all of our laws going forward. They must earn the right to stay over a 6-year peri
od, and then they must wait another 5 years as legal permanent residents before they become citizens.But in exchange for acceptin
g those penalties, we must allow undocumented immigrants to come out of the shadows and step on a path toward full participation 
in our society. In fact, I will not support any bill that does not provide this earned path to citizenship for the undocumented p
opulation--not just for humanitarian reasons; not just because these people, having broken the law, did so for the best of motive
s, to try and provide a better life for their children and their grandchildren; but also because this is the only practical way w
e can get a handle on the population that is within our borders right now.To keep from having to go through this difficult proces
s again in the future, we must also replace the flow of undocumented immigrants coming to work here with a new flow of guestworke
rs. Illegal immigration is bad for illegal immigrants and bad for the workers against whom they compete.Replacing the flood of il
legals with a regulated stream of legal immigrants who enter the United States after background checks and who are provided labor
 rights would enhance our security, raise wages, and improve working conditions for all Americans.But I fully appreciate that we 
cannot create a new guestworker program without making it as close to impossible as we can for illegal workers to find employment
. We do not need new guestworkers plus future undocumented immigrants. We need guestworkers instead of undocumented immigrants.To
ward that end, American employers need to take responsibility. Too often illegal immigrants are lured here with a promise of a jo
b, only to receive unconscionably low wages. In the interest of cheap labor, unscrupulous employers look the other way when emplo
yees provide fraudulent U.S. citizenship documents. Some actually call and place orders for undocumented workers because they don
't want to pay minimum wages to American workers in surrounding communities. These acts hurt both American workers and immigrants
 whose sole aim is to work hard and get ahead. That is why we need a simple, foolproof, and mandatory mechanism for all employers
 to check the legal status of new hires. Such a mechanism is in the Judiciary Committee bill.And before any guestworker is hired,
 the job must be made available to Americans at a decent wage with benefits. Employers then need to show that there are no Americ
ans to take these jobs. I am not willing to take it on faith that there are jobs that Americans will not take. There has to be a 
showing. If this guestworker program is to succeed, it must be properly calibrated to make certain that these are jobs that canno
t be filled by Americans, or that the guestworkers provide particular skills we can't find in this country.I know that dealing wi
th the undocumented population is difficult, for practical and political reasons. But we simply cannot claim to have dealt with t
he problems of illegal immigration if we ignore the illegal resident population or pretend they will leave voluntarily. Some of t
he proposed ideas in Congress provide a temporary legal status and call for deportation, but fail to answer how the government wo
uld deport 11 million people. I don't know how it would be done. I don't know how we would line up all the buses and trains and a
irplanes and send 11 million people back to their countries of origin. I don't know why it is that we expect they would voluntari
ly leave after having taken the risk of coming to this country without proper documentation.I don't know many police officers acr
oss the country who would go along with the bill that came out of the House, a bill that would, if enacted, charge undocumented i
mmigrants with felonies, and arrest priests who are providing meals to hungry immigrants, or people who are running shelters for 
women who have been subject to domestic abuse. I cannot imagine that we would be serious about making illegal immigrants into fel
ons, and going after those who would aid such persons.That approach is not serious. That is symbolism, that is demagoguery. It is
 important that if we are going to deal with this problem, we deal with it in a practical, commonsense way. If temporary legal st
atus is granted but the policy says these immigrants are never good enough to become Americans, then the policy that makes little
 sense.I believe successful, comprehensive immigration reform can be achieved by building on the work of the Judiciary Committee.
 The Judiciary Committee bill combines some of the strongest elements of Senator Hagel's border security proposals with the reali
stic workplace and earned-citizenship program proposed by Senators McCain and Kennedy.Mr. President, I will come to the floor ove
r the next week to offer some amendments of my own, and to support amendments my colleagues will offer. I will also come to the f
loor to argue against amendments that contradict our tradition as a nation of immigrants and as a nation of laws.As FDR reminded 
the Nation at the 50th anniversary of the dedication of the Statue of Liberty, those who landed at Ellis Island ``were the men an
d women who had the supreme courage to strike out for themselves, to abandon language and relatives, to start at the bottom witho
ut influence, without money, and without knowledge of life in a very young civilization.''It behooves us to remember that not eve
ry single immigrant who came into the United States through Ellis Island had proper documentation. Not every one of our grandpare
nts or great-grandparents would have necessarily qualified for legal immigration. But they came here in search of a dream, in sea
rch of hope. Americans understand that, and they are willing to give an opportunity to those who are already here, as long as we 
get serious about making sure that our borders actually mean something.Today's immigrants seek to follow in the same tradition of
 immigration that has built this country. We do ourselves and them a disservice if we do not recognize the contributions of these
 individuals. And we fail to protect our Nation if we do not regain control over our immigration system immediately. Super Tuesda
y Chicago, IL February 5, 2008 Before I begin, I just want to send my condolences to the victims of the storms that hit Tennessee
 and Arkansas. They are in our thoughts and in our prayers.Well, the polls are just closing in California and the votes are still
 being counted in cities and towns across the country. But there is one thing on this February night that we do not need the fina
l results to know - our time has come, our movement is real, and change is coming to America.Only a few hundred miles from here, 
almost one year ago to the day, we stood on the steps of the Old State Capitol to reaffirm a truth that was spoken there so many 
generations ago - that a house divided cannot stand; that we are more than a collection of Red States and Blue States; we are, an
d always will be, the United States of America.What began as a whisper in Springfield soon carried across the corn fields of Iowa
, where farmers and factory workers; students and seniors stood up in numbers we've never seen. They stood up to say that maybe t
his year, we don't have to settle for a politics where scoring points is more important than solving problems. This time we can f
inally do something about health care we can't afford or mortgages we can't pay. This time can be different.Their voices echoed f
rom the hills of New Hampshire to the deserts of Nevada, where teachers and cooks and kitchen workers stood up to say that maybe 
Washington doesn't have to be run by lobbyists anymore. They reached the coast of South Carolina when people said that maybe we d
on't have to be divided by race and region and gender; that crumbling schools are stealing the future of black children and white
 children; that we can come together and build an America that gives every child, everywhere the opportunity to live their dreams
. This time can be different.And today, on this Tuesday in February, in states North and South, East and West, what began as a wh
isper in Springfield has swelled to a chorus of millions calling for change. A chorus that cannot be ignored. That cannot be dete
rred. This time can be different because this campaign for the presidency is different.It's different not because of me, but beca
use of you. Because you are tired of being disappointed and tired of being let down. You're tired of hearing promises made and pl
ans proposed in the heat of a campaign only to have nothing change when everyone goes back to Washington. Because the lobbyists j
ust write another check. Or because politicians start worrying about how they'll win the next election instead of why they should
. Or because they focus on who's up and who's down instead of who matters.And while Washington is consumed with the same drama an
d division and distraction, another family puts up a For Sale sign in the front yard. Another factory shuts its doors. Another so
ldier waves goodbye as he leaves on another tour of duty in a war that should've never been authorized and never been waged. It g
oes on and on and on.But in this election - at this moment - you are standing up all across this country to say, not this time. N
ot this year. The stakes are too high and the challenges too great to play the same Washington game with the same Washington play
ers and expect a different result. This time must be different.Now, this isn't about me and it's not about Senator Clinton. As I'
ve said before, she was a friend before this campaign and she'll be a friend after it's over. I respect her as a colleague, and I
 congratulate her on her victories tonight.But this fall we owe the American people a real choice. It's change versus more of the
 same. It's the future versus the past.It's a choice between going into this election with Republicans and Independents already u
nited against us, or going against their nominee with a campaign that has united Americans of all parties around a common purpose
.It's a choice between having a debate with the other party about who has the most experience in Washington, or having one about 
who's most likely to change Washington. Because that's a debate we can win.It's a choice between a candidate who's taken more mon
ey from Washington lobbyists than either Republican in this race, and a campaign that hasn't taken a dime of their money because 
we've been funded by you.And if I am your nominee, my opponent will not be able to say that I voted for the war in Iraq; or that 
I gave George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran; or that I support the Bush-Cheney policy of not talking to leaders we don't 
like. And he will not be able to say that I wavered on something as fundamental as whether or not it's ok for America to use tort
ure - because it is never ok. That is the choice in this election.The Republicans running for President have already tied themsel
ves to the past. They speak of a hundred year war in Iraq and billions more on tax breaks for the wealthiest few who don't need t
hem and didn't ask for them - tax breaks that mortgage our children's future on a mountain of debt at a time when there are famil
ies who can't pay their medical bills and students who can't pay their tuition.They are running on the politics of yesterday, and
 that is why our party must be the party of tomorrow. And that is the party I will lead as President.I'll be the President who en
ds the tax breaks to companies that ship our jobs overseas and start putting them in the pockets of working Americans who deserve
 it. And struggling homeowners. And seniors who should retire with dignity and respect.I'll be the President who finally brings D
emocrats and Republicans together to make health care affordable and available for every single American. We will put a college e
ducation within reach of anyone who wants to go, and instead of just talking about how great our teachers are, we will reward the
m for their greatness, with more pay and better support. And we will harnesses the ingenuity of farmers and scientists and entrep
reneurs to free this nation from the tyranny of oil once and for all.And when I am President, we will put an end to a politics th
at uses 9/11 as a way to scare up votes, and start seeing it as a challenge that should unite America and the world against the c
ommon threats of the twenty-first century: terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease.We can
 do this. It will not be easy. It will require struggle and sacrifice. There will setbacks and we will make mistakes. And that is
 why we need all the help we can get. So tonight I want to speak directly to all those Americans who have yet to join this moveme
nt but still hunger for change - we need you. We need you to stand with us, and work with us, and help us prove that together, or
dinary people can still do extraordinary things.I am blessed to be standing in the city where my own extraordinary journey began.
 A few miles from here, in the shadow of a shuttered steel plant, is where I learned what it takes to make change happen.I was a 
young organizer then, intent on fighting joblessness and poverty on the South Side, and I still remember one of the very first me
etings I put together. We had worked on it for days, but no one showed up. Our volunteers felt so defeated, they wanted to quit. 
And to be honest, so did I.But at that moment, I looked outside and saw some young boys tossing stones at a boarded-up apartment 
building across the street. They were like boys in so many cities across the country - boys without prospects, without guidance, 
without hope. And I turned to the volunteers, and I asked them, "Before you quit, I want you to answer one question. What will ha
ppen to those boys?" And the volunteers looked out that window, and they decided that night to keep going - to keep organizing, k
eep fighting for better schools, and better jobs, and better health care. And so did I. And slowly, but surely, in the weeks and 
months to come, the community began to change.You see, the challenges we face will not be solved with one meeting in one night. C
hange will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time.We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change
 that we seek. We are the hope of those boys who have little; who've been told that they cannot have what they dream; that they c
annot be what they imagine.Yes they can.We are the hope of the father who goes to work before dawn and lies awake with doubts tha
t tell him he cannot give his children the same opportunities that someone gave him.Yes he can.We are the hope of the woman who h
ears that her city will not be rebuilt; that she cannot reclaim the life that was swept away in a terrible storm.Yes she can.We a
re the hope of the future; the answer to the cynics who tell us our house must stand divided; that we cannot come together; that 
we cannot remake this world as it should be.Because we know what we have seen and what we believe - that what began as a whisper 
has now swelled to a chorus that cannot be ignored; that will not be deterred; that will ring out across this land as a hymn that
 will heal this nation, repair this world, and make this time different than all the rest - Yes. We. Can. Floor Statement Habeas 
Corpus Amendment Habeas Corpus Statement Video - PART 1Habeas Corpus Statement Video - PART 2 TOPIC: Homeland Security September 
27, 2006 Floor Statement on the Habeas Corpus Amendment Complete Text Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I would like to address the habea
s corpus amendment that is on the floor and that we just heard a lengthy debate about between Senator Specter and Senator Warner.
A few years ago, I gave a speech in Boston that people talk about from time to time. In that speech, I spoke about why I love thi
s country, why I love America, and what I believe sets this country apart from so many other nations in so many areas. I said: Th
at is the true genius of America--a faith in simple dreams, an insistence on small miracles; that we can tuck in our children at 
night and know that they are fed and clothed and safe from harm; that we can say what we think, write what we think, without hear
ing a sudden knock on the door. .....Without hearing a sudden knock on the door. I bring this up because what is at stake in this
 bill, and in the amendment that is currently being debated, is the right, in some sense, for people who hear that knock on the d
oor and are placed in detention because the Government suspects them of terrorist activity to effectively challenge their detenti
on by our Government.Now, under the existing rules of the Detainee Treatment Act, court review of anyone's detention is severely 
restricted. Fortunately, the Supreme Court in Hamdan ensured that some meaningful review would take place. But in the absence of 
Senator Specter's amendment that is currently pending, we will essentially be going back to the same situation as if the Supreme 
Court had never ruled in Hamdan, a situation in which detainees effectively have no access to anything other than the Combatant S
tatus Review Tribunal, or the CSRT.Now, I think it is important for all of us to understand exactly the procedures that are curre
ntly provided for under the CSRT. I have actually read a few of the transcripts of proceedings under the CSRT. And I can tell you
 that oftentimes they provide detainees no meaningful recourse if the Government has the wrong guy.Essentially, reading these tra
nscripts, they proceed as follows: The Government says: You are a member of the Taliban. And the detainee will say: No, I'm not. 
And then the Government will not ask for proof from the detainee that he is not. There is no evidence that the detainee can offer
 to rebut the Government's charge.The Government then moves on and says: And on such and such a date, you perpetrated such and su
ch terrorist crime. And the detainee says: No, I didn't. You have the wrong guy. But again, he has no capacity to place into evid
ence anything that would rebut the Government's charge. And there is no effort to find out whether or not what he is saying is tr
ue.And it proceeds like that until effectively the Government says, OK, that is the end of the tribunal, and he goes back to dete
ntion. Even if there is evidence that he was not involved in any terrorist activity, he may not have any mechanism to introduce t
hat evidence into the hearing.Now, the vast majority of the folks in Guantanamo, I suspect, are there for a reason. There are a l
ot of dangerous people. Particularly dangerous are people like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. Ironically, those are the guys who are goi
ng to get real military procedures because they are going to be charged by the Government. But detainees who have not committed w
ar crimes--or where the Government's case is not strong--may not have any recourse whatsoever.The bottom line is this: Current pr
ocedures under the CSRT are such that a perfectly innocent individual could be held and could not rebut the Government's case and
 has no way of proving his innocence.I would like somebody in this Chamber, somebody in this Government, to tell me why this is n
ecessary. I do not want to hear that this is a new world and we face a new kind of enemy. I know that. I know that every time I t
hink about my two little girls and worry for their safety--when I wonder if I really can tuck them in at night and know that they
 are safe from harm. I have as big of a stake as anybody on the other side of the aisle and anybody in this administration in cap
turing terrorists and incapacitating them. I would gladly take up arms myself against any terrorist threat to make sure my family
 is protected.But as a parent, I can also imagine the terror I would feel if one of my family members were rounded up in the midd
le of the night and sent to Guantanamo without even getting one chance to ask why they were being held and being able to prove th
eir innocence.This is not just an entirely fictional scenario, by the way. We have already had reports by the CIA and various gen
erals over the last few years saying that many of the detainees at Guantanamo should not have been there. As one U.S. commander o
f Guantanamo told the Wall Street Journal:Sometimes, we just didn't get the right folks.We all know about the recent case of the 
Canadian man who was suspected of terrorist connections, detained in New York, sent to Syria--through a rendition agreement--tort
ured, only to find out later it was all a case of mistaken identity and poor information.In this war, where terrorists can plot u
ndetected from within our borders, it is absolutely vital that our law enforcement agencies are able to detain and interrogate wh
oever they believe to be a suspect,and so it is understandable that mistakes will be made and identities will be confused. I don'
t blame the Government for that. This is an extraordinarily difficult war we are prosecuting against terrorists. There are going 
to be situations in which we cast too wide a net and capture the wrong person.But what is avoidable is refusing to ever allow our
 legal system to correct these mistakes. By giving suspects a chance--even one chance--to challenge the terms of their detention 
in court, to have a judge confirm that the Government has detained the right person for the right suspicions, we could solve this
 problem without harming our efforts in the war on terror one bit.Let me respond to a couple of points that have been made on the
 other side. You will hear opponents of this amendment say it will give all kinds of rights to terrorist masterminds, such as Kha
lid Shaikh Mohammed. But that is not true. The irony of the underlying bill as it is written is that someone like Khalid Shaikh M
ohammed is going to get basically a full military trial, with all of the bells and whistles. He will have counsel, he will be abl
e to present evidence, and he will be able to rebut the Government's case. The feeling is that he is guilty of a war crime and to
 do otherwise might violate some of our agreements under the Geneva Conventions. I think that is good, that we are going to provi
de him with some procedure and process. I think we will convict him, and I think he will be brought to justice. I think justice w
ill be carried out in his case.But that won't be true for the detainees who are never charged with a terrorist crime, who have no
t committed a war crime. Under this bill, people who may have been simply at the wrong place at the wrong time--and there may be 
just a few--will never get a chance to appeal their detention. So, essentially, the weaker the Government's case is against you, 
the fewer rights you have. Senator Specter's amendment would fix that, while still ensuring that terrorists like Mohammed are swi
ftly brought to justice.You are also going to hear a lot about how lawyers are going to file all kinds of frivolous lawsuits on b
ehalf of detainees if habeas corpus is in place. This is a cynical argument because I think we could get overwhelming support in 
this Chamber right now for a measure that would restrict habeas to a one-shot appeal that would be limited solely to whether some
one was legally detained or not. I am not interested in allowing folks at Guantanamo to complain about whether their cell is too 
small or whether the food they get is sufficiently edible or to their tastes. That is not what this is about. We can craft a habe
as bill that says the only question before the court is whether there is sufficient evidence to find that this person is truly an
 unlawful enemy combatant and belongs in this detention center. We can restrict it to that. And although I have seen some of thos
e amendments floating around, those were not amendments that were admitted during this debate. It is a problem that is easily add
ressed. It is not a reason for us to wholesale eliminate habeas corpus.Finally, you will hear some Senators argue that if habeas 
is allowed, it renders the CSRT process irrelevant because the courts will embark on de novo review, meaning they will completely
 retry these cases, take new evidence. So whatever findings were made in the CSRT are not really relevant because the court is es
sentially going to start all over again.I actually think some of these Senators are right on this point. I believe we could actua
lly set up a system in which a military tribunal is sufficient to make a determination as to whether someone is an enemy combatan
t and would not require the sort of traditional habeas corpus that is called for as a consequence of this amendment, where the co
urt's role is simply to see whether proper procedures were met. The problem is that the way the CSRT is currently designed is so 
insufficient that we can anticipate the Supreme Court overturning this underlying bill,once again, in the absence of habeas corpu
s review.I have had conversations with some of the sponsors of the underlying bill who say they agree that we have to beef up the
 CSRT procedures. Well, if we are going to revisit the CSRT procedures to make them stronger and make sure they comport with basi
c due process, why not leave habeas corpus in place until we have actually fixed it up to our satisfaction? Why rush through it 2
 days before we are supposed to adjourn? Because some on the other side of the aisle want to go campaign on the issue of who is t
ougher on terrorism and national security.Since 9/11, Americans have been asked to give up certain conveniences and civil liberti
es--long waits in airport security lines, random questioning because of a foreign-sounding last name--so that the Government can 
defeat terrorism wherever it may exist. It is a tough balance to strike. I think we have to acknowledge that whoever was in power
 right now, whoever was in the White House, whichever party was in control, that we would have to do some balancing between civil
 liberties and our need for security and to get tough on those who would do us harm.Most of us have been willing to make some sac
rifices because we know that, in the end, it helps to make us safer. But restricting somebody's right to challenge their imprison
ment indefinitely is not going to make us safer. In fact, recent evidence shows it is probably making us less safe.In Sunday's Ne
w York Times, it was reported that previous drafts of the recently released National Intelligence Estimate, a report of 16 differ
ent Government intelligence agencies, describe:..... actions by the United States Government that were determined to have stoked 
the jihad movement, like the indefinite detention of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. .....This is not just unhelpful in our fight ag
ainst terror, it is unnecessary. We don't need to imprison innocent people to win this war. For people who are guilty, we have th
e procedures in place to lock them up. That is who we are as a people. We do things right, and we do things fair.Two days ago, ev
ery Member of this body received a letter, signed by 35 U.S. diplomats, many of whom served under Republican Presidents. They urg
ed us to reconsider eliminating the rights of habeas corpus from this bill, saying:To deny habeas corpus to our detainees can be 
seen as a prescription for how the captured members of our own military, diplomatic, and NGO personnel stationed abroad may be tr
eated. ..... The Congress has every duty to insure their protection, and to avoid anything which will be taken as a justification
, even by the most disturbed minds, that arbitrary arrest is the acceptable norm of the day in the relations between nations, and
 that judicial inquiry is an antique, trivial and dispensable luxury.The world is watching what we do today in America. They will
 know what we do here today, and they will treat all of us accordingly in the future--our soldiers, our diplomats, our journalist
s, anybody who travels beyond these borders. I hope we remember this as we go forward. I sincerely hope we can protect what has b
een called the ``great writ''--a writ that has been in place in the Anglo-American legal system for over 700 years.Mr. President,
 this should not be a difficult vote. I hope we pass this amendment because I think it is the only way to make sure this underlyi
ng bill preserves all the great traditions of our legal system and our way of life.I yield the floor. Meeting on Iraq with Presid
ent Bush - Podcast - Complete Transcript TOPIC: Iraq January 25, 2006 Meeting on Iraq with President Bush Vice President Cheney, 
Secretary Rice and Secretary Rumsfeld Complete Podcast Transcript Hello everybody, this is Senator Barack Obama, and today is Wed
nesday, January 25, 2006. First of all, let me say that I am glad to be back from the Middle East. It was a wonderful trip, but i
t is good to be back in the States. It was especially good to hug my kids and my wife. So in case they're listening out there, I 
love them, and appreciate them. I also want to apologize for some of you who have listened to our last couple of podcasts. I know
 I was a little bit long in each of those pod casts, but when you're on the road talking into a cell phone, sometimes you loose t
rack of time. I obviously had a lot of information I wanted to transmit. I appreciate you guys bearing with me. I will try to be 
as succinct as possible in the future.Today I just had a meeting with George Bush, Secretary Rumsfeld, Vice-President Cheney, and
 Condoleezza Rice, as well as some other officials, to discuss the situation in Iraq. Myself with eight other senators had a fran
k exchange of views as to what is taking place in Iraq, and how we can improve the situation there. As many of you know, this is 
a difficult issue for me because I was strongly opposed to the war; felt very strongly that once we were in, it would be very dif
ficult to extract ourselves honorably. Now that we are in, I believe we need to bring our troops home as quickly as possible, but
 to do so in a way that does not precipitate all out civil war in Iraq.As I indicated in my pod cast from Iraq, what was clear to
 me from my visit was that there is no military solution to the problem in Iraq, that the only way we're going to solve the situa
tion there is for all the parties involved to arrive at a political accommodation. In the discussions that we had, I reiterated t
hat view to the president. Ambassador Kaizaad participated in the meeting, as did General Casey. They gave us an update in terms 
of political situation there. One of the biggest concerns, as I may have mentioned in previous pod casts is that the police and d
efense security forces in Iraq in particular that are there have to be governed by non-sectarian leadership that the ministries o
f the interior and defense cannot be subject to the say of either Shia militias or Sunni militias. They have to operate professio
nally to generate trust from the general public. I also pointed out to the president what I heard in Iraq in regards to reconstru
ction. How vital it was to have competent institutions in place that would show the Iraqi people that a unified central governmen
t would work to improve their lives in a concrete way.Another point of discussion had to do with troop levels. Obviously, I am ex
tremely interested, as a number of the other Senators were, in figuring out when we can actually start brining troops home. We tr
ied to press both the President and other members of the administration on how we can start reducing troop levels in a meaningful
 way. I do believe that some progress has been made as respect to training of Iraqi security forces. If in fact we are seeing mor
e trained Iraqis, both in the police and security apparatus, then it seems to me that we should be able to start rotating some of
 our troops out. We didn't get any firms commitments from the president, but that is something that we will continue to press the
m on.There was one final point that came up in discussion. The president insisted that regardless of whether or not agreed about 
going into Iraq, that all Americans had a stake in the success of Iraqi democracy. I agree with that proposition. I also shared w
ith the President my belief, however, that bipartisanship can only work if the administration and political operatives within the
 White House are not using national security as a means of supporting chief political points. Obviously that is not something tha
t is restrictive to Republicans; Democrats do it as well sometimes. But, the stakes are too high to suggest that Democrats who ha
ve critiqued the war effort, or have dissenting views are un-American. I am hopeful that out of this conversation there is some d
iscussion and consideration of these issues within the White House.So, thanks for listening, everybody. I appreciate it, and I wi
ll talk to you next week. We'll probably have some discussion, at that time, about the Alito nomination. January 2006 Middle East
 Trip - Podcast Transcript TOPIC: Foreign Policy & Defense January 14, 2006 From the Road: Israel and the Palestinian territories
 At the end of his Middle East trip Via Cell Phone from Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv Complete Transcript NOTE: The transcript a
bruptly ends there is no goodbye because Senator Obamas cell phone connection dropped Hello, this is Barack Obama and it's the 14
th of January. I'm sitting in an airport in Tel Aviv finishing up on a 9-day trip to the Middle East. Those of you who listened t
o the last Podcast know that I spent several days in Baghdad as well as Qatar, Kuwait and Jordan. For the last 5 days I've travel
ed throughout Israel and the Palestinian territories. My impressions - and for those of you who have been to the Middle East I th
ink you'll recognize - that it's an extraordinarily complex place.We had the opportunity on the first day to meet with a variety 
of members of Israel security forces and get briefings from them about the border situation and their concerns surrounding Iran a
s well as the prospects of elections both on the Palestinian side and the Israeli side.This was a difficult time for the Israeli 
people - Prime Minister Sharon had just suffered a massive stroke and there was a lot of tumult in terms of political positioning
. Fortunately at least on the Israeli side there seems to be a growing consensus represented by the Kadima party, that a centrist
 position that seeks to disengage from certain areas that are currently controlled by Israel while maintaining vigilance against 
terrorist attacks is the right approach.I also had the opportunity then to fly from Tel Aviv all the way up north on a Blackhawk 
helicopter and see the borders of Israel and the separation barrier that has been erected. The separation barrier is a major bone
 of contention between Palestinians and Israelis at this point. In most portions it's a high fence that appears temporary and cou
ld be moved if the peace process and negotiations go forward. In some places it is a wall - a high barrier that can't be breeched
 and certainly looks permanent.One of the points that I think all Israelis want to emphasize is how small and potentially vulnera
ble from the ground Israel is. And it's true that at certain points it's only about 20-30 minutes wide. When you are flying over 
it is almost impossible to distinguish between - at least for a layman - between Palestinian villages and Israeli villages. And w
e had the opportunity to fly up over the Sea of Galilee, towards the Israeli, Lebanese and Syrian borders and visit with a gentle
man whose house had been hit by a Katyusha missile just recently, launched by Hezbollah (Hezbollah, the militant Islamic organiza
tion that is active in Syria and Lebanon and occasionally engages in skirmishes across the border and obviously makes the populat
ion there feel extraordinarily vulnerable.) But, having said that, one of the things you do get a strong sense of is that Israel 
at this point possesses such superior military forces, that they don't really have enormous vulnerability in a conventional sense
. There is no risk of invasion by its neighbors and Israel's economy and infrastructure seem extraordinarily robust and vibrant.T
he following day I went into Ramallah and to the West Bank and had an opportunity to talk to Palestinian students, as well as Pal
estinian businessmen and also had a meeting with Abu Mazen, the President and successor to Yasser Arafat. As you travel through t
he West Bank, you get a sense of the differences between life for Palestinians and Israelis in this region. Palestinians have to 
suffer through the checkpoint system, the barriers, the fenced-in wall that exists just to get to their jobs, often times to trav
el from north and south even within the west bank. It's created enormous hardship for them - there is high unemployment and the e
conomy is not doing as well as it should.Unfortunately the Palestinians, through Yasser Arafat, suffered from leadership that see
med to be more interested in the rhetoric of Israel's destruction and less interested in actually constructively creating a peace
ful solution to the problem and focusing on delivery of services to the Palestinian people. And so I had a wonderful discussion w
ith Palestinian students as well as discussions with Palestinian businessmen and Abu Mazen, about the importance of the Palestini
an people focusing on building up infrastructure, building up capacity, building up an honest, non-corrupt government, consolidat
ing arms that are currently dispersed among a variety of militias under a single command structure of the Palestinian authority, 
and entering into constructive negotiations on a non-violent basis to arrive at a peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian pr
oblem.Whether that's going to be able to happen or not is not yet clear. There are elections on January 26th and Abu Mazen - his 
party, Fatah party - is being challenged very effectively by Hammas, which has historically been a terrorist organization. This i
s their first venture into politics and they've proved to be much more adept at politics and organization than the ruling Fatah m
ovement, which has been marked for its reputation of corruption.The next day, and the final full day in Israel, we spent finally 
doing a little bit of sight-seeing and traveling through the old city of Jerusalem. Those of you who have been here know the incr
edible magic of the city. As the sun rises over 2,000-year old walls - walls built by David, Soloman, the Turkish Empire, we visi
ted the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, where the site of Calvary and Jesus' tomb is located. Just a stone's throw away, the Wester
n Wall; across from there you have the magnificent Dome of the Rock, gilded in gold. It gives you a sense of just how much histor
y is here and it reminds us that you have to be humble when you think about the Middle East and what's possible here.There are a 
lot of memories, there's a lot of history, there are a lot of grudges and bitterness and in some ways it reminds us of how lucky 
we are as Americans that ironically we don't have this kind of history. It's easier for us to forget and move on. It's much harde
r for people here who are seeing everyday the roots of their own people and the conflicts that go back generation after generatio
n.On the other hand, as I was leaving Jerusalem on that final day and looking over the Old City I was reminded of how similar in 
many ways Palestinians and Jews, Muslims, Christians - how similar all these people were; and that despite differences in languag
e and religion and despite the bitter history of the region it must be possible on some level to have each group recognize the hu
manity of the other. Nomination of Justice Janice Rogers Brown Nomination of Justice Janice Rogers Brown - Complete Text TOPIC: C
onfirmations Wednesday, June 8, 2005 Nomination of Justice Janice Rogers Brown Remarks Complete Text I rise today to speak on the
 nomination of California Justice Janice Rogers Brown to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. Now, let me begin by saying that the la
st thing I would like to be spending my time on right now is talking about judges.I am sure that is true for many in this Chamber
. I know that I certainly do not hear about filibusters and judges when I go back to Illinois and hold townhall meetings with peo
ple across the State. What I hear about are veterans who are concerned about their disability payments and families who are talki
ng about how high gas prices were or how difficult it is to pay for college. And so I think this argument we have been having ove
r the last several weeks about judicial nominations has been an enormous distraction from some of the work that is most important
 to the American people.Moreover, I am not so naive as to think that speaking to an empty Chamber for the benefit of C-SPAN is so
mehow going to change people's minds or people's votes. I recognize that most of my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, are f
airly locked into their positions. I do not expect the President to appoint many judges of my liking. One of the things I have to
ld some of my colleagues on this side of the aisle is that there is only one sure way to make sure Democrats are able to block wh
at they consider to be bad judges, and that is to win elections.And yet I feel compelled to rise on this issue to express, in the
 strongest terms, my opposition to the nomination of Janice Rogers Brown to the DC Circuit.I think it is important for the Americ
an people to know just what it is we are getting. After the Supreme Court, as my esteemed colleague from Wisconsin just stated, t
he DC Circuit is widely viewed as the second highest court in the land. Three of our current Supreme Court Justices came directly
 from this court. Under its jurisdiction fall laws relating to all sorts of Federal agencies and regulations. This is a special c
ourt. It has jurisdiction that other appeals courts do not have. The judges on this court are entrusted with the power to make de
cisions affecting the health of the environment, the amount of money we allow in politics, the right of workers to bargain for fa
ir wages and find freedom from discrimination, and the Social Security that our seniors will receive. It is because of this power
 that we deserve to give the American people a qualified judicial nominee to serve on the DC Circuit.Now, the test for a qualifie
d judicial nominee is not simply whether they are intelligent. Some of us who attended law school or are in business know there a
re a lot of real smart people out there whom you would not put in charge of stuff. The test of whether a judge is qualified to be
 a judge is not their intelligence. It is their judgment.The test of a qualified judicial nominee is also not whether that person
 has their own political views. Every jurist surely does. The test is whether he or she can effectively subordinate their views i
n order to decide each case on the facts and the merits alone. That is what keeps our judiciary independent in America. That is w
hat our Founders intended.Unfortunately, as has been stated repeatedly on this floor, in almost every legal decision that she has
 made and every political speech that she has given, Justice Brown has shown she is not simply a judge with very strong political
 views, she is a political activist who happens to be a judge. It is a pretty easy observation to make when you look at her judic
ial decisions. While some judges tend to favor an activist interpretation of the law and others tend to believe in a restrained i
nterpretation of the law providing great deference to the legislature, Justice Brown tends to favor whatever interpretation leads
 her to the very same ideological conclusions every single time.So when it comes to laws protecting a woman's right to choose or 
a worker's right to organize, she will claim that the laws that the legislature passed should be interpreted narrowly. Yet when i
t comes to laws protecting corporations and private property, she has decided that those laws should be interpreted broadly. When
 the rights of the vulnerable are at stake, then she believes the majority has the right to do whatever it wants. When the minori
ty happens to be the minority of people who have privilege and wealth, then suddenly she is countermajoritarian and thinks it is 
very important to constrain the will of the majority.Let me just give you a couple examples. In a case reviewing California's par
ental notification law, Justice Brown criticized the California Supreme Court decision overturning that law, saying that the cour
t should have remained "tentative, recognizing the primacy of legislative prerogatives." She has also repeatedly tried to overtur
n the fact that California law recognizes Tameny claims, a line of cases that establishes that an employer does not have an unfet
tered right to fire an employee, but that the right has limits according to fundamental public policy. She says judicial restrain
t is critical. She claims that public policy is "a function first and foremost reserved to the legislature."So on these cases dea
ling with a woman's right to choose, worker protections, punitive damages, or discrimination, she wants the judge to stay out of 
the legislative decisionmaking process. But Justice Brown doesn't always want the courts to exercise restraint and defer to the l
egislature. When Justice Brown wanted to limit the ability of juries to punish companies that engage in severe discrimination, a 
fellow judge on the California Supreme Court accused her of engaging in "judicial law making." Instead of denying it, Justice Bro
wn defended her judicial activism. She called it creativity. This is what she said: "All judges make law. It is arrogance, carele
ssness and a lack of candor that constitute impermissible judicial practice, not creativity."Justice Brown has also gone out of h
er way to use her position in the courts to advocate for increased protections for property owners. In a case about a developer t
hat wanted to break a city rent control law, Justice Brown dismissed the fact that a majority of the city's voters had approved o
f that law and thought that the case should be an exception to the philosophy of narrow judicial review. Justice Brown believed t
hat this case was one in which "some degree of judicial scrutiny... is appropriate." Which is it, Justice Brown? In some cases yo
u think we should defer to the legislature and in some cases, apparently, you think it is appropriate for judges to make law. Wha
t seems to distinguish these two types of cases is who the plaintiff is, who the claimant is.If the claimant is powerful -- if th
ey are a property owner, for example -- then she is willing to use any tool in her judicial arsenal to make sure the outcome is o
ne they like. If it is a worker or a minority claiming discrimination, then she is nowhere to be found.Judicial decisions ultimat
ely have to be based on evidence and on fact. They have to be based on precedent and on law. When you bend and twist all of these
 to cramp them into a conclusion you have already made -- a conclusion that is based on your own personal ideology -- you do a di
sservice to the ideal of an independent judiciary and to the American people who count on an independent judiciary.Because of thi
s tendency, and because of her record, it seems as if Justice Brown's mission is not blind justice but political activism. The on
ly thing that seems to be consistent about her overarching judicial philosophy in an unyielding belief in an unfettered free mark
et and a willingness to consistently side with the powerful over the powerless.Let's look at some of her speeches outside of the 
courtroom. In speech after speech, she touts herself as a true conservative who believes that safety nets -- such as Social Secur
ity, unemployment insurance, and health care -- have "cut away the very foundation upon which the Constitution rests."Justice Bro
wn believes, as has already been stated in the Chamber, that the New Deal, which helped save our country and get it back on its f
eet after the Great Depression, was a triumph of our very own "Socialist revolution." She has equated altruism with communism. Sh
e equates even the most modest efforts to level life's playing field with somehow inhibiting our liberty.For those who pay attent
ion to legal argument, one of the things that is most troubling is Justice Brown's approval of the Lochner era of the Supreme Cou
rt. In the Lochner case, and in a whole series of cases prior to Lochner being overturned, the Supreme Court consistently overtur
ned basic measures like minimum wage laws, child labor safety laws, and rights to organize, deeming those laws as somehow violati
ng a constitutional right to private property. The basic argument in Lochner was you can't regulate the free market because it is
 going to constrain people's use of their private property. Keep in mind that that same judicial philosophy was the underpinning 
of Dred Scott, the ruling that overturned the Missouri Compromise and said that it was unconstitutional to forbid slavery from be
ing imported into the free States. That same judicial philosophy essentially stopped every effort by Franklin Delano Roosevelt to
 overcome the enormous distress and suffering that occurred during the Great Depression. It was ultimately overturned because Jus
tices, such as Oliver Wendell Holmes, realized that if Supreme Court Justices can overturn any economic regulation -- Social Secu
rity, minimum wage, basic zoning laws, and so forth -- then they would be usurping the rights of a democratically constituted leg
islature. Suddenly they would be elevated to the point where they were in charge as opposed to democracy being in charge.Justice 
Brown, from her speeches, at least, seems to think overturning Lochner was a mistake. She believes the Supreme Court should be ab
le to overturn minimum wage laws. She thinks we should live in a country where the Federal Government cannot enforce the most bas
ic regulations of transparency in our security markets, that we cannot maintain regulations that ensure our food is safe and the 
drugs that are sold to us have been tested. It means, according to Justice Brown, that local governments or municipalities cannot
 enforce basic zoning regulations that relieve traffic, no matter how much damage it may be doing a particular community.What is 
most ironic about this is that what Justice Brown is calling for is precisely the type of judicial activism that conservatives ha
ve been railing against for the last 50 years.Supreme Court Justice Scalia is not somebody with whom I frequently agree. I do not
 like a lot of his judicial approaches, but at least the guy is consistent. Justice Scalia says that, generally speaking, the leg
islature has the power to make laws and the judiciary should only interpret the laws that are made or are explicitly in the Const
itution. That is not Justice Brown's philosophy. It is simply intellectually dishonest and logically incoherent to suggest that s
omehow the Constitution recognizes an unlimited right to do what you want with your private property and yet does not recognize a
 right to privacy that would forbid the Government from intruding in your bedroom. Yet that seems to be the manner in which Justi
ce Brown would interpret our most cherished document.It would be one thing if these opinions were confined to her political speec
hes. The fact is she has carried them over into her judicial decisionmaking. That is why the California State Bar Association rat
ed her as "unqualified" to serve on the State's highest court. That is why not one member of the American Bar Association found h
er to be very qualified to serve on the DC Circuit, and why many members of the bar association found her not qualified at all.It
 is also why conservative commentators, such as Andrew Sullivan and George Will, while agreeing with her political philosophy, si
mply do not see how she can be an effective judge. Here is what Sullivan said:She does not fit the description of a judge who sim
ply follows the law. If she isn't a "judicial activist," I don't know who would be.Sullivan added that he is in agreement with so
me of her conservative views but thinks "she should run for office, not the courts."Columnist George Will, not known to be a ravi
ng liberal, added recently that he believes Justice Brown is out of the mainstream of conservative jurisprudence.Let me wrap up b
y making mention of a subtext to this debate. As was true with Clarence Thomas, as was true with Alberto Gonzales, as was true wi
th Condoleezza Rice, my esteemed colleagues on the other side of the aisle have spent a lot of time during this debate discussing
 Justice Brown's humble beginnings as a child of a sharecropper. They like to point out she was the first African American to ser
ve on the California Supreme Court.I, too, am an admirer of Justice Brown's rise from modest means, just as I am an admirer of Al
berto Gonzales's rise from modest means, just as I am an admirer of Clarence Thomas's rise from modest means, just as I am an adm
irer of Condoleezza Rice's rise from modest means. I think it is wonderful. We should all be grateful where opportunity has opene
d the doors of success for Americans of every background.Moreover, I am not somebody who subscribes to the view that because some
body is a member of a minority group they somehow have to subscribe to a particular ideology or a particular political party. I t
hink it is wonderful that Asian Americans, Latinos, African Americans, and others are represented in all parties and across the p
olitical spectrum. When such representation exists, then those groups are less likely to be taken for granted by any political pa
rty.I do not think that because Justice Brown is an African-American woman she has to adhere to a particular political orthodoxy,
 something that has been suggested by the other side of the aisle. Just as it would be cynical and offensive that Justice Brown b
e vilified simply for being a Black conservative, it is equally offensive and cynical to suggest that somehow she should get a pa
ss for her outlandish views simply because she is a Black woman.I hope we have arrived at a point in our country's history where 
Black folks can be criticized for holding views that are out of the mainstream, just as Whites are criticized when they hold view
s that are out of the mainstream. I hope we have come to the point where a woman can be criticized for being insensitive to the r
ights of women, just as men are criticized when they are insensitive to the rights of women.Unfortunately, Justice Brown's record
 on privacy and employment discrimination indicates precisely such an insensitivity.I will give one example. In a case where a gr
oup of Latino employees at Avis Rent A Car was subjected to repeated racial slurs in the workplace by another employee, the lower
 court found that Avis, in allowing this to go on, had created a hostile environment. Justice Brown disagreed with and criticized
 the decision.In her opinion, she wrote that racially discriminatory speech in the workplace, even when it rises to the level of 
illegal race discrimination, is still protected by the first amendment. This was despite U.S. Supreme Court opinions that came to
 the exact opposite conclusion.Justice Brown went so far as to suggest that the landmark civil rights law, Title VII of the Civil
 Rights Act of 1964, could be unconstitutional under the first amendment.I believe if the American people could truly see what wa
s going on here they would oppose this nomination, not because she is African American, not because she is a woman, but because t
hey fundamentally disagree with a version of America she is trying to create from her position on the bench. It is social Darwini
sm, a view of America that says there is not a problem that cannot be solved by making sure that the rich get richer and the poor
 get poorer. It requires no sacrifice on the part of those of us who have won life's lottery and does not consider who our parent
s were or the education received or the right breaks that came at the right time.Today, at a time when American families are faci
ng more risk and greater insecurity than they have in recent history, at a time when they have fewer resources and a weaker safet
y net to protect them against those insecurities, people of all backgrounds in America want a nation where we share life's risks 
and rewards with each other. And when they make laws that will spread this opportunity to all who are willing to work for it, the
y expect our judges to uphold those laws, not tear them down because of their political predilections. Republican, Democrat, or a
nyone in between. Those are the types of judges the American people deserve. Justice Brown is not one of those judges. I strongly
 urge my colleagues to vote against this nomination. A More Perfect Union The Race Speech Philadelphia, PA March 18, 2008 "We the
 people, in order to form a more perfect union." Two hundred and twenty one years ago, in a hall that still stands across the str
eet, a group of men gathered and, with these simple words, launched America's improbable experiment in democracy. Farmers and sch
olars; statesmen and patriots who had traveled across an ocean to escape tyranny and persecution finally made real their declarat
ion of independence at a Philadelphia convention that lasted through the spring of 1787. The document they produced was eventuall
y signed but ultimately unfinished. It was stained by this nation's original sin of slavery, a question that divided the colonies
 and brought the convention to a stalemate until the founders chose to allow the slave trade to continue for at least twenty more
 years, and to leave any final resolution to future generations. Of course, the answer to the slavery question was already embedd
ed within our Constitution - a Constitution that had at is very core the ideal of equal citizenship under the law; a Constitution
 that promised its people liberty, and justice, and a union that could be and should be perfected over time. And yet words on a p
archment would not be enough to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights 
and obligations as citizens of the United States. What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing 
to do their part - through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience an
d always at great risk - to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time. This was one of the 
tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign - to continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more
 just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America. I chose to run for the presidency at this moment in histor
y because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together - unless we perfect our 
union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not
 have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction - towards a better future for our children and our 
grandchildren. This belief comes from my unyielding faith in the decency and generosity of the American people. But it also comes
 from my own American story. I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of 
a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton's Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on
 a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I've gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in 
one of the world's poorest nations. I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners -
 an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles and cousins, of every
 race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country o
n Earth is my story even possible. It's a story that hasn't made me the most conventional candidate. But it is a story that has s
eared into my genetic makeup the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts - that out of many, we are truly one. Th
roughout the first year of this campaign, against all predictions to the contrary, we saw how hungry the American people were for
 this message of unity. Despite the temptation to view my candidacy through a purely racial lens, we won commanding victories in 
states with some of the whitest populations in the country. In South Carolina, where the Confederate Flag still flies, we built a
 powerful coalition of African Americans and white Americans. This is not to say that race has not been an issue in the campaign.
 At various stages in the campaign, some commentators have deemed me either "too black" or "not black enough." We saw racial tens
ions bubble to the surface during the week before the South Carolina primary. The press has scoured every exit poll for the lates
t evidence of racial polarization, not just in terms of white and black, but black and brown as well. And yet, it has only been i
n the last couple of weeks that the discussion of race in this campaign has taken a particularly divisive turn. On one end of the
 spectrum, we've heard the implication that my candidacy is somehow an exercise in affirmative action; that it's based solely on 
the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap. On the other end, we've heard my former pastor, 
Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, b
ut views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike. I have alre
ady condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging quest
ions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever he
ar him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his p
olitical views? Absolutely - just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you
 strongly disagreed. But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren't simply controversial. They weren't simply a r
eligious leader's effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this co
untry - a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right wi
th America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, 
instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam. As such, Reverend Wright's comments were not only
 wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a s
et of monumental problems - two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devasta
ting climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all. Given
 my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnat
ion are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church? And 
I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the t
elevision and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, th
ere is no doubt that I would react in much the same way But the truth is, that isn't all that I know of the man. The man I met mo
re than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to l
ove one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor. He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine; who has studied 
and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that se
rves the community by doing God's work here on Earth - by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care serv
ices and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS. In my first book, Dreams From My 
Father, I described the experience of my first service at Trinity: "People began to shout, to rise from their seats and clap and 
cry out, a forceful wind carrying the reverend's voice up into the rafters....And in that single note - hope! - I heard something
 else; at the foot of that cross, inside the thousands of churches across the city, I imagined the stories of ordinary black peop
le merging with the stories of David and Goliath, Moses and Pharaoh, the Christians in the lion's den, Ezekiel's field of dry bon
es. Those stories - of survival, and freedom, and hope - became our story, my story; the blood that had spilled was our blood, th
e tears our tears; until this black church, on this bright day, seemed once more a vessel carrying the story of a people into fut
ure generations and into a larger world. Our trials and triumphs became at once unique and universal, black and more than black; 
in chronicling our journey, the stories and songs gave us a means to reclaim memories that we didn't need to feel shame about...m
emories that all people might study and cherish - and with which we could start to rebuild." That has been my experience at Trini
ty. Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety - the doctor
 and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity's services are full of rau
cous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the 
untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the stru
ggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America. And this helps expla
in, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my f
aith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethn
ic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within 
him the contradictions - the good and the bad - of the community that he has served diligently for so many years. I can no more d
isown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped ra
ise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a wo
man who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racia
l or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe. These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I l
ove. Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable. I can assure you it is not. I su
ppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dism
iss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent stat
ements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias. But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right 
now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America - to simplify and stere
otype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality. The fact is that the comments that have been made and the i
ssues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked 
through - a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corn
ers, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs fo
r every American. Understanding this reality requires a reminder of how we arrived at this point. As William Faulkner once wrote,
 "The past isn't dead and buried. In fact, it isn't even past." We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in 
this country. But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community tod
ay can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery a
nd Jim Crow. Segregated schools were, and are, inferior schools; we still haven't fixed them, fifty years after Brown v. Board of
 Education, and the inferior education they provided, then and now, helps explain the pervasive achievement gap between today's b
lack and white students. Legalized discrimination - where blacks were prevented, often through violence, from owning property, or
 loans were not granted to African-American business owners, or black homeowners could not access FHA mortgages, or blacks were e
xcluded from unions, or the police force, or fire departments - meant that black families could not amass any meaningful wealth t
o bequeath to future generations. That history helps explain the wealth and income gap between black and white, and the concentra
ted pockets of poverty that persists in so many of today's urban and rural communities. A lack of economic opportunity among blac
k men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of bla
ck families - a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban b
lack neighborhoods - parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement - 
all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us. This is the reality in which Reverend Wright
 and other African-Americans of his generation grew up. They came of age in the late fifties and early sixties, a time when segre
gation was still the law of the land and opportunity was systematically constricted. What's remarkable is not how many failed in 
the face of discrimination, but rather how many men and women overcame the odds; how many were able to make a way out of no way f
or those like me who would come after them. But for all those who scratched and clawed their way to get a piece of the American D
ream, there were many who didn't make it - those who were ultimately defeated, in one way or another, by discrimination. That leg
acy of defeat was passed on to future generations - those young men and increasingly young women who we see standing on street co
rners or languishing in our prisons, without hope or prospects for the future. Even for those blacks who did make it, questions o
f race, and racism, continue to define their worldview in fundamental ways. For the men and women of Reverend Wright's generation
, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years. That an
ger may not get expressed in public, in front of white co-workers or white friends. But it does find voice in the barbershop or a
round the kitchen table. At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for 
a politician's own failings. And occasionally it finds voice in the church on Sunday morning, in the pulpit and in the pews. The 
fact that so many people are surprised to hear that anger in some of Reverend Wright's sermons simply reminds us of the old truis
m that the most segregated hour in American life occurs on Sunday morning. That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too o
ften it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and
 prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change. But the anger is real; i
t is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misun
derstanding that exists between the races. In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- 
and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the im
migrant experience - as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked ha
rd all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They ar
e anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportuni
ty comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a
 school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good co
llege because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neigh
borhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time. Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren't
 always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over wel
fare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own elect
oral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing l
egitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism. Just as black anger oft
en proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class sque
eze - a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominat
ed by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments 
of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns - thi
s too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding. This is where we are right now. It's a racial stalemate we'
ve been stuck in for years. Contrary to the claims of some of my critics, black and white, I have never been so nave as to believ
e that we can get beyond our racial divisions in a single election cycle, or with a single candidacy - particularly a candidacy a
s imperfect as my own. But I have asserted a firm conviction - a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the America
n people - that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds, and that in fact we have no choice if we are t
o continue on the path of a more perfect union. For the African-American community, that path means embracing the burdens of our 
past without becoming victims of our past. It means continuing to insist on a full measure of justice in every aspect of American
 life. But it also means binding our particular grievances - for better health care, and better schools, and better jobs - to the
 larger aspirations of all Americans -- the white woman struggling to break the glass ceiling, the white man whose been laid off,
 the immigrant trying to feed his family. And it means taking full responsibility for own lives - by demanding more from our fath
ers, and spending more time with our children, and reading to them, and teaching them that while they may face challenges and dis
crimination in their own lives, they must never succumb to despair or cynicism; they must always believe that they can write thei
r own destiny. Ironically, this quintessentially American - and yes, conservative - notion of self-help found frequent expression
 in Reverend Wright's sermons. But what my former pastor too often failed to understand is that embarking on a program of self-he
lp also requires a belief that society can change. The profound mistake of Reverend Wright's sermons is not that he spoke about r
acism in our society. It's that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country - a co
untry that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of whi
te and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old -- is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know -- 
what we have seen - is that America can change. That is true genius of this nation. What we have already achieved gives us hope -
 the audacity to hope - for what we can and must achieve tomorrow. In the white community, the path to a more perfect union means
 acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people; that the legacy of
 discrimination - and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past - are real and must be addressed. No
t just with words, but with deeds - by investing in our schools and our communities; by enforcing our civil rights laws and ensur
ing fairness in our criminal justice system; by providing this generation with ladders of opportunity that were unavailable for p
revious generations. It requires all Americans to realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams; that 
investing in the health, welfare, and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper
. In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world's great religions demand - that
 we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let us be our brother's keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sister's k
eeper. Let us find that common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well. For we have a 
choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism. We can tackle race only as spe
ctacle - as we did in the OJ trial - or in the wake of tragedy, as we did in the aftermath of Katrina - or as fodder for the nigh
tly news. We can play Reverend Wright's sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and 
make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his mo
st offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she's playing the race card, or we can sp
eculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies. We can do that. Bu
t if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we'll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And th
en another one. And nothing will change. That is one option. Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, 
"Not this time." This time we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white c
hildren and Asian children and Hispanic children and Native American children. This time we want to reject the cynicism that tell
s us that these kids can't learn; that those kids who don't look like us are somebody else's problem. The children of America are
 not those kids, they are our kids, and we will not let them fall behind in a 21st century economy. Not this time. This time we w
ant to talk about how the lines in the Emergency Room are filled with whites and blacks and Hispanics who do not have health care
; who don't have the power on their own to overcome the special interests in Washington, but who can take them on if we do it tog
ether. This time we want to talk about the shuttered mills that once provided a decent life for men and women of every race, and 
the homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from every religion, every region, every walk of life. This time we want to ta
lk about the fact that the real problem is not that someone who doesn't look like you might take your job; it's that the corporat
ion you work for will ship it overseas for nothing more than a profit. This time we want to talk about the men and women of every
 color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. We want to talk about how 
to bring them home from a war that never should've been authorized and never should've been waged, and we want to talk about how 
we'll show our patriotism by caring for them, and their families, and giving them the benefits they have earned. I would not be r
unning for President if I didn't believe with all my heart that this is what the vast majority of Americans want for this country
. This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected. And today, whenever
 I find myself feeling doubtful or cynical about this possibility, what gives me the most hope is the next generation - the young
 people whose attitudes and beliefs and openness to change have already made history in this election. There is one story in part
icularly that I'd like to leave you with today - a story I told when I had the great honor of speaking on Dr. King's birthday at 
his home church, Ebenezer Baptist, in Atlanta. There is a young, twenty-three year old white woman named Ashley Baia who organize
d for our campaign in Florence, South Carolina. She had been working to organize a mostly African-American community since the be
ginning of this campaign, and one day she was at a roundtable discussion where everyone went around telling their story and why t
hey were there. And Ashley said that when she was nine years old, her mother got cancer. And because she had to miss days of work
, she was let go and lost her health care. They had to file for bankruptcy, and that's when Ashley decided that she had to do som
ething to help her mom. She knew that food was one of their most expensive costs, and so Ashley convinced her mother that what sh
e really liked and really wanted to eat more than anything else was mustard and relish sandwiches. Because that was the cheapest 
way to eat. She did this for a year until her mom got better, and she told everyone at the roundtable that the reason she joined 
our campaign was so that she could help the millions of other children in the country who want and need to help their parents too
. Now Ashley might have made a different choice. Perhaps somebody told her along the way that the source of her mother's problems
 were blacks who were on welfare and too lazy to work, or Hispanics who were coming into the country illegally. But she didn't. S
he sought out allies in her fight against injustice. Anyway, Ashley finishes her story and then goes around the room and asks eve
ryone else why they're supporting the campaign. They all have different stories and reasons. Many bring up a specific issue. And 
finally they come to this elderly black man who's been sitting there quietly the entire time. And Ashley asks him why he's there.
 And he does not bring up a specific issue. He does not say health care or the economy. He does not say education or the war. He 
does not say that he was there because of Barack Obama. He simply says to everyone in the room, "I am here because of Ashley." "I
'm here because of Ashley." By itself, that single moment of recognition between that young white girl and that old black man is 
not enough. It is not enough to give health care to the sick, or jobs to the jobless, or education to our children. But it is whe
re we start. It is where our union grows stronger. And as so many generations have come to realize over the course of the two-hun
dred and twenty one years since a band of patriots signed that document in Philadelphia, that is where the perfection begins. VIE
W ENTIRE SPEECHTURN THE PAGE California Democratic Convention TOPIC: Election April 28, 2007 Turn The Page Speech California Demo
cratic National Convention Complete Text INTRODUCTIONS NOT INCLUDED IN TRANSCRIPT It has now been a little over two months since 
we began this campaign. In that time we have traveled all across this country. And before every event we do, I usually have a min
ute to sit quietly and collect my thoughts. And recently, Ive found myself reflecting on what it was that led me to public servic
e in the first place.I live in Chicago now, but I am not a native of that great city. I moved there when I was just a year out of
 college, and a group of churches offered me a job as a community organizer so I could help rebuild neighborhoods that had been d
evastated by the closing of steel plants.The salary was $12,000 a year plus enough money to buy an old, beat-up car, and so I too
k the job and drove out to Chicago, where I didnt know a soul. And during the time I was there, we worked to set up job training 
programs for the unemployed and after school programs for kids.And it was the best education I ever had, because I learned in tho
se neighborhoods that when ordinary people come together, they can achieve extraordinary things.After three years, I went back to
 law school. I left there with a degree and a lifetime of debt, but I turned down the corporate job offers so I could come back t
o Chicago and organize a voter registration drive. I also started a civil rights practice, and began to teach constitutional law.
And after a few years, people started coming up to me and telling me I should run for state Senate. So I did what every man does 
when hes faced with a big decision I prayed, and I asked my wife. And after consulting those two higher powers, I decided to get 
in the race.And everywhere Id go, Id get two questions. First, theyd ask, Whered you get that funny name, Barack Obama? Because p
eople just couldnt pronounce it. Theyd call me Alabama, or theyd call me Yo Mama. And Id tell them that my father was from Kenya,
 and thats where I got my name. And my mother was from Kansas, and thats where I got my accent from.And the second thing people w
ould ask me was, You seem like a nice young man. Youve done all this great work. Youve been a community organizer, and you teach 
law school, youre a civil rights attorney, youre a family man why would you wanna go into something dirty and nasty like politics
?And I understand the question, and the cynicism. We all understand it.We understand it because we get the sense today that polit
ics has become a business and not a mission. In the last several years, we have seen Washington become a place where keeping scor
e of whos up and whos down is more important than whos working on behalf of the American people.We have been told that our mounti
ng debts dont matter, that the economy is doing great, and so Americans should be left to face their anxiety about rising health 
care costs and disappearing pensions on their own.Weve been told that climate change is a hoax, that our broken schools cannot be
 fixed, that we are destined to send millions of dollars a day to Mideast dictators for their oil. And weve seen how a foreign po
licy based on bluster and bombast can lead us into a war that shouldve never been authorized and never been waged.And when we try
 to have an honest debate about the crises we face, whether its on the Senate floor or a Sunday talk show, the conversation isnt 
about finding common ground, its about finding someone to blame. Were divided into Red States and Blue States, and told to always
 point the finger at somebody else the other party, or gay people, or immigrants.For good reason, the rest of us have become cyni
cal about what politics can achieve in this country, and as weve turned away in frustration, we know whats filled the void. The l
obbyists and influence-peddlers with the cash and the connections the ones whove turned government into a game only they can affo
rd to play.They write the checks and you get stuck with the bills, they get the access while you get to write a letter, they thin
k they own this government, but were here to tell them its not for sale. People tell me I havent spent a lot of time learning the
 ways of Washington. But I promise you this Ive been there long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change. Im runnin
g for President because the time for the cant-do, wont-do, wont-even-try style of politics is over. Its time to turn the page. Th
ere is an awakening taking place in America today. From New Hampshire to California, from Texas to Iowa, we are seeing crowds wev
e never seen before; were seeing people showing up to the very first political event of their lives.Theyre coming because they kn
ow we are at a crossroads right now. Because we are facing a set of challenges we havent seen in a generation and if we dont meet
 those challenges, we could end up leaving our children a world thats a little poorer and a little meaner than we found it.And so
 the American people are hungry for a different kind of politics the kind of politics based on the ideals this country was founde
d upon. The idea that we are all connected as one people. That we all have a stake in one another.Its what I learned as a state S
enator in Illinois. That you can turn the page on old debates; that its possible to compromise so long as you as you never compro
mise your principles; and that so long as were willing to listen to each other, we can assume the best in people instead of the w
orst.Thats how we were able to reform a death penalty system that sent 13 innocent people to death row. Thats how we were able to
 give health insurance to 20,000 more children who needed it. Thats how we gave $100 million worth of tax cuts to working familie
s in Illinois. And thats how we passed the first ethics reform in twenty-five years.We have seen too many campaigns where our pro
blems are talked to death. Where ten-point plans are crushed under the weight of the same old politics once the elections over. W
here experience in Washington doesnt always translate to results for the American people.And so if we do not change our politics 
if we do not fundamentally change the way Washington works then the problems weve been talking about for the last generation will
 be the same ones that haunt us for generations to come.We must find a way to come together in this country to realize that the r
esponsibility we have to one another as Americans is greater than the pursuit of any ideological agenda or corporate bottom line.
 Democrats of California, its time to turn the page.Its time to turn the page on health care to bring together unions and busines
ses, Democrats and Republicans, and to let the insurance and drug companies know that while they get a seat at the table, they do
nt get to buy every chair.When I am president, I will sign a universal health care law by the end of my first term. My plan will 
cover the uninsured by letting people buy into the same kind of health care plan that members of Congress give themselves. It wil
l bring down costs by investing in information technology, and preventative care, and by stopping the drug companies from price-g
ouging when patients need their medicine.It will help business and families shoulder the burden of catastrophic care so that an i
llness doesnt lead to a bankruptcy. And it will save the average family a thousand dollars a year on their premiums. We can do th
is.Its time to turn the page on education to move past the slow decay of indifference that says some schools cant be fixed and so
me kids just cant learn.As President, I will launch a campaign to recruit and support hundreds of thousands of new teachers acros
s the country, because the most important part of any education is the person standing in the front of the classroom. Its time to
 treat teaching like the profession it is paying teachers what they deserve and working with them not against them to develop the
 high standards we need. We can do this.Its time to turn the page on energy to break the political stalemate thats kept our fuel 
efficiency standards in the same place for twenty years; to tell the oil and auto industries that they must act, not only because
 their futures at stake, but because the future of our country and our planet is at stake as well.As President, I will institute 
a cap-and-trade system that would dramatically reduce carbon emissions and auction off emissions credits that would generate mill
ions of dollars to invest in renewable sources of energy. Ill put in place a low-carbon fuel standard like you have here in Calif
ornia that will take 32 million cars worth of pollution off the road. And Id raise the fuel efficiency standards for our cars and
 trucks because we know we have the technology to do it and its time we did. We can do this.We can do all of this. But most of al
l, we have to turn the page on this disaster in Iraq and restore our standing in the world. I am proud that I stood up in 2002 an
d urged our leaders not to take us down this dangerous path. And so many of you did the same, even when it wasnt popular to do so
.We knew back then this war was a mistake. We knew back then that it was dangerous diversion from the struggle against the terror
ists who attacked us on September 11th. We knew back then that we could find ourselves in an occupation of undetermined length, a
t undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.But the war went forward. And now, weve seen those consequences and we mourn 
for the dead and wounded.I was in New Hampshire the other week when a woman told me that her nephew was leaving for Iraq. And as 
she started telling me how much shed miss him and how worried she was about him, she began to cry.And she said to me, I cant brea
the. I want to know, when am I going to be able to breathe again?It is time to let this woman know she can breathe again. It is t
ime to put an end this war.The majority of both houses of the American Congress Republicans and Democrats just passed a bill that
 would do exactly that. Its a bill similar to the plan I introduced in January that says there is no military solution to this ci
vil war that the last, best hope to pressure the warring factions to reach a political settlement is to let the Iraqi government 
know that America will not be there forever to begin a phased withdrawal with the goal of bringing all combat brigades home by Ma
rch 31st, 2008.We are one signature away from ending this war. If the President refuses to sign it, we will go back and find the 
sixteen votes we need to end this war without him. We will turn up the pressure on all those Republican Congressmen and Senators 
who refuse to acknowledge the reality that the American people know so well, and we will get this done. We will bring our troops 
home. Its time to turn the page.Its time to show the world that America is still the last, best hope of Earth. This President may
 occupy the White House, but for the last six years the position of leader of the free world has remained open. Its time to fill 
that role once more. Whether its terrorism or climate change, global AIDS or the spread of weapons of mass destruction, America c
annot meet the threats of this new century alone, but the world cannot meet them without America. Its time for us to lead.Its tim
e for us to show the world that we are not a country that ships prisoners in the dead of night to be tortured in far off countrie
s. That we are not a country that runs prisons which lock people away without ever telling them why they are there or what they a
re charged with. We are not a country which preaches compassion to others while we allow bodies to float down the streets of a ma
jor American city.That is not who we are.We are America. We are the nation that liberated a continent from a madman, that lifted 
ourselves from the depths of Depression, that won Civil Rights, and Womens Rights, and Voting Rights for all our people. We are t
he beacon that has led generations of weary travelers to find opportunity, and liberty, and hope on our doorstep. Thats who we ar
e.I was down in Selma, Alabama awhile back, and we were celebrating the 42nd anniversary of the march across the Edmund Pettus Br
idge. It was a march of ordinary Americans maids and cooks, preachers and Pullman porters who faced down fire hoses and dogs, tea
r gas and billy clubs when they tried to get to the other side. But every time they were stopped, every time they were knocked do
wn, they got back up, they came back, and they kept on marching. And finally they crossed over. It was called Bloody Sunday, and 
it was the culmination of the Civil Rights Movement.When I came back from that celebration, people would say, oh, what a wonderfu
l celebration of African-American history that must have been. And I would say, no, that wasnt African-American history. That was
 a celebration of American history its our story.And it reminds us of a simple truth a truth I learned all those years ago as an 
organizer in Chicago a truth you carry by being here today that in the face of impossible odds, people who love their country can
 change it.I am confident about my ability to lead this country. But I also know that I cant do it without you. There will be tim
es when I get tired, there will be times when I make a mistake its true, talk to my wife, shell tell you. But this campaign that 
were running has to be about your hopes, and your dreams, and what you will do. Because there are few obstacles that can withstan
d the power of millions of voices calling for change.Thats how change has always happened not from the top-down, but from the bot
tom-up.And thats exactly how you and I will change this country. California, if you want a new kind of politics, its time to turn
 the page.If you want an end to the old divisions, and the stale debates, and the score-keeping and the name-calling, its time to
 turn the page.If you want health care for every American and a world-class education for all our children; if you want energy in
dependence and an end to this war in Iraq; if you believe America is still that last, best hope of Earth, then its time to turn t
he page.Its time to turn the page for hope. Its time to turn the page for justice. It is time to turn the page and write the next
 chapter in the great American story. Lets begin the work. Lets do this together. Lets turn that page. Thank you. Manassas, Princ
e William County, Virginia November 3, 2008 10:30pm Night Before the Election What a scene. What a crowd. Thank you for Virginia.
 (Crowd chants "yes we can.")Let me start by noting, Virginia that this is our last rally. This is the last rally of a campaign t
hat began nearly 2 years ago. We've gone to every corner of this country, from here in Northern Virginia to the rocky coasts of M
aine, to the open plains of Texas, to the open skies of Montana.I just want to say that whatever happens tomorrow, I have been de
eply humbled by this journey. You have welcomed Michelle and me and the girls into your homes. You have shared your stories of st
ruggle, you have spoken of your dreams, along the way, talking with all of you about your own lives.You have enriched my life, yo
u have moved me again and again. You have inspired me. Sometimes when I have been down you have lifted me up. You filled me with 
new hope for our future and you have reminded me about what makes America so special. In the places I have gone and the people I 
have met, I have been struck again and again by the fundamental decency and generosity and dignity of men and women who work hard
 without complaint, to meet their responsibilities every day.I come away with an unyielding belief that if we only had a governme
nt as responsible as all of you, as compassionate as the American people, that there is no obstacle that we can't overcome. There
 is no destiny that we cannot fulfill.Virginia, I have just one word for you, just one word. Tomorrow. Tomorrow. After decades of
 broken politics in Washington, 8 years of failed policies from George Bush, twenty-one months of campaigning, we are less then o
ne day away from bringing about change in America.Tomorrow you can turn the page on policies that put greed and irresponsibility 
before hard work and sacrifice. Tomorrow you can choose policies that invest in our middle class, create new jobs and grow this e
conomy so that everybody has a chance to succeed. Not just the CEO but the secretary and the janitor; not just the factory owner 
but the men and women who work the factory floor. Tomorrow you can put an end to the politics that would divide a nation just to 
win an election; that puts reason against reason, and city against town, Republican against Democrat; that asks us to fear at a t
ime when we need to hope.Tomorrow, at this defining moment in history, you can give this country the change that we need. It star
ts here in Virginia. It starts here in Manassas. This is where change begins.Our campaign has not been perfect. There are times w
hen I look back and I've said, "you know I wouldn't have done that if I had thought about it a little bit more." But I'll tell yo
u what. When you think about this campaign we've got a lot to be proud of when it comes to the tone that we have set.We tried to 
argue issues and not engage in personal attacks. We've been fierce in defending ourselves but we've tried to make sure that we ar
e always reminding our supporters that all of us are in this together. Black, white, Hispanic, native American, Asian, Democrats 
and Republicans, young and old, rich and poor, gay and straight, disabled and not disabled, all of us have something to contribut
e.We tried to communicate for these last two years that we can't afford the same political games, the same tactics that pit us ag
ainst one another, that make us afraid of each other. We can't afford that anymore. Not this time. Despite what our opponents mig
ht claim, there are no real or fake parts of Virginia anymore and then there are real or fake parts of America. There is no city 
or town that is more pro-America than anywhere else. We are all one nation. All of us proud. All of us patriots. All of us salute
 this flag.The men and women who serve on our battlefields come from many walks of life, different political parties, but they fo
ught together and they bled together. Some die together under the same proud flag. They have not served red America or blue Ameri
ca, they have served the United States of America. And that is what this campaign has been about, we're calling us to serve the U
nited States of America.In this campaign I have had the privilege to witness what is best in America, in the stories, in the face
s, of men and women I have met at countless rallies, town hall meetings, VFW halls, living rooms, diners, all across America, men
 and women who shared with me their stories and spoke of their struggles but they also spoke of their hopes and dreams. They want
 for their children a sense of obligation and debts to be paid to earlier generations.I met one of those women in Greenwood, Sout
h Carolina. It was back early when we were way back in the polls. Nobody gave us much of a chance back then. I had gone to South 
Carolina early in the campaign to see what I could stir up in the way of endorsements, and I was at a legislative dinner sitting 
next to a state representative that I really wanted to endorse me. So I turned to her and I said "I really want your endorsement.
" And she looked at me and she said "I'll tell you what, Obama, I will give you my endorsement if you come to my hometown of Gree
nwood, South Carolina." I must have had a sip of wine or something that night because right away I said "Okay. I'm coming."So the
 next time I come to South Carolina it's about a month later. We fly in about midnight. We get to the hotel about one o'clock in 
the morning. I'm exhausted. I'm dragging my bags to my room when I get a tap on my shoulder and I look back and it is one of my s
taff people who says "Senator we need to be out of the hotel by 6 a.m." I say "Why is that?" He says "because we have to go to Gr
eenwood, like you promised."So the next morning I wake up and I feel terrible, and I think I am coming down with a cold, my back 
is sore, I feel worse than when I went to bed. I open up the curtains in the hotel room to get some sunlight in and hopefully wak
e me up, but it's pouring down rain. I go outside my room and get the New York Times, and there is a bad story about me in the Ne
w York Times. I go downstairs after I pack, and my umbrella blows open and I get soaked, so by the time I get in the car I am mad
, I am wet and I am sleepy.We drive, and we drive, and we drive. It turns out that Greenwood is about an hour and a half from eve
rywhere else. Finally we get to Greenwood.First of all you do not know you're in Greenwood when you get to Greenwood, there aren'
t a lot of tall buildings in Greenwood. We pull off to a small building a little field house in a park and we go inside, and low 
and behold, after an hour and a half drive, turns out there are 20 people there. Twenty people. They look all kind of damp and sl
eepy, maybe they aren't really excited to be there either.But I am a professional, I've got to do what I got to do. I'm going aro
und, I'm shaking hands, I am saying "How are you doing? What are you doing?"As I go around the room suddenly I hear this voice cr
y out behind me "fired up." I'm shocked. I jumped up. I don't know what is going on. But everyone else acts as though this were n
ormal and they say "fired up." Then I hear this voice say "ready to go." And the 20 people in the room act like this happens all 
the time and they say "ready to go".I don't know what's going on so I looked behind me and there is this small woman, about 60 ye
ars old, a little over 5 feet, looks like she just came from church she's got on a big church hat. She's standing there, she look
s at me and she smiles and she says "fired up."It turns out that she was a city Councilwoman from Greenwood who also moonlights a
s a private detective. I'm not making this up. And it turns out that she is famous for her chant. She does this where ever she go
es. She says "fired up" and the people say "fired up", and she says "ready to go" and they say "ready to go."For the next five mi
nutes she proceeds to do this. "Fired up?" and everyone says "fired up" and she says "ready to go" and they say "ready to go." I'
m standing there and I'm thinking I'm being outflanked by this woman. She's stealing my thunder. I look at my staff and they shru
gged their shoulders, they don't know how long this is going to go on.But here's the thing, Virginia. After a minute or so I am f
eeling kind of fired up. I'm feeling like I'm ready to go. So I join in the chant. It feels good. For the rest of the day, even a
fter we left Greenwood, even though it was still raining, even though I was still not getting big crowds anywhere, even though we
 hadn't gotten the endorsement from the people we were hoping for, somehow I felt a little lighter, a little better. I'd see my s
taff and I would say "Are you fired up? and they would say "We are fired up, boss, are you ready to go?" And I'd say "I'm ready t
o go."Here's my point, Virginia. That's how this thing started. It shows you what one voice can do. That one voice can change a r
oom. And if a voice can change a room, it can change a city, and if it can change a city, it can change a state, and if it can ch
ange a state, it can change a nation, and if it can change a nation, it can change the world.Virginia, your voice can change the 
world tomorrow. In 21 hours if you are willing to endure some rain, if you are willing to drag that person you know who is not go
ing to vote, to the polls. If you are willing to organize and volunteer in the offices, if you are willing to stand with me, if y
ou are willing to fight with me, I know your voice will matter.So I have just one question for you Virginia, Are you fired up? Re
ady to go? Fired up. Ready to go. Fired up. Ready to go. Fired up. Ready to go.Virginia, let's go change the world. God bless you
 and God bless the United States of America. Katrina Reconstruction Contracts and US toll in Iraq TOPIC: Katrina & Gulf Recovery 
and Iraq June 15, 2006 Katrina Reconstruction Contracts/US Toll in Iraq Complete Transcript Hello, this is Senator Barack Obama a
nd today is Thursday, June 15, 2006.I want to talk to you guys today about Katrina. I know that we've had a number of discussions
 about the process of rebuilding and what's been happening and what hasn't been happening down in the Gulf. Some of you may recal
l that a while back that I introduced a piece of legislation that should be pretty straightforward. It essentially said that all 
Katrina reconstruction contracts in excess of $500,000 had to be competitively bid. This was prompted by news reports that enormo
us amounts of waste were taking place in the Katrina contracting process. You had multibillion dollar no-bid contracts for things
 as varied as debris removal or buying tarps to put on roofs, trailers for people who had been displaced. Many of these items had
 been purchased, or services had been purchased, at two or three or five times the typical market value and, obviously, any money
 that's wasted going to contractors is money that is coming out of taxpayers' pockets and not getting to the intended beneficiari
es - the people who have been displaced as a consequence of the hurricane.So, myself and Tom Coburn (Republican from Oklahoma) in
troduced a very simple amendment in the Emergency Defense Supplemental. It essentially said that if there is going to be a contra
ct of more than half a million dollars, it has to be competitively bid. The amendment passed 98 to 0; the entire Senate was unani
mous. But, as some of you may not be aware, the way Washington works is a bill that passes in the Senate and a bill that passes i
n the House has to be reconciled in what is called a conference committee because there are going to be differences, potentially,
 between what's in the House version and the Senate version. Those have to be worked out in a conference of House members and Sen
ate members. I wasn't on the conference committee; neither was Tom Coburn. When the conference committee report finally came out,
 the bill that would actually be voted on and signed into law, our little provision had been struck - it wasn't in there.Since th
at time we got that news there's at least 1.4 billion dollars of taxpayer money that could have gone to helping the people on the
 coast that instead has been siphoned off on a series of fraudulent claims; spending on everything from Girls Gone Wild videos to
 vacation trips to Hawaii to, in one case, a sex change operation. Now, this didn't have to do with contracting - it had to do wi
th claims - but it indicated the complete lack of oversight by which we are spending billions of dollars down on the Gulf Coast.S
o, as a consequence, I am reintroducing with Tom Coburn our provision to end no-bid contracts. We are going to introduce that int
o the Department of Defense Authorization Bill next week. I just want you guys to track this because these small provisions and a
mendments and details are really what make up the guts of what's going on here in Washington. We'll have big debates on abortion,
 gay marriage, what's happening in respect to the war in Iraq - many of these issues are critically important, but what really de
termines how our government acts often are these provisions, these amendments, these conference committee reports. They don't get
 a lot of attention: reporters, oftentimes, don't track them, except for maybe the specialty press, the newspapers here in Washin
gton. But it's important, I think, for everybody who's listening out there to be aware of what's going on because unless the citi
zenry is informed about the procedures and processes in Washington, it's very difficult to hold our elected officials accountable
. And there are times, I'll confess, where I can get extremely frustrated just because good provisions, like the one that Tom Cob
urn and I introduced that passed 98 to 0, still aren't able to get signed into law. Hopefully we'll be able to make progress on t
his one.Coming up next week there is going to be a vigorous debate around spending with respect to the war in Iraq and Afghanista
n. The House is sponsoring a major debate on their side. I suspect we'll have a series of amendments that we'll being dealing wit
h on the Senate side, as well. And so, rather than talk about those today, I'm going to wait until we've had some of the debate t
ake place so I can give you guys some insight in terms of how people are thinking about it on both sides of the aisle.In the mean
time, I think it is worth noting that today we passed the 2,500 casualty mark in terms of the war in Iraq: twenty-five hundred Am
erican heroes, servicemen and servicewomen, who have been killed in Iraq. We observed a moment of silence on the Senate floor tod
ay and it might make sense for some of you guys just to think about those men and women, as well as their families, and the enorm
ous sacrifice that they've made. I look forward talking to you guys next week. Bye-bye. AVIAN FLU REMARKS ON THE U.S. SENATE FLOO
R TOPIC: Healthcare & Health Issues October 18, 2005 Avian Flu Remarks U.S. Senate floor Washington, DC Complete Text We are cont
inuing to witness the relentless spread of avian flu, carried slowly but predictably by wild, migratory birds from countries in S
outheast Asia to Western China, to Mongolia, and then over the Ural Mountains into Russia and Ukraine. From there, avian flu has 
spread over the past week to Romania and Turkey, and we have just learned, possibly into Greece.Dr. Joseph Domenech, chief of the
 Animal Health Service at the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization, has been quoted as saying that "...we are not su
rprised."Mr. President, at this point, no one should be surprised. The experts have told us repeatedly that a flu pandemic is ine
vitable, although the timing is unpredictable. In other words, the question is not if, but when. This spread of avian flu is our 
warning signal, and we need to heed this call to action.If we're lucky, we'll have at least a year, or perhaps several years, to 
prepare for a flu pandemic. But we might not be so lucky. And regardless of whether it is this particular strain of avian flu, H5
N1, or another deadly strain, the time to act is long overdue if we want to prevent unprecedented human suffering, death, and eco
nomic devastation.International health experts say that two of the three conditions for an avian flu pandemic in Southeast Asia a
lready exist. First, a new strain of the virus has emerged to which humans have little or no immunity. Second, this strain has sh
own that it can jump between species.The last condition--the ability for the virus to travel efficiently from human to human--has
 not been met, and it is the only thing preventing a full blown pandemic. Once this virus mutates and can be transmitted from hum
an to human, we will not be able to contain this disease. Because of the wonders of modern travel, a person could board a plane i
n Bangkok, Athens, or Bucharest and land in Chicago less than a day later, unknowingly carrying the virus. Indeed, we learned thi
s lesson from SARS, which moved quickly from Asia to Canada, where it led to many deaths.As my colleagues know, one of my top pri
orities since arriving in the Senate has been increasing awareness about the avian flu. In April of this year, I introduced the A
VIAN Act, which is a comprehensive bill to increase our preparedness for an avian flu pandemic. This bill was incorporated into a
 larger bill, the Pandemic Preparedness and Response Act, that Senator Reid and I introduced two weeks ago. We need to move this 
bill as quickly as possible.We also need to provide more funding to purchase vaccines and antivirals and improve our ability to s
pot and isolate a pandemic as soon as it begins. In the spring and summer, I worked to secure $35 million in funding to fight the
 avian flu. Today, some of this money is already helping the World Health Organization to step up its international surveillance 
and response efforts.But clearly much more money is needed. Last month, I joined Senator Harkin and others in offering an amendme
nt to the DOD appropriations bill to provide almost $4 billion to fight the avian flu. I am pleased that Senator Stevens cosponso
red the amendment and it was accepted into the appropriations bill. I hope that the House will agree to this funding in conferenc
e.Although we have begun to step up to the plate in the Senate, it is unfortunate that none of the avian flu bills that have been
 introduced have passed into law. Frankly, there's been a lot of talk, but not enough action. And this isn't just true of the Con
gress.One year after publishing the draft pandemic flu plan, the Administration has still not released the final HHS Pandemic Flu
 Preparedness Plan. Half of states haven't published plans either, and we know that many of these states will need substantial he
lp. This lack of planning is compounded by the fact that we still don't have a FDA approved vaccine against avian flu, and the on
e drug that many countries are relying on--Tamiflu--may be less effective than experts had thought. The manufacturer is also stru
ggling to meet the demand, and it could take up to 2 years for it to make enough for the U.S. stockpile, presuming this Administr
ation finally puts in an order for the drug.I would ask my colleagues how many hearings and briefings that they have sat through 
where witnesses and experts have urged the United States government to be better prepared for these types of crises.The failure t
o prepare for emergencies can have devastating consequences. We learned that lesson the hard way after Hurricane Katrina. This na
tion must not be caught off-guard when faced with the prospect of an avian flu pandemic. The consequences are too high.The flyway
s for migratory birds are well-established. We know that avian flu will likely hit the United States in a matter of time. With th
e regular flu season coming up shortly, conditions will be favorable for reassortment of the avian flu virus with the annual flu 
virus. Such reassortment could lead to a mutated virus that could be transmitted efficiently between humans, which is the last co
ndition needed for pandemic flu.The question is will we be ready when that happens? Let's make sure that answer is yes. I urge my
 colleagues in the Senate and the House to push this Administration to take the action needed to prevent a catastrophe that we ha
ve not seen during our lifetimes.Thank you. I yield the floor. Energy Security is National Security - Complete Text TOPIC: Oil & 
Alternative Fuels February 28, 2006 Energy Security is National Security Remarks of Senator Barack Obama Governor's Ethanol Coali
tion Washington, DC Complete Text In this year's State of the Union address, President Bush told us that it was time to get serio
us about America's addiction to foreign oil. The next day, we found out that his idea didn't sit too well with the Saudi Royal Fa
mily. A few hours later, Energy Secretary Bodman backtracked and assured the world that even though the President said he planned
 to reduce the amount of oil we import from the Middle East, he actually didn't mean that literally.If there's a single example o
ut there that encapsulates the ability of unstable, undemocratic governments to wield undue influence over America's national sec
urity just because of our dependence on oil, this is it.Now, I could stand up here and give you all plenty of reasons why it's a 
good idea for this country to move away from an oil-based economy. I could cite studies from scientists and experts and even our 
own State Department detailing the dangers of global warming - how it can destroy our coastal areas and generate more deadly stor
ms. I could talk forever about the economic consequences of dependence - how it's decimating our auto industry and costing us job
s and emptying our wallets at the pump. And I could talk about the millions of new jobs and entire new industries we could create
 by transitioning to an alternative-fuel economy.But all we really need to know about the danger of our oil addiction comes direc
tly from the mouths of our enemies:"[Oil] is the umbilical cord and lifeline of the crusader community." These are the words of A
l Qaeda."Focus your operations on oil, especially in Iraq and the Gulf area, since this will cause them to die off [on their own]
." These are the words Osama bin Laden.More than anything else, these comments represent a realization of American weakness share
d by the rest of the world. It's a realization that for all of our military might and economic dominance, the Achilles heel of th
e most powerful country on Earth is the oil we cannot live without.Oil single-handedly fuels 96% of our transportation needs, and
 it's also critical to the manufacture of millions of goods and products in this country. As we saw during Hurricane Katrina, thi
s kind of dependency means that the loss of even a small amount of oil and refining capacity for just a few days can cause econom
ic panic and soaring prices. A serious embargo or permanent loss could cause untold disaster.It would be nice if we could produce
 our way out of this problem, but it's just not possible. We only have 3% of the world's oil reserves. We could start drilling in
 ANWR today, and at its peak, which would be more than a decade from now, it would give us enough oil to take care of our transpo
rtation needs for about a month.As a result, every single hour we spend $18 million on foreign oil. It doesn't matter if these co
untries are budding democracies, despotic regimes, or havens for the madrassas that plant the seeds of terror in young minds - th
ey get our money because we need their oil.One need only glance at headlines around the world to understand how dangerous this ad
dictive arrangement truly is.In Iran, Islamic fundamentalists are forging ahead with their nuclear program, knowing full well tha
t the world's response to their actions will be influenced by our need for their oil. In fact, reports of a $100 billion oil deal
 between Iran and China were soon followed by China's refusal to press for sanctions against Iran over its nuclear intentions.In 
Nigeria, militant rebels have been attacking the country's oil pipelines in recent weeks, sending prices soaring and calling into
 question the political stability of a country that represents America's fifth-largest source of oil imports.In Saudi Arabia, Al 
Qaeda has been attempting attacks on that country's poorly defended oil refineries for years. On Friday, they almost succeeded as
 a truck full of explosives was detonated by the shots of security guards just before it entered the refinery. Even this minor da
mage caused oil prices to jump $2 in a single day. But a former CIA agent tells us that if terrorists ever succeeded in destroyin
g an entire oil complex, it could take enough oil off the market to cause economic catastrophe in the United States.Our enemies a
re fully aware that they can use oil as a weapon against America. And if we don't take this threat as seriously as the bombs they
 build or the guns they buy, we will be fighting the War on Terror with one hand tied behind our back.Now, the good news about th
e President's decision to finally focus on energy independence after five years is that it helps build bipartisan consensus that 
our reliance on foreign oil is a problem and shows that he understands the potential of renewable fuels to make a difference.The 
bad news is that the President's energy policy treats our dependence on oil as more of a nuisance than a serious threat.Just one 
day after he told us in the State of the Union that renewable fuels were the key to an energy independent future, we learned that
 the President's budget cuts would force layoffs at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Last week, this made for a rather a
wkward situation when the President wanted to use the lab for a photo-op - so awkward that the White House actually re-hired the 
laid-off researchers just to avoid the embarrassment.This is only one example, but it tells the story of a larger weakness in the
 President's energy policy: it's simply not commensurate to the challenge.There's a reason that some have compared the quest for 
energy independence to the Manhattan Project or the Apollo moon landing. Like those historic efforts, moving away from an oil eco
nomy is a major challenge that will require a sustained national commitment.During World War II, we had an entire country working
 around the clock to produce enough planes and tanks to beat the Axis powers. In the middle of the Cold War, we built a national 
highway system so we had a quick way to transport military equipment across the country. When we wanted to beat the Russians into
 space, we poured millions into a national education initiative that graduated thousands of new scientists and engineers.If we ho
pe to strengthen our security and control our own foreign policy, we can offer no less of a commitment to energy independence.But
 so far, President Bush seems like he is offering less - much less.His funding for renewable fuels is at the same level it was th
e day he took office.He refuses to call for even a modest increase in fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks.His latest bu
dget funds less then half of the energy bill he himself signed into law - leaving hundreds of millions of dollars in under-funded
 energy proposals.And while he cannot seem to find the funding for any of these energy proposals, he has no problem allowing the 
oil companies to stiff taxpayers $7 billion in royalties that they owe us for drilling on public lands. These are the same oil co
mpanies that are currently enjoying the highest profits on record.Again, this is just not a serious commitment to energy independ
ence. The solutions are too timid - the reforms too small. America's dependence on oil is a major threat to our national security
, and the American people deserve a bold commitment that has the full force of their government behind it.This isn't to lay the b
lame for our energy problems entirely at the feet of our President. This is an issue that politicians from both parties clamor ab
out when gas prices are the headline of the month, only to fall back into a trance of inaction once things calm down. And so we a
ll need to get serious here. Automakers need to get serious about shifting their technology to greater fuel-efficiency, consumers
 need to get serious about buying hybrid cars, and Washington needs to get serious about working together to find a real solution
 to our energy crisis.Such a solution is not only possible, it's already being implemented in other places around the world. Coun
tries like Japan are creating jobs and slowing oil consumption by churning out and buying millions of fuel-efficient cars. Brazil
, a nation that once relied on foreign countries to import 80% of its crude oil, will now be entirely self-sufficient in a few ye
ars thanks to its investment in biofuels.So why can't we do this? Why can't we make energy security one of the great American pro
jects of the 21st century?The answer is, we can. The President's energy proposal would reduce our oil imports by 4.5 million barr
els per day by 2025. Not only can we do better than that, we must do better than that if we hope to make a real dent in our oil d
ependency. With technology we have on the shelves right now and fuels we can grow right here in America, by 2025 we can reduce ou
r oil imports by over 7.5. million barrels per day - an amount greater than all the oil we are expected to import from the entire
 Middle East.We can do this by focusing on two things: the cars we drive and the fuels we use.First, the cars. For years, we've h
esitated to raise fuel economy standards as a nation in part because of a very legitimate concern - the impact it would have on D
etroit. The auto industry is right when they argue that transitioning to more hybrid and fuel-efficient cars would require massiv
e investment at a time when they're struggling under the weight of rising health care costs, sagging profits, and stiff competiti
on.But it's precisely because of that competition that they don't have a choice. China now has a higher fuel economy standard tha
n we do, and Japan's Toyota is doubling production of the popular Prius to sell 100,000 in the U.S. this year.There is now no dou
bt that fuel-efficient cars represent the future of the auto industry. If American car companies hope to be a part of that future
 - if they hope to survive - they must start building more of these cars.But that's not to say we should leave the industry to fa
ce these costs on its own. Yes, we should raise fuel economy standards by 3% a year over the next fifteen years, starting in 2008
. With the technology they already have, this should be an achievable goal for automakers. But we can help them get there.Right n
ow, one of the biggest costs facing auto manufacturers isn't the cars they make, it's the health care they provide. Health care c
osts make up $1,500 of the price of every GM car that's made - more than the cost of steel. Retiree health care alone cost the Bi
g 3 automakers nearly $6.7 billion just last year.So here's the deal we can make with the auto companies. It's a piece of legisla
tion I introduced called "Health Care for Hybrids," and it would allow the federal government to pick up part of the tab for the 
auto companies' retiree health care costs. In exchange, the auto companies would then use some of that savings to build and inves
t in more fuel-efficient cars. It's a win-win proposal for the industry - their retirees will be taken care of, they'll save mone
y on health care, and they'll be free to invest in the kind of fuel-efficient cars that are the key to their competitive future.N
ow, building cars that use less oil is only one side of the equation. The other involves replacing the oil we use with home-grown
 biofuels. The Governors in this room have long known about this potential, and all of you have been leading the way on ethanol i
n your own states.This coalition also knows that corn-based ethanol is only the beginning. If we truly want to harness the power 
of these fuels and the promise of this market, we can and must generate more cellulosic ethanol from agricultural products like c
orn stocks, switch grass and other crops our farmers grow.Already, there are hundreds of fueling stations that use a blend of eth
anol and gasoline known as E85, and there are millions of cars on the road with the flexible-fuel tanks necessary to use this fue
l - including my own.But the challenge we face with these biofuels is getting them out of the labs, out of the farms, and onto th
e wider commercial market. Every scientific study in the world could sing the praises of biofuels, but you might still be hard-pr
essed to find an investor willing to take the risk on a cellulosic ethanol plant or a brand-name petroleum company willing to bui
ld an E85 fueling station.The federal government can help in two ways here. First, we can reduce the risk of investing. We alread
y do this in a number of ways by funding projects critical to our national security. Energy independence should be no different. 
By developing an Energy Technology Program at the Defense Department, we can provide loan guarantees and venture capital to those
 with the best plans to develop and sell biofuels on a commercial market. The Defense Department will also hold a competition whe
re private corporations get funding to see who can build the best new alternative-fuel plant. The Department can then use these n
ew technologies to improve the energy security of our own military.Once we take the risk out of investing, the second thing the g
overnment can do is to let the private sector know that there will always be a market for renewable fuels. We can do this in a fe
w ways.First, we should ramp up the renewable fuel standard and create an alternative diesel standard in this country so that by 
2025, 65 billion gallons of alternative fuels per year will be blended into the petroleum supply.Second, Washington should lead t
he way on energy independency by making sure that every single automobile the government purchases is a flexible-fuel vehicle - s
tarting today. When it becomes possible in the coming years, we should make sure that every government car is a plug-in hybrid as
 well.Third, I'm supporting legislation that would make sure every single new car in America is a flexible-fuel vehicle within a 
decade. Currently it costs manufacturers just $100 to add these tanks to each car. But we can do them one better. If they install
 flexible-fuel tanks in their cars before the decade's up, the government should provide them a $100 tax credit to do it - so the
re's no excuse for delay.Fourth, there are already millions of people driving flexible-fuel vehicles who don't know it. The auto 
companies shouldn't get CAF'E credit for making these cars if they don't let buyers know about them, so I'd like to ask the indus
try to follow GM's lead and put a yellow gas cap on all flexible fuel vehicles starting today. Also, they should send a letter to
 those people who already have flexible-fuel vehicles so they can start filling up their tank at the closest E85 station.Finally,
 since there are only around 500 fueling stations that pump E85 in the country, we recently passed legislation that would provide
 tax credits of up to $30,000 for those who want to install E85 pumps at their station. But we should do even more - we should ma
ke sure that in the coming years, E85 stations are as easy to find as your gas station is now.Make no mistake - none of these ref
orms will come easy, and they won't happen overnight. But we can't continue to settle for piecemeal, bite-sized solutions to our 
energy crisis. We need a national commitment to energy security, and to emphasize that commitment, we should install a Director o
f Energy Security to oversee all of our efforts. Like the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the National Intelligence Director, th
is person would be an advisor to the National Security Council and have the full authority to coordinate America's energy policy 
across all levels of government. He or she would approve all major budget decisions and provide a full report to Congress and the
 country every year detailing the progress we're making toward our 2025 goal.In the days and months after September 11th, America
ns were waiting to be called to something bigger than themselves. Just like their parents and grandparents of the Greatest Genera
tion, they were willing to serve and defend their country - not only on the fields of war, but on the homefront too.This is our c
hance to step up and serve. The war against international terrorism has pitted us against a new kind of enemy that wages terror i
n new and unconventional ways. At home, fighting that enemy won't require us to build the massive war machine that Franklin Roose
velt called for so many years ago, but it will require us to harness our own renewable forms of energy so that oil can never be u
sed as a weapon against America. From farmers and scientists to entrepreneurs and governors, everyone has a role to play in this 
effort. In fact, this afternoon I'm sitting down with business and military leaders to discuss this very topic.Now is the time fo
r serious leadership to get us started down the path of energy independence. Now is the time for this call to arms. I hope some o
f the ideas I've laid out today can serve as a basis for this call, but I also hope that members of both parties and all levels o
f government can come together in the near future to launch this serious quest for energy independence. Thank you. AMERICAN LEGIO
N CONFERENCE REMARKS TOPIC: Veterans Saturday, July 16, 2005 American Legion Conference Remarks by Senator Barack Obama Springfie
ld, Illinois Complete Text Thank you. It's an honor to be here today with all of you Legionnaires.Over the last few months and th
roughout the campaign, I've been able to travel the state and meet veterans from all across Illinois. And no matter how many stor
ies of heroism I hear, I constantly find myself in awe of your service and inspired by your sacrifice.Oliver Wendell Holmes once 
said that "To fight out a war, you must believe something and want something with all your might."In America, we must never forge
t how lucky we are to have so many men and women who believe - who are willing to put aside their own pursuit of happiness, to su
bordinate their own sense of survival, for something bigger - something greater.When many of you joined the Armed Forces, you had
 your whole lives ahead of you - birthdays and weddings, holidays with family and friends, successes not yet achieved. And yet, y
ou were willing to leave all of that behind - perhaps forever - because you believed that your service would make it possible for
 the rest of us to live happily, safely, and freely.And so it's this sense of obligation - of responsibility to one's fellow Amer
ican - that we must honor when our veterans return and need our care and support. Since I joined the Veterans Committee, I've hea
rd a lot of debate over funding and budget numbers - about what we can afford and where we can save money. But I know those aren'
t the first things that come to your mind when you think about taking care of America's veterans. And they're not the first thing
s that come to my mind either.I think about my grandfather, who signed up for duty in World War II the day after Pearl Harbor. He
 marched across Europe in Patton's army, and when he came home, it was the education and opportunity offered by the GI Bill that 
allowed his family to build their own American Dream.I think about stories like the one I heard from a veteran named Bill Allen, 
who told me that on a trip to Chicago, he actually saw homeless veterans fighting over access to the dumpsters.And I think about 
people like Seamus Ahern, who I met during the campaign at a V.F.W. hall in East Moline. He told me about how he'd joined the Mar
ines because he was so proud of this country, and he felt that as a young person in his early twenties he wanted to give somethin
g back. We became friends and we kept in touch over email while he was in Iraq. One day he sent me one that said "I'm sorry I hav
en't written more often - I've been a little busy over here." I had to tell him "Don't worry - I know you've got your hands full.
"But as I listened to Seamus explain why he'd enlisted, the absolute faith he had in our country and its leaders, his devotion to
 duty and service, I thought this young man was all that any of us might hope for in a child. And then I asked myself: When Seamu
s comes home, will we serve him as well as he served us?That's the question we should be asking ourselves when we talk about vete
rans' benefits and the veterans' budget. And that's the standard we should meet.And so I ask: are we serving our veterans as well
 as they've served us when we find out that veterans' health care has been shortchanged by at least one billion dollars? A shortf
all that could have meant veterans turned away from doctor's visits, veterans unable to pay their medical bills, or veterans refu
sed the prosthetics they need to live normal lives?Thankfully, we restored the funding in Congress so that none of this would hap
pen. But let me be clear - the Department of Veterans Affairs should never be funded as an afterthought. Republicans and Democrat
s warned the administration that there may be a shortfall months ago, and so we shouldn't have to be scraping for change now to c
are for those who risked their lives to defend ours. It should be America's first priority.And yet, you've all seen how we keep f
alling short. How disabled veterans are waiting hundreds of days just to get their claim processed. How wounded veterans in Illin
ois receive fewer disability benefits than those in New Mexico or Maine. When I first arrived in the Senate, and saw the Chicago 
Sun-Times report that ranked Illinois 49th in how much disability pay our veterans received, we decided to hold town hall meeting
s here in Springfield and in Chicago to hear directly from you. Well you spoke, we relayed your concerns to VA Secretary Nicholso
n, he came out to see the problem for himself, and now we've increased our VA staff by 27% so there are more caseworkers for each
 veteran.But the benefits are still too low and the waits are still too long, and so we've got a ways to go. It's not enough to s
imply wave a flag and welcome our veterans with words of praise - we need to get serious about solving these problems and honorin
g their service. We held a hearing in Chicago about these issues just the other week, and I heard from a veteran whose hands had 
been crushed in an accident. Twenty years later he's still caught in the VA bureaucracy, trying to obtain disability benefits. Tw
enty years later. Meanwhile, we just learned that the VA's latest solution on disability disparities is to stop ranking which sta
tes are the best and worst. I don't know about you, but I don't think that burying bad news is any way deal with it.If this is th
e best we can do for veterans who've already come home, what will we do for the hundreds of thousands who will, God-willing, retu
rn from Iraq and Afghanistan? Veterans already have difficulty accessing VA care, and none of us want those who are still fightin
g to be greeted by a system that tells them "Thanks for fighting for your country - now take a number."We know that soldiers are 
already coming home with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and we know that a recent Army study showed that one in six soldiers in 
Iraq reported symptoms of major depression. Some experts predict that more than 100,000 soldiers may need some kind of mental hea
lth treatment when they come home. For tens of thousands of others, the wounds they suffered in battle will need care that could 
last a lifetime. These brave men and women may not have survived earlier wars, but thanks to advances in technology, these young 
people not only have the chance to survive, but to live normal lives. But it's up to us to provide the resources to make that a r
eality.It is not only our patriotic duty to provide this care, it is our moral duty at the most fundamental level - and we must r
ise to that challenge.We've made some progress already. In Congress, with the help of the American Legion, I worked to ensure tha
t our hospitalized soldiers don't get billed for their meals. And I've also sponsored the Sheltering All Veterans Everywhere Act,
 which would strengthen the VA programs our homeless vets need to get back on their feet. The American Legion has endorsed this b
ill, and so I hope we can work together on this and other initiatives in the future.Over half a century ago, it was American Legi
on National Commander Harry Colmery who first sat down and wrote the legislation that would become the GI Bill of Rights - a bill
 that has since provided education and training for nearly 8 million Americans, housing for nearly 2 million families, and led to
 the creation of the great American middle-class. That was a bill that told our heroes "When you come home, we're here for you, b
ecause we're all in this together."Today, we shouldn't be scraping to find the bare minimum in benefits and health care for our v
eterans. And with the largest deployment of troops since Vietnam fighting for freedom in an increasingly dangerous world, we shou
ld be talking about a GI Bill for the 21st Century.When veterans look to Congress for help, this is the kind of legislation they 
should hear about - not budget cuts and funding shortfalls.It's time to reassess our priorities. We never hesitate to praise the 
service of our veterans and acknowledge the debt we owe them for their service, but now we must renew our commitment to them by i
ncreasing funding for the VA, and ensure that our veterans receive more than just words of praise, but also the health care and b
enefits they've earned.George Washington once said: "the willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, 
no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciate
d by our nation."Washington understood then what every veteran here knows now - that when we make the decision to send our troops
 to war, we also make the decision to care for them, to speak for them, and to think of them - always - when they come. Thank you
 and God Bless you. Federal Marriage Amendment TOPIC: Domestic Policy Related June 5, 2006 Floor Statement of Senator Barack Obam
a Federal Marriage Amendment Complete Text Today, we take up the valuable time of the U.S. Senate with a proposed amendment to ou
r Constitution that has absolutely no chance of passing.We do this, allegedly, in an attempt to uphold the institution of marriag
e in this country. We do this despite the fact that for over two hundred years, Americans have been defining and defending marria
ge on the state and local level without any help from the U.S. Constitution at all.And yet, we're here anyway because it's an ele
ction year - because the party in power has decided that the best way to get voters to the polls is not by talking about Iraq or 
health care or energy or education, but about a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage that they have no chance of passing.Now, 
I realize that for some Americans, this is an important issue. And I should say that personally, I do believe that marriage is be
tween a man and a woman.But let's be honest. That's not what this debate is about. Not at this time.This debate is an attempt to 
break a consensus that is quietly being forged in this country. It's a consensus between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and 
conservatives, Red States and Blue States, that it's time for new leadership in this country - leadership that will stop dividing
 us, stop disappointing us, and start addressing the problems facing most Americans.It's a consensus between a majority of Americ
ans who say, "You know what, maybe some of us are comfortable with gay marriage right now and some of us are not. But most of us 
do believe that gay couples should be able to visit each other in the hospital and share health care benefits; most of us do beli
eve that they should be treated with dignity and have their privacy respected by the federal government."And we all know that if 
this amendment were to pass, it would close the door on much of this - because we know that when similar amendments passed in pla
ces like Ohio and Michigan and Utah, domestic partnership benefits were taken away from gay couples.This is not what the majority
 of the American people want. And this is not about trying to build consensus in this country; it's not about trying to bring peo
ple together.This is about winning an election. That's why the issue was last raised in July of 2004, and that's why we haven't h
eard about it again until now. And while this is supposedly a measure that the other party raised to appeal to some of its core s
upporters, I don't know how happy I'd be if my party only talked about an issue I cared about right around election time - especi
ally if they knew it had no chance of passing.I agree with most Americans, with Democrats and Republicans, with Vice President Ch
eney, with over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage, as they always have, should be l
eft to the states.Today, we should take this amendment only for what it is - a political ploy designed to rally a few supporters 
and draw the country's attention away from this leadership's past failures and America's future challenges.There is plenty of wor
k to be done in this country. There are millions without health care and skyrocketing gas prices and children in crumbling school
s and thousands of young Americans risking their lives in Iraq.So don't tell me that this is the best use of our time. Don't tell
 me that this is what people want to see talked about on TV and in the newspapers all day. We wonder why the American people have
 such a low opinion of Washington these days. This is why.We are better than this. And we certainly owe the American people more 
than this. I know that this amendment will fail, and when it does, I hope we can start discussing issues and offering proposals t
hat will actually improve the lives of most Americans. Confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito, Jr. Floor Statement TOPIC: Confirmatio
ns Thursday, January 26, 2006 Floor Statement on the Confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito, Jr. Complete Text First off, let me cong
ratulate Senators Specter and Leahy for moving yet another confirmation process along with a civility that speaks well of the Sen
ate.As we all know, there's been a lot of discussion in the country about how the Senate should approach this confirmation proces
s. There are some who believe that the President, having won the election, should have the complete authority to appoint his nomi
nee, and the Senate should only examine whether or not the Justice is intellectually capable and an all-around nice guy. That onc
e you get beyond intellect and personal character, there should be no further question whether the judge should be confirmed.I di
sagree with this view. I believe firmly that the Constitution calls for the Senate to advise and consent. I believe that it calls
 for meaningful advice and consent that includes an examination of a judge's philosophy, ideology, and record. And when I examine
 the philosophy, ideology, and record of Samuel Alito, I'm deeply troubled.I have no doubt that Judge Alito has the training and 
qualifications necessary to serve. He's an intelligent man and an accomplished jurist. And there's no indication he's not a man o
f great character.But when you look at his record - when it comes to his understanding of the Constitution, I have found that in 
almost every case, he consistently sides on behalf of the powerful against the powerless; on behalf of a strong government or cor
poration against upholding American's individual rights.If there is a case involving an employer and an employee and the Supreme 
Court has not given clear direction, he'll rule in favor of the employer. If there's a claim between prosecutors and defendants, 
if the Supreme Court has not provided a clear rule of decision, then he'll rule in favor of the state. He's rejected countless cl
aims of employer discrimination, even refusing to give some plaintiffs a hearing for their case. He's refused to hold corporation
s accountable numerous times for dumping toxic chemicals into water supplies, even against the decisions of the EPA. He's overtur
ned a jury verdict that found a company liable for being a monopoly when it had over 90% of the market share at the time.It's not
 just his decisions in these individual cases that give me pause - it's that decisions like these are the rule for Samuel Alito, 
not the exception.When it comes to how checks and balances in our system are supposed to operate - the balance of power between t
he Executive Branch, Congress, and the Judiciary, Judge Alito consistently sides with the notion that a President should not be c
onstrained by either Congressional acts or the check of the Judiciary. He believes in the overarching power of the President to e
ngage in whatever the President deems to be appropriate policy. As a consequence of this, I'm extraordinarily worried about how J
udge Alito might approach issues like wiretapping, monitoring of emails, or other privacy concerns that we've seen surface over t
he last several months.In sum, I've seen an extraordinarily consistent attitude on the part of Judge Alito that does not uphold t
he traditional role of the Supreme Court as a bastion of equality and justice for United States citizens.Should he be confirmed, 
I hope that he proves me wrong. I hope that he shows the independence that I think is absolutely necessary in order for us to pre
serve our liberties and protect our citizens. Floor Statement on Iraq Debate TOPIC: Iraq June 21, 2006 Floor Statement of Senator
 Barack Obama on Iraq Debate Complete Text Mr. President, in October of 2002, I delivered a speech opposing the War in Iraq.I sai
d that Saddam Hussein was a ruthless man, but that he posed no imminent and direct threat to the United States.I said that a war 
in Iraq would take our focus away from our efforts to defeat al-Qaeda.And, with a volatile mix of ethnic groups and a complicated
 history, I said that the invasion and occupation of Iraq would require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined
 cost, with undetermined consequences.In short, I felt the decision unfolding then to invade Iraq was being made without a clear 
rationale, based more on ideology and politics than fact and reason.It is with no great pleasure that I recall this now. Too many
 young men and women have died. Too many have been maimed. Too many hearts have been broken. I fervently wish I had been wrong ab
out this war; that my concerns had been unfounded.America and the American people have paid a high price for the decision to inva
de Iraq and myriad mistakes that followed. I believe that history will not judge the authors of this war kindly.For all these rea
sons, I would like nothing more than to support the Kerry Amendment; to bring our brave troops home on a date certain, and spare 
the American people more pain, suffering and sorrow.But having visited Iraq, I'm also acutely aware that a precipitous withdrawal
 of our troops, driven by Congressional edict rather than the realities on the ground, will not undo the mistakes made by this Ad
ministration. It could compound them.It could compound them by plunging Iraq into an even deeper and, perhaps, irreparable crisis
.We must exit Iraq, but not in a way that leaves behind a security vacuum filled with terrorism, chaos, ethnic cleansing and geno
cide that could engulf large swaths of the Middle East and endanger America. We have both moral and national security reasons to 
manage our exit in a responsible way.I share many of the goals set forth in the Kerry Amendment. We should send a clear message t
o the Iraqis that we won't be there forever, and that by next year our primary role should be to conduct counter-insurgency actio
ns, train Iraqi security forces, and provide needed logistical support.Moreover, I share the frustration with an Administration w
hose policies with respect to Iraq seem to simply repeat the simple-minded refrains of "we know best" and "stay the course." It's
 not acceptable to conduct a war where our goals and strategies drift aimlessly regardless of the cost in lives or dollars spent,
 and where we end up with arbitrary, poll-driven troop reductions by the Administration - the worst of all possible outcomes.As o
ne who strongly opposed the decision to go to war and who has met with servicemen and women injured in this conflict and seen the
 pain of the parents and loved ones of those who have died in Iraq, I would like nothing more than for our military involvement t
o end.But I do not believe that setting a date certain for the total withdrawal of U.S. troops is the best approach to achieving,
 in a methodical and responsible way, the three basic goals that should drive our Iraq policy: that is, 1) stabilizing Iraq and g
iving the factions within Iraq the space they need to forge a political settlement; 2) containing and ultimately defeating the in
surgency in Iraq; and 3) bringing our troops safely home.What is needed is a blueprint for an expeditious yet responsible exit fr
om Iraq. A hard and fast, arbitrary deadline for withdrawal offers our commanders in the field, and our diplomats in the region, 
insufficient flexibility to implement that strategy.For example, let's say that a phased withdrawal results in fifty thousand tro
ops in Iraq by July 19, 2007. If, at that point, our generals and the Iraqi government tell us that having those troops in Iraq f
or an additional three or six months would enhance stability and security in the region, this amendment would potentially prevent
 us from pursuing the optimal policy.It is for this reason that I cannot support the Kerry Amendment. Instead, I am a cosponsor o
f the Levin amendment, which gives us the best opportunity to find this balance between our need to begin a phase-down and our ne
ed to help stabilize Iraq. It tells the Iraqis that we won't be there forever so that they need to move forward on uniting and se
curing their country. I agree with Senator Warner that the message should be "we really mean business, Iraqis, get on with it." A
t the same time, the amendment also provides the Iraqis the time and the opportunity to accomplish this critical goal.Essential t
o a successful policy is the Administration listening to its generals and diplomats and members of Congress - especially those wh
o disagree with their policies and believe it is time to start bringing our troops home.The overwhelming majority of the Senate i
s already on record voting for an amendment stating that calendar year 2006 should be a period of significant transition to full 
Iraqi sovereignty, with Iraqi security forces taking the lead for the security, creating the conditions for the phased redeployme
nt of United States forces from Iraq. The Levin Amendment builds on this approach.The White House should follow this principle as
 well. Visiting Iraq for a few hours cannot resuscitate or justify a failed policy. No amount of spin or photo opportunities can 
change the bottom line: this war has been poorly conceived and poorly managed by the White House, and that is why it has been so 
poorly received by the American people..And it's troubling to already see Karl Rove in New Hampshire, treating this as a politica
l attack opportunity instead of a major national challenge around which to rally the country.There are no easy answers to this wa
r. I understand that many Americans want to see our troops come home. The chaos, violence, and horrors in Iraq are gut-wrenching 
reminders of what our men and women in uniform, some just months out of high school, must confront on a daily basis. They are doi
ng this heroically, they are doing this selflessly, and more than 2,500 of them have now made the ultimate sacrifice for our coun
try.Not one of us wants to see our servicemen and women in harm's way a day longer than they have to be. And that's why we must f
ind the most responsible way to bring them home as quickly as possible, while still leaving the foundation of a secure Iraq that 
will not endanger the free world. FOREIGN OPERATIONS APPROPRIATIONS BILL AND THE AVIAN FLU TOPICS: Foreign Policy & Defense and H
ealthcare & Health Issues July 18, 2005 Remarks of U.S. Senator Barack Obama Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill and the Avian
 Flu Complete Text Mr. President, I rise today in support of H.R. 2057, the Foreign Operations Appropriation Bill. I'd also like 
to highlight one aspect of the bill.Since coming to the Senate six months ago, one of the foreign policy and health issues I have
 focused on relates to the avian flu. I am pleased that this bill includes $10 million to combat the spread of this potential pan
demic, adding to the $25 million that the Senate provided in the supplemental appropriations bill in April.I thank the managers o
f this bill, Senators McConnell and Leahy, and their staffs for working with me on this important issue. I know that Senator McCo
nnell has a longstanding interest in Southeast Asia, and Senator Leahy has always been a champion of international health issues,
 making the avian flu something I know they both care deeply about.In the last few weeks, scientists have reported that a deadlie
r version of the avian flu has now spread to migrant birds that could carry the disease out of Asia and across the world.While it
 may not seem that threatening to many Americans at first, this bird flu could easily transform into a human flu. And if it does,
 it could be one of the deadliest flus mankind has ever known - even worse than the 1918 flu pandemic that killed 675,000 America
ns and 50 million worldwide.Already, there have been 108 human cases of avian flu, resulting in 54 deaths. And while the virus ha
s not yet mutated into a full-blown human flu, recent developments suggest it might be heading in that direction. In recent month
s, the virus has been detected in mammals that have never previously been infected, including tigers, leopards and cats. A few we
eks ago, the World Health Organization reported that avian flu strains in Vietnam are lasting longer and spreading to more humans
. And according to government officials, a few cases of human-to-human spread have already occurred.Every day, there are new repo
rts about the increasing dangers of the avian flu. Last month, it was revealed that Chinese farmers have tried to suppress outbre
aks of the avian flu by using human antiviral drugs on infected animals. As a result, one strain of the virus has become resistan
t to these drugs, thus making the drugs ineffective in protecting humans against a possible pandemic. And just this week, researc
hers found that ducks infected with the virus were contagious for up to 17 days, causing the animals to become - in the researche
rs' words - "medical Trojan horses" for transmitting the disease to humans.Simply put, the world is not ready for a potential out
break of this deadly flu. In fact, we aren't even close.There is no known vaccine for the avian flu, and producing one could take
 months once an outbreak occurs. And while the World Health Organization recommends that every nation stockpiles enough flu treat
ment to treat a quarter of its population, the United States has only ordered enough to treat less than 1% of ours.We can't just 
stand by and hope that this virus doesn't reach our shores when it only takes hours to travel from one side of the world to the o
ther. It's time for America to lead the world in taking decisive action to prevent a potential global tragedy.We should start by 
doing what we can to fight the virus while it's still mainly in Southeast Asia. That's why I fought for and obtained $25 million 
for prevention efforts by the CDC, the Agency for International Development, the Health and Human Services Department, and other 
agencies. And that's why I requested another $10 million in this bill.In addition, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee approve
d language that I offered directing President Bush to form a senior-level task force to devise an international strategy to deal 
with the avian flu and coordinate policy among our government agencies. I hope that the Bush administration forms this task force
 immediately without waiting for legislation to be passed.Yet, these are only modest first steps. International health experts be
lieve that Southeast Asia will be an epicenter of influenza for decades. That's why we need to create a permanent framework for c
urtailing the spread of future infectious diseases - a framework that would increase international disease surveillance, response
 capacity and public education and coordination, especially in Southeast Asia.But we must also prepare our own country in the eve
nt that a global pandemic reaches America. That's why I recently introduced the AVIAN Act, which helps make sure that Americans a
re protected from a possible outbreak of the avian flu.When the threat is this real, we should be increasing research into possib
le flu vaccines, and we should be ordering enough doses of flu treatment to cover the recommended 25% of our population - just li
ke England and other Western countries have done.We should also ensure that our Health and Human Services department and state go
vernments put in place a plan as to how they would address a potential flu pandemic, including the purchasing and distributing of
 vaccines. A year after a draft of a federal plan was published, a final version has yet to be finalized. We shouldn't have to wa
it any longer, because the avian flu certainly won't.We are extremely fortunate that so far, the avian flu has not been found in 
the United States. But in an age when you can board planes in Bangkok or Hong Kong and arrive in Chicago, Burlington or Louisvill
e in hours, we must face the reality that these exotic killer diseases are not isolated health problems half a world away, but di
rect and immediate threats to security and prosperity here at home.Again, I thank Senators McConnell and Leahy for including this
 important funding in the supplemental appropriations bill and now including additional funding in this bill. And I thank the dis
tinguished chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Lugar, for his leadership on this issueI ask unanimous consent that 
several articles and editorials about the avian flu be included in the record. Thank you, and I yield the floor. Teaching Our Kid
s in a 21st Century Economy TOPIC: Education October 25, 2005 Teaching Our Kids in a 21st Century Economy Delivered at the Center
 for American Progress Complete Text The other day, I was reading through Jonathan Kozol's new book, Shame of a Nation. In it, he
 talks about his recent travels to schools across America, and how fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, we have an educ
ation system in this country that is still visibly separate and painfully unequal. At one point, Kozol tells about his trip to Fr
emont High School in Los Angeles, where he meets some children who explain with heart-wrenching honesty what living in this syste
m is like. One girl told him that she'd taken hairdressing twice, because there were actually two different levels offered by the
 high school. The first was in hairstyling; the other in braiding.Another girl, Mireya, listened as her friend told this story. A
nd she began to cry. When asked what was wrong, she said, "I don't want to take hairdressing. I did not need sewing either. I kne
w how to sew. My mother is a seamstress in a factory. I'm trying to go to college. I don't need to sew to go to college. My mothe
r sews. I hoped for something else."I hoped for something else.It's a simple dream, but it speaks to us so powerfully because it 
is our dream - one that exists at the very center of the American experience. One that says if you're willing to work hard and ta
ke responsibility, then you'll have the chance to reach for something else; for something better.The ideal of public education ha
s always been at the heart of this bargain. From the moment the earliest Americans stepped out from the shadows of tyranny and bu
ilt the first free schools in the towns of New England and across the Southern plains, it was the driving force behind Thomas Jef
ferson's declaration that "...talent and virtue, needed in a free society, should be educated regardless of wealth, birth or othe
r accidental condition."It's a bargain our government kept as we moved from a nation of farms to a nation of factories, setting u
p a system of free public high schools to give every American the chance to participate in the new economy. It's a bargain we exp
anded after World War II, when we sent over two million returning heroes to college on the GI Bill, creating the largest middle c
lass in history.And even when our government refused to hold up its end of this bargain; when America fell short of its promise a
nd forced Linda Brown to walk miles to a dilapidated Topeka school because she wasn't allowed in the well-off, white-only school 
near her house; even then, ordinary people marched and bled, they took to the streets and fought in the courts, they stood up and
 spoke out until the day when the arrival of nine little children at a school in Little Rock made real the decision that in Ameri
ca, separate could never be equal. Because in America, it's the promise of a good education for all that makes it possible for an
y child to transcend the barriers of race or class or background and achieve their God-given potential.In this country, it is edu
cation that allows our children to hope for something else.And as the twenty-first century unfolds, we are called once again to m
ake real this hope - to meet the new challenges of a global economy by carrying forth the ideals of progress and opportunity thro
ugh public education in America.We now live in a world where the most valuable skill you can sell is knowledge. Revolutions in te
chnology and communication have created an entire economy of high-tech, high-wage jobs that can be located anywhere there's an in
ternet connection. And today, a child in Chicago is not only competing for jobs with one in Boston, but thousands more in Bangalo
re and Beijing who are being educated longer and better than ever before.America is in danger of losing this competition. We now 
have one of the highest high school dropout rates of any industrialized country. By 12th grade, our children score lower on their
 math and science tests than most other kids in the world. And today, countries like China are graduating eight times as many eng
ineers as we do.And yet, as these fundamental changes are occurring all around this, we still hear about schools that are giving 
students the choice between hairstyling and braiding.Let's be clear - we are failing too many of our children. We're sending them
 out into a 21st century economy by sending them through the doors of 20th century schools.Right now, six million middle and high
 school students are reading at levels significantly below their grade level. Half of all teenagers can't understand basic fracti
ons; half of all nine year olds can't perform basic multiplication or division. For some students, the data is even worse: almost
 60% of African-American fourth-graders can't read at even the basic level, and by 8th grade, nearly nine in ten African-American
 and Latino students are not proficient in math. More students than ever are taking college entrance exams, but these tests are s
howing that only twenty percent are prepared to take college-level classes in English, math, and science. For African-American st
udents, the figure dips to just ten percent.What happens to these kids? What happens to the one in four eighth graders who never 
go on to finish high school in five years? What happens to the one in two high school graduates who never go on to college?Thirty
 or forty years ago, they may have gone on to find a factory job that could pay the bills and support a family. But we no longer 
live in that world. Today, the average salary of a high school graduate is only $33,000 a year. For high school dropouts, it's ev
en closer to the poverty line - just $25,000.If we do nothing about this, if we accept this kind of economy; this kind of society
, we face a future where the ideal of American meritocracy could turn into an American myth. A future that's not only morally una
cceptable for our children; but economically untenable for a nation that finds itself in a globalized world, as countries who are
 out-educating us today out-compete our workers tomorrow.Now, the American people understand that government alone can't meet thi
s challenge. They understand that we need to transform our educational culture, from one of complacency to one that constantly st
rives for excellence. And they understand that government cannot replace parents as the primary motivator for the hard work and c
ommitment that excellence requires.But they also know that government, through the public schools, plays a critical role. And wha
t they've seen from government for close to two decades is not innovation or bold calls to action. Instead, what they've seen is 
inaction and tinkering around the edges of our education system - a paralysis that is fueled by ideological battles that are as o
utdated as they are predictable.You know the arguments. On one side, you'll here conservatives who will look at children without 
textbooks and classrooms without computers and say money doesn't matter. On the other side, you'll find liberals who will look at
 failing test scores and failing schools and not realize how much reform matters. One side will blame teachers, and the other sid
e will never ask them to change. Some will say that no matter what you do, some children just can't learn. Others will make excus
es for them when they won't learn.Some will say that the same public school system that succeeded for generations must now be dis
mantled and privatized, no matter who it leaves behind. And others will defend the status quo in these schools even when they fai
l to teach our kids.Like most ideological debates, this one assumes that there's an "either-or" answer to our education problems.
 Either we need to pour more money into the system, or we need to reform it with more tests and standards.But we don't make much 
progress for our kids when we constrain ourselves like this. It appeared for a brief moment that the President, working with lead
ers like Senator Kennedy understood this, and many of us were initially encouraged by the passage of No Child Left Behind. It may
 not be popular to say in Democratic circles, but there were good elements to this bill - its emphasis on the achievement gap, ra
ising standards, and accountability. Unfortunately, because of failures in implementation, particularly its failure to provide ad
equate funding and a failure to design better assessment tests that provide a clearer path for schools to raise achievement, the 
bill's promise is not yet fulfilled.The shortcomings of NCLB shouldn't end the conversation, however. They should be the start of
 a conversation about how we can do better. Yes, it's a moral outrage that this Administration hasn't come through with the fundi
ng for what it claims has been its number one domestic priority. But to wage war against the entire law for that reason is not an
 education policy, and Democrats need to realize that.If we truly believe in our public schools, then we have a moral responsibil
ity to do better - to break the either-or mentality around school reform, and embrace a both-and mentality. Good schools will req
uire both the structural reform and the resources necessary to prepare our kids for the future.It's not as if innovation isn't ta
king place around the country. It's taking place in wealthier schools, like Illinois' Adlai Stevenson High School, which has one 
of the highest percentages of students taking AP exams in the country, and California's New Tech High, which puts a computer in f
ront of every child. But it's also taking place in schools where large majorities of children find themselves below the poverty l
ine yet above the national average in achievement -- places like Newark's Branch Book Elementary and Chicago's Carson Elementary 
School.The problem is that we are not applying what we've learned from these successes to inform national policy. We need new vis
ion for education in America - one where we move past ideology to experiment with the latest reforms, measure the results, and ma
ke policy decisions based on what works and what doesn't.Now, if we are going to learn from schools that work, we must begin by a
dmitting the obvious: money matters. In too many places, kids are going to school in trailers where rats are more numerous than c
omputers. Smaller classes, books and lab supplies, better paid teachers, modernized buildings with the latest technology - all of
 this is critical if we are serious about educating our next generation.But money alone won't make a difference without reform. A
nd by the way, we won't be able to muster the political will to get more money into the system unless taxpayers are convinced tha
t the money will produce measurable results. Fortunately, those who work in the field know what reforms really work: a more chall
enging and rigorous curriculum with emphasis on math, science, and literacy skills. Longer hours and more days to give kids the t
ime and attention they need to learn. Early childhood education for every child so they're not left behind before they even start
 school. Meaningful, performance-based assessments that can give us a fuller picture of how a student is doing. And putting effec
tive teachers and transformative principals in front of our kids.All of these reforms need to be scaled-up and replicated across 
the country. But in the time I have remaining, let me use just talk about a few to point to what's possible, starting with one pl
ace where I think we can start making a big difference in education right now.From the moment our children step into a classroom,
 new evidence shows that the single most important factor in determining their achievement today is not the color of their skin o
r where they come from; it's not who their parents are or how much money they have.It's who their teacher is. It's the person who
 will brave some of the most difficult schools, the most challenging children, and accept the most meager compensation simply to 
give someone else the chance to succeed.One study shows that two groups of students who started third grade at about the same lev
el of math achievement finished fifth grade at vastly different levels. The group with the effective teacher saw their scores ris
e by nearly 25%. The group with the ineffective teacher actually saw their scores drop by 25%.But even though we know how much te
aching matters, in too many places we've abandoned our teachers, sending them into some of the most impoverished, underperforming
 schools with little experience or pay; little preparation or support. After a few years of experience, most will leave to pick w
ealthier, less challenging schools.The result is that some of our neediest children end up with less-experienced, poorly-paid tea
chers who are far more likely to be teaching subjects in which they have no training. Minority students are twice as likely to ha
ve these teachers. In Illinois, students in high-poverty schools are more than three times as likely to have them. The No Child L
eft Behind law, which states that all kids should have highly qualified teachers, is supposed to correct this, but so far it hasn
't, because no one's followed through on the promise.If we hope to give our children a chance, it's time we start giving our teac
hers a chance. We can't change the whole country overnight. But what we can do is give more school districts the chance to revolu
tionize the way they approach teaching. By helping spark complete reform across an entire school district, we can learn what actu
ally works for our kids and then replicate those policies throughout the country.So here's what I'm proposing: the creation of wh
at I call Innovation Districts. School districts from around the country that want to become seedbeds of reform would apply and w
e'd select the twenty with the best plans to put effective, supported teachers in all classrooms and increase achievement for all
 students. We'd offer these districts substantial new resources to do this, but in return, we'd ask them to try systemic new refo
rms. Above all, we'd require results.In Innovation Districts, we'd ask for reforms in four broad areas: teaching, most importantl
y, but also how teachers use their time, what they teach, and what we can do to hold our schools accountable for achievement.We'd
 begin by working with these districts to strengthen their teaching, and we'd start with recruitment. Right now we don't have nea
rly enough effective teachers in the places we need them most: urban and rural schools, and subject areas like math and science. 
One of the main reasons for this, cited by most teachers who leave the profession, is that no one gives them the necessary traini
ng and preparation.Around the country, organizations like the Academy for Urban School Leadership in Chicago are changing this by
 recruiting and training new, highly-qualified teachers for some of the hardest-to-teach classrooms in the country. We need to ex
pand this by giving districts help in creating new teacher academies that will partner with organizations like this to recruit ef
fective teachers for low-performing, high-poverty schools. Each teacher would undergo an extensive training program before they b
egin, including classroom observation and participation.After we recruit great teachers, we need to pay them better. Right now, t
eaching is one of the only professions where no matter how well you perform at your job, you're almost never rewarded for success
. But with six-figure salaries luring away some of our most talented college graduates from some of our neediest schools, this ne
eds to change. That's why teachers in these Innovation Districts who are successful in improving student achievement would receiv
e substantial pay increases, as would those who choose to teach in the most troubled schools and the highest-need subject areas, 
like math and science. The city of Denver is trying pay increases in partnership with the local union, and when Chattanooga, Tenn
essee offered similar incentives for teachers who taught in high-need schools, student reading scores went up by over 10%.Of cour
se, teachers don't just need more pay, they need more support. One thing I kept hearing when I visited Dodge Elementary School in
 Chicago is how much an encouraging principal or the advice of an experienced teacher can make a difference. That's why teachers 
would be paired with mentor teachers who've been there before. After a few years of experience, they'd then have the chance to be
come mentor teachers themselves.And to help them deal with those few disruptive students who tend to slow down the rest of the cl
ass - a problem I hear about from teachers all the time - we'd expand innovative programs being used in states like Illinois that
 teach students about positive behavior.Finally, we would also require Innovation Districts to work with their unions to uncover 
bureaucratic obstacles that leave poor kids without good teachers, including hiring, funding and transfer policies. Districts wou
ld work with unions to tackle these problems so that we can provide every child with an effective teacher.Beyond policies that he
lp teachers specifically, we'd also ask Innovation Districts to try reforms that create a more effective teaching environment. To
 give teachers more time with their students and more time to learn from each other, these districts would be asked to restructur
e their schedules and implement either longer days or summer school. In addition to more learning, this would provide kids a safe
, educational environment while their parents are at work.And we'd make sure that in every school district across the country, ed
ucators are teaching a curriculum that will prepare our kids for the global economy. In many states, students are taught the anat
omy of a flower as many as six times over the course of their education. Yet, they are never taught what they need to become a pr
oductive citizen in a global economy - like computer technology, how the economy works, why skyscrapers stand, or how to design a
 new product. Some states are successfully using this kind of project-based learning to give our kids real world, hands-on experi
ence in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math. We will provide funding for more of this learning in more of ou
r schools.To hold schools and teachers accountable for the results of all these reforms, Innovation Districts would be asked to s
upport schools that succeed and shut down those that don't. To find out what works and what doesn't, we'd provide them with power
ful data and technology, and also give them the option of partnering with local universities to help them improve performance, li
ke what happens at the University of Chicago's Urban Education Initiative. Schools that raise student achievement would be given 
bonuses. For schools that don't improve, the districts would close them and replace them with new, smaller schools that can repli
cate some of the successful reforms taking place elsewhere. Entire districts that do not improve would be removed from the progra
m. These reforms would take an important first step toward fixing our broken system by putting qualified, supported teachers in t
he schools that need them most. But beyond that, they would show us the progress we can make when money is well spent. And they w
ould allow us to finally break free from the either-or mentality that's put bureaucracy and ideology ahead of what works; ahead o
f what's best for our kids.When it comes to education, the time for excuses has passed - for all of us.During my visit to Dodge E
lementary, I was able to speak with a few of the teachers about some of the challenges they're facing in educating their students
. And one teacher mentioned to me that in one of the biggest obstacles in her view is what she referred to as the "These Kids" sy
ndrome.She said that when it comes to educating students today, people always seem to find a million excuses for why "these kids"
 can't learn. That you'll hear how "these kids are nothing but trouble," or "these kids come from tough backgrounds," or "these k
ids don't want to learn." And the more people talk about them as "these kids," the easier it is for "these kids" to become somebo
dy else's problem.But of course, the children in this country - the children in Dodge Elementary, and South Central L.A., and rur
al Arkansas, and suburban Maryland - they are not "these kids." They are our kids. They want a chance to achieve - and each of us
 has a responsibility to give them that chance.In the end, children succeed because somewhere along the way, a parent or teacher 
instills in them the belief that they can. That they're able to. That they're worth it.At Earhart Elementary in Chicago, one litt
le girl, raised by a single mom from a poor background, was asked the secret to her academic success.She said, "I just study hard
 every night because I like learning. My teacher wants me to be a good student, and so does my mother. I don't want to let them d
own."In the months and years to come, it's time for this nation to rededicate itself to the ideal of a world class education for 
every American child. It's time to let our kids hope for something else. It's time to instill the belief in every child that they
 can succeed - and then make sure we make good on the promise to never let them down. Thank you. Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights A
ward Ceremony TOPIC: Civil Rights November 16, 2005 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award Ceremony & commemoration of Robert F. Ke
nnedys 80th birthday Complete Text Thank you. Its an honor to be here today, and Id also like to congratulate Stephen Bradbury on
 his award and on all the wonderful work hes been doing on behalf of the people of New Orleans.I come to this with tremendous hum
ility. I was only seven when Bobby Kennedy died. Many of the people in this room knew him as brother, as husband, as father, as f
riend.I knew him only as an icon. In that sense, it is a distance I share with most of the people who now work in this Capitol ma
ny of whom were not even born when Bobby Kennedy died. But whats interesting is that if you go throughout the offices in the Capi
tol, everywhere youll find photographs of Kennedy, or collections of his speeches, or some other memento of his life.Why is this?
 Why is it that this man who was never President, who was our Attorney General for only three years, who was New Yorks junior Sen
ator for just three and a half, still calls to us today? Still inspires our debate with his words, animates our politics with his
 ideas, and calls us to make gentle the life of a world thats too often coarse and unforgiving?Obviously, much has to do with cha
risma and eloquence that unique ability, rare for most but common among Kennedys, to sum up the hopes and dreams of the most dive
rse nation on Earth with a simple phrase or sentence; to inspire even the most apathetic observers of American life.Part of it is
 his youth both the time of life and the state of mind that dared us to hope that even after John was killed; even after we lost 
King; there would come a younger, energetic Kennedy who could make us believe again.But beyond these qualities, theres something 
more.Within the confines of these walls and the boundaries of this city, it becomes very easy to play small-ball politics. Somewh
ere between the partisan deadlock and the twenty-four hour news cycles, the contrived talking points and the focus on the sensati
onal over the substantive, issues of war and poverty, hopelessness and lawlessness become problems to be managed, not crises to b
e solved. They become fodder for the Sunday show scrum, not places to find genuine consensus and compromise. And so, at some poin
t, we stop reaching for the possible and resign ourselves to that which is most probable.This is what happens in Washington.And y
et, as this goes on, somewhere another child goes hungry in a neighborhood just blocks away from one where a family is too full t
o eat another bite. Somewhere another hurricane survivor still searches for a home to return to or a school for her daughter. Som
ewhere another twelve-year-old is gunned down by an assailant who used to be his kindergarten playmate, and another parent loses 
their child on the streets of Tikrit.But somewhere, there have also always been people who believe that this isnt the way it was 
supposed to be that things should be different in America. People who believe that while evil and suffering will always exist, th
is is a country that has been fueled by small miracles and boundless dreams a place where were not afraid to face down the greate
st challenges in pursuit of the greater good; a place where, against all odds, we overcome.Bobby Kennedy was one of these people.
In a nation torn by war and divided against itself, he was able to look us in the eye and tell us that no matter how many cities 
burned with violence, no matter how persistent the poverty or the racism, no matter how far adrift America strayed, hope would co
me again.It was an idealism not based in rigid ideology. Yes, he believed that government is a force for good but not the only fo
rce. He distrusted big bureaucracies, and knew that change erupts from the will of free people in a free society; that it comes n
ot only from new programs, but new attitudes as well.And Kennedys was not a pie-in-the-sky-type idealism either. He believed we w
ould always face real enemies, and that there was no quick or perfect fix to the turmoil of the 1960s.Rather, the idealism of Rob
ert Kennedy the unfinished legacy that calls us still is a fundamental belief in the continued perfection of American ideals.Its 
a belief that says if this nation was truly founded on the principles of freedom and equality, it could not sit idly by while mil
lions were shackled because of the color of their skin. That if we are to shine as a beacon of hope to the rest of the world, we 
must be respected not just for the might of our military, but for the reach of our ideals. That if this is a land where destiny i
s not determined by birth or circumstance, we have a duty to ensure that the child of a millionaire and the child of a welfare mo
m have the same chance in life. That if out of many, we are truly one, then we must not limit ourselves to the pursuit of selfish
 gain, but that which will help all Americans rise together.We have not always lived up to these ideals and we may fail again in 
the future, but this legacy calls on us to try. And the reason it does the reason we still hear the echo of not only Bobbys words
, but Johns and Kings and Roosevelts and Lincolns before him is because they stand in such stark contrast to the place in which w
e find ourselves today.Its the timidity of politics thats holding us back right now the politics of cant-do and oh-well. An energ
y crisis that jeopardizes our security and our economy? No magic wand to fix it, were told. Thousands of jobs vanishing overseas?
 Its actually healthier for the economy that way. Three days late to the worst natural disaster in American history? Brownie, you
re doing a heck of a job.And of course, if nothing can be done to solve the problems we face, if we have no collective responsibi
lity to look out for one another, then the next logical step is to give everyone one big refund on their government divvy it up i
nto individual tax breaks, hand em out, and encourage everyone to go buy their own health care, their own retirement plan, their 
own child care, their own schools, their own roads, their own leveesWe know this as the Ownership Society. But in our past there 
has been another term for it Social Darwinism every man or women for him or herself. It allows us to say to those whose health ca
re or tuition may rise faster than they can afford tough luck. It allows us to say to the child who was born into poverty pull yo
urself up by your bootstraps. It lets us say to the workers who lose their job when the factory shuts down youre on your own.But 
there is a problem. It wont work. It ignores our history. Yes, our greatness as a nation has depended on individual initiative, o
n a belief in the free market. But it has also depended on our sense of mutual regard for each other, the idea that everybody has
 a stake in the country, that were all in it together and everybodys got a shot at opportunity.Robert Kennedy reminded us of this
. He reminds us still. He reminds us that we dont need to wait for a hurricane to know that Third World living conditions in the 
middle of an American city make us all poorer. We dont need to wait for the 3000th death of someone elses child in Iraq to make u
s realize that a war without an exit strategy puts all of our families in jeopardy. We dont have to accept the diminishment of th
e American Dream in this country now, or ever.Its time for us to meet the whys of today with the why nots we often quote but rare
ly live to answer why hunger and why homeless, why violence and why despair with why not good jobs and living wages, why not bett
er health care and world class schools, why not a country where we make possible the potential that exists in every human being?I
f he were here today, I think it would be hard to place Robert F. Kennedy into any of the categories that so often constrain us p
olitically. He was a fervent anti-communist but knew diplomacy was our way out of the Cuban Missile Crisis. He sought to wage the
 war on poverty but with local partnerships and community activism. He was at once both hard-headed and big-hearted.And yet, his 
was not a centrism in the sense of finding a middle road or a certain point on the ideological spectrum. His was a politics that,
 at its heart, was deeply moral based on the notion that in this world, there is right and there is wrong, and its our job to org
anize our laws and our lives around recognizing the difference.When RFK made his famous trip to the Mississippi Delta with Charle
s Evers in 1967, the story is often told about the destitute they encountered as they walked from shack to shack. As they walk in
to one with hardly a ceiling and a floor full of holes, Kennedy sees a small child with a swollen stomach sitting in the corner. 
He tries and tries to talk to this child again and again, but he gets no response, no movement, not even a look of awareness. Jus
t a blank stare from cold, wide eyes so battered by poverty that theyre barely alive.And at that point were told that Kennedy beg
ins to cry. And he turns to Evers and asks How can a country like this allow it? and Evers responds Maybe they just dont know.Bob
by Kennedy spent his life making sure that we knew not only to wake us from indifference and face us with the darkness we let sli
p into our own backyard, but to bring us the good news that we have it within our power to change all this; to write our own dest
iny. Because we are a people of hope. Because we are Americans.This is the good news we still hear all these years later the mess
age that still points us down the road that Bobby Kennedy never finished traveling. Its a road I hope our politics and our countr
y begin to take in the months and years to come. Thank you. Energy Independence TOPIC: Oil & Alternative Fuels September 20, 2006
 Energy Independence: A Call for Leadership Complete Text Now that summer's over and gas prices have finally come down a bit, the
re's a temptation to put any discussion about energy on the back burner until the next crisis arises. Gone are the days when the 
President would make sweeping pronouncements in his State of the Union about America's addiction to oil - today there is far more
 political mileage out of questioning Democrats' commitment to fighting terror than by affirming America's commitment to energy i
ndependence.But as the President may or may not have learned by now, simply ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away. Because w
hile headlines about price gouging and gas lines have temporarily faded from the news, new headlines have emerged that should hav
e us every bit as concerned about the addiction we just can't seem to shake.In just the last week, two in particular caught my ey
e.One is from the Detroit Free Press, and it talks about how Ford Motor Company plans to cut 30,000 hourly jobs, 14,000 salaried 
jobs, and close sixteen plants by 2012.Now, there are plenty of reasons for Ford's financial troubles, but one of the most glarin
g has been their inability to compete with foreign counterparts by transitioning to the fuel-efficient and hybrid vehicles that r
epresent the future of the auto industry.200,000 of these hybrids are driving around China today, a country that already has a hi
gher fuel economy than we do. Over in Japan, Toyota is doubling production of the popular Prius to sell 100,000 in the U.S. this 
year. But at Ford, there are plans to make only 20,000 Escape Hybrids in 2006, and GM's brand won't be on the market until 2007. 
Meanwhile, the waiting lists for a hybrid car in this country get longer by the day.These foreign auto companies are out-innovati
ng and out-competing us, and if we do nothing to help U.S. carmakers, tens of thousands more jobs and billions in business will b
e heading overseas in the months to come.Unfortunately, job losses and foreign competition are just the half of it. Because the s
econd headline that caught my eye was in Saturday's New York Times, and it read, "Suicide Attacks Foiled at 2 Oil Sites in Yemen.
"This news is disturbing, but not surprising. For years, Al Qaeda has been trying to attack Middle Eastern oil refineries as a wa
y to wreak havoc on the U.S. economy. Osama bin Laden himself has said, "Focus your operations on oil, especially in Iraq and the
 Gulf area, since this will cause them to die off [on their own]." In the past, even minor attacks have caused global prices to j
ump $2 per barrel in a single day. And a former CIA agent tells us that if terrorists ever succeeded in destroying an entire oil 
complex, it could take enough oil off the market to cause financial catastrophe in America.More than anything else, headlines lik
e these represent a realization that goes far beyond the temporary rise and fall of gas prices. It's a realization that for all o
f our economic dominance - for all of our military might - the Achilles heel of the most powerful country on Earth is the oil we 
cannot live without.The President knows this. That thousands of autoworkers are losing their jobs. That we spend $18 million on f
oreign oil ever hour. That our climate is changing and global temperatures are rising.And yet, for someone who talks tough about 
defending America, actually solving our energy crisis seems to factor pretty low on the President's agenda.And that's because as 
much as George Bush might want to defend America, he also needs to defend his vision of government - and that's a government that
 can't, won't, and shouldn't solve great national challenges like our energy dependence.That's why the President's funding for re
newable fuels is at the same level it was the day he took office. That's why his budget funds less then half of the energy bill h
e himself signed into law. That's why billions of tax dollars that could've been used to fund energy research went to the record-
profiting oil companies instead.And that's why it's time to stand up for a new vision of government this November.You see, it's t
his timidity - this smallness - in our politics that's holding us back right now. The idea that some problems are just too big to
 handle, and if you just ignore them, sooner or later, they'll go away.But that's not where the American people are. They still b
elieve in an America where anything's possible - they just don't think their leaders do. They still dream big dreams - they just 
sense their leaders have forgotten how.There's a reason that some have compared the quest for energy independence to the Manhatta
n Project or the Apollo moon landing. Like those historic efforts, moving away from an oil economy is a major challenge that will
 require a sustained national commitment.During World War II, we had an entire country working around the clock to produce enough
 planes and tanks to beat the Axis powers. In the middle of the Cold War, we built a national highway system so we had a quick wa
y to transport military equipment across the country. When we wanted to beat the Russians into space, we poured millions into a n
ational education initiative that graduated thousands of new scientists and engineers.If we hope to strengthen our security and c
reate hundreds of thousands of new jobs, we can offer no less of a commitment to energy independence.With technology we have on t
he shelves right now and fuels we can grow right here in America, by 2025 we can reduce our oil imports by over 7.5. million barr
els per day - an amount greater than all the oil we are expected to import from the entire Middle East.We start by producing cars
 that use less oil. The auto industry has not been asked to raise fuel economy standards in seventeen years, and lately we've jus
t stopped asking them to.Today, we have no choice. Starting in 2008, if we raised CAF'E standards a modest 3% a year over the nex
t twelve years, by 2020 passenger vehicles would average 40.5 mpg and light trucks would average 32.6 mpg. This is by no means a 
dramatic increase - five years ago, the National Academy of Sciences concluded that raising CAF'E to 33 mpg for passenger cars co
uld easily be done without compromising passenger safety.Not only would this reduce America's oil consumption, but it would incre
ase profits for the auto industry. Yesterday a University of Michigan report came out that said if the Big Three automakers took 
proactive steps to increase the fuel-efficiency of their vehicles, they would stand to gain up to $2 billion more in profits per 
year. But if they continue on their current path, they could stand to lose up to $3.6 billion in profits.Of course, auto executiv
es are right when they say that transitioning to these more fuel-efficient automobiles would be costly at a time of sagging profi
ts and stiff competition, and that's precisely why the federal government shouldn't let the industry face these costs on their ow
n.We should strike a grand bargain with the Big Three automakers where the government picks up part of the tab for their retiree 
health care costs - a tab that ran almost $6.7 billion just last year - in exchange for the car companies using that savings to i
nvest in more fuel-efficient cars.Beyond raising CAFE, however, it's time we replace oil altogether as America's fuel of choice. 
This doesn't just mean singing the praises of ethanol and hoping that it finds its way into our fuel supply on its own. It means 
taking major steps now to put a national biofuel infrastructure in place.Already, some cars on the road have the flexible-fuel ta
nks necessary for them to run on E85, a cheaper, cleaner blend of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline. But millions upon millions of car
s still don't have these tanks.It's time for them to install those tanks in every single car they make, and it's time for the gov
ernment to cover this small cost, which currently runs at just $100 per car. We should also make sure that from now on, every sin
gle automobile the government purchases is a flex-fuel vehicle.It's also a time to start making E85 fueling stations more availab
le to the public. Currently, only 681 out of 170,000 fueling stations in America offer E85 pumps. This is not acceptable. Every A
merican should have the choice to fill up their car with E85 at any fueling station. And oil companies should stop standing in th
e way and join us in making this happen. If the big oil companies would devote just 1% of their first quarter profits this year t
o install E85 pumps, more than 7,000 service stations would be able to serve E85 to hungry motorists.Finally, we should reduce th
e risk of investing in renewable fuels by providing loan guarantees and venture capital to those entrepreneurs with the best plan
s to develop and sell biofuels. And we should create a market for renewable fuels by ramping up the renewable fuel standard and c
reating an alternative diesel standard in this country that together would blend 65 billion gallons of renewable fuels into the p
etroleum supply each year.In the days and months after September 11th, Americans were waiting to be called to something bigger th
an themselves. Just like their parents and grandparents of the Greatest Generation, they were willing to serve and defend their c
ountry - not only on the fields of war, but on the homefront too.This is our chance to step up and serve. For decades, we have he
ard President after President call for energy independence in this country, but for decades, we have fallen short. Well it's time
 to call on ourselves. We shouldn't wait for the next time gas hits $3 a gallon - and we shouldn't accept any more headlines that
 talk about a dying auto industry or a terrorist plot to use oil as a weapon against America. We should act - and we should act n
ow.Now is the time for serious leadership to get us started down the path of energy independence. Now is the time for this call t
o arms. I hope some of the ideas I've laid out today can serve as a basis for this call, but I also hope that members of both par
ties and all levels of government can come together in the near future to launch this serious quest for energy independence. Than
k you. Obama to Vote No on the Nomination of Judge Alito - Podcast Transcript TOPIC: Confirmations January 31 2006 Obama to Vote 
No on the Nomination of Judge Alito to the Supreme Court Complete Podcast Transcript Hello, this is Barack Obama, and today is Tu
esday, January 31, 2006. As many of you may be aware, today is the vote to confirm Judge Alito the Unites States Supreme Court. T
here's been a lot of discussion in the country about how the Senate should approach the confirmation process. There's some who be
lieve that the President, having won the election, should have complete authority to appoint the nominee, and that the Senate sho
uld only examine whether or not the Justice is intellectually capable and is nice to his wife, or she is nice to her husband. Tha
t, once you get beyond issues of intellect and personal character, then there shouldn't be further question as to whether the Jud
ge should be confirmed. I disagree with the view.I believe that the Constitution calls for the Senate to advise and consent, that
, meaningful advice and consent includes an examination of a judge's philosophy, ideology, and record. When I examine the philoso
phy, ideology, and record of Judge Samuel Alito, I am deeply troubled. I have no doubt that Judge Alito has the training and qual
ifications necessary to serve as a Supreme Court Justice. He's a smart guy, there's no indication that he is not a man of good ch
aracter. But, when you look at his record, what is clear is that when it comes to his understanding of the Constitution, he consi
stently sides on behalf of the powerful against the powerless. If there is a case involving an employer and an employee, and the 
Supreme Court has not given clear direction, Judge Alito will rule in favor of the employer. If there is a claim between prosecut
ors and defendants, if the Supreme Court has not already a clear rule of decision then, Judge Alito will rule in favor of the sta
te. When it comes to how checks and balances in our system are supposed to operate, the balance of power between the executive br
anch, Congress, and the judiciary, Judge Alito consistently sides with the notion that a president should not be constrained by e
ither Congressional acts, or the check of the judiciary. He believes in the overarching power of the president to engage in whate
ver the president deems to be appropriate policy. As a consequence of this, I'm extraordinarily worried about how Judge Alito mig
ht approach issues such as wire tapping, monitoring of emails, or other privacy concerns that we have seen surface over the last 
several months.In sum, I've seen an extraordinarily consistent attitude on the part of Judge Alito that does not uphold the tradi
tional role of the Supreme Court as a bastion of equality and justice for the United States citizen, and for that reason, I will 
be voting against his confirmation. I do hope that if Judge Alito is confirmed, he proves me wrong. I know that all the Senators 
who will be voting against him ardently hope that the Supreme Court continues to serve the vital role that it plays in preserving
 our liberties. Thank you very much; I will talk to you guys next week. OBAMA ON S.256, THE BANKRUPTCY ABUSE AND PREVENTION ACT O
F 2005 Monday, February 28, 2005Floor Statement of Senator Barack Obama on S.256, the Bankruptcy Abuse and Prevention Act of 2005
Complete Text Mr. President, I have come to the floor today to address this pending legislation.This issue should force us to fac
e a fundamental question about who we are as a country, how we progress as a society, and where our values lie as a people:How do
 we treat our fellow Americans who have fallen on hard times, and what is our responsibility to cushion those falls when they occ
ur?Proponents claim this bill is designed to curb the worst abuses of our bankruptcy system. That's a worthy goal, and we can all
 agree that bankruptcy was never meant to serve as a Get Out of Jail Free Card, for use when you've foolishly gambled away all yo
ur savings and don't feel like taking responsibility for your actions. Business owners and creditors deserve the money they're ow
ed, and anyone who tries to scam the system just because they can should be stopped and forced to pay their debt.But to accomplis
h that, this bill would take us from a system where judges weed out the abusers from the honest to a system where all the honest 
are presumed to be abusers. Where declaring Chapter 7 bankruptcy is made prohibitively expensive for people who already have suff
ered financial devastation. With this bill, it doesn't matter if you ran up your debt on a trip to Vegas or a trip to the Emergen
cy Room, you're still treated the same under the law and you still face the possibility that you'll never get the chance to start
 over.Now, it would be one thing if most people were abusing the system and falling into bankruptcy because they were irresponsib
le with their finances. But we know that's not the case. We know that most people fall into bankruptcy as a result of bad luck. A
nd we know that a recent Harvard study showed that nearly half of all bankruptcies occur because of an illness that ends up stick
ing families with medical bills they just can't keep up with.Take the case of Suzanne Gibbons. A few years back, Suzanne had a go
od job as a nurse and a home on Chicago's Northwest Side. Then she suffered a stroke that left her hospitalized for five-days. An
d even though she had health insurance through her job, it only covered $4,000 of her $53,000 hospital bill.Because of her illnes
s, she was soon forced to leave her full-time nursing job and take a temp job that paid less and didn't offer health insurance. T
hen the collection agencies started coming after her for hospital bills that she just couldn't keep up with. She lost her retirem
ent savings, she lost her house, and eventually, she was forced to declare bankruptcy.If this bill passes as written, Suzanne wou
ld be treated by the law the same as any scam artist who cheats the system. The decision about whether or not she can file for Ch
apter 7 bankruptcy would never take into account the fact that she fell into financial despair because of her illness. With all t
hat debt, she would have had to hire a lawyer and pay hundreds of dollars more in increased paperwork. And after all that, she st
ill may have been told that she was ineligible for Chapter 7 bankruptcy.And so, as much as we'd like to believe that the face of 
this bankruptcy crisis is credit card addicts who spend their way into debt, the truth is that it's the face of people like Suzan
ne Gibbons. It's the face of middle-class America. Over the last thirty years bankruptcies have gone up 400% -- and we've had mor
e than 2,100 in Illinois just last year. We also know what else has gone up: the cost of child care and the cost of college, the 
cost home ownership and the cost of health care - which is now at a record high. People are working harder and longer for less, a
nd they're falling further and further behind.And we're not talking about the poor or even just the working poor here. As bankrup
tcy professor Elizabeth Warren has noted, these are middle-class families with two parents who both work at good-paying jobs that
 put a roof over their heads. They're saving every extra penny they have so that their children can someday do better than they d
id. But with just one illness, emergency, or divorce, those dreams can be wiped out. This bill does a great job helping the credi
t card industry recover the profits they're losing, but what are we doing to help middle-class families recover the dreams they'r
e losing?This bill does a great job protecting credit card companies from the few bad apples who try to escape their debt, but wh
at does it do to protect the American public from the credit card companies who try to take advantage of them?Mr. President, the 
bankruptcy crisis this bill should address is not just the one facing credit card companies who are enjoying record profits. We s
hould be addressing middle-class families who are dealing with record hardships.As Senator Dodd, Senator Feinstein, and others ha
ve pointed out, this bill also fails to deal with the aggressive marketing practices and hidden fees credit card companies have u
sed to raise their profits and our debt. Charging a penalty to consumers who make a late payment on a completely unrelated credit
 card is just one example of these tactics. We need to end these practices so that we're making life easier not just for the cred
it card companies, but for honest, hardworking middle-class families.And if we're going to crack down on bankruptcy abuse, we sho
uld make it clear that we intend to hold the wealthy and the powerful accountable too. As it is now, this bill makes it easier fo
r a company like Enron who just bilked their employees out of their life savings to declare bankruptcy than for the employees the
mselves. In my own state, we even had a mining company by the name of Horizon declare bankruptcy and then refuse to pay its emplo
yees the health benefits it owed them.The Mine Workers involved had provided a total of 100,000 years of service and dedication a
nd sacrifice to this company. They spent their lives working hard. They did their part. But Horizon didn't do its part, and it wa
s allowed to hide behind bankruptcy laws to leave these workers without the care they had earned.This is wrong. It's wrong that t
his bill would make it harder for these unemployed workers to declare bankruptcy, while doing nothing to prevent the bankrupt com
pany that put them there from shirking its responsibility entirely.What kind of a message does it send when we tell hardworking, 
middle-class Americans, "You have to be more responsible with your finances, but the corporations you work for can be as irrespon
sible as they want with theirs"?We must reform our bankruptcy code so that corporations keep their promises and meet their obliga
tions to their workers. And while I remain hopeful that our companies want to do the right thing for their workers, doing so shou
ld not be a choice - it should be a mandate.Senator Rockefeller has two amendments to do this that I have co-sponsored and urge m
y colleagues to support. One would increase the required payments of wages and employee benefit plans to $15,000 per individual f
rom the current level of $4,925. And it would also require companies that emerge from bankruptcy to immediately pay each retiree 
who lost health benefits an amount of cash equal to what a retiree would be expected to have to pay for COBRA coverage for 18 mon
ths. The second amendment would prevent bankruptcy courts from dismissing companies' coal act obligations to pay their workers th
e benefits they promised them. These companies made a deal to their mine workers, and they should be forced to honor that deal.Mr
. President, this bill gives us a rare chance to ask ourselves who we're here to protect - who we're here to stand up and speak o
ut for. We should curb bankruptcy abuse and to demand a measure of personal responsibility from people. We all want that.But ther
e are also millions of middle-class families out there who are struggling to get by. They work hard, they love their children, an
d they're willing to do anything to give them the best possible shot in life. And in the ten minutes since I've been talking, abo
ut thirty of them have filed for bankruptcy.We live in a rapidly changing world with an economy that's moving just as fast. We ca
n't always control this and we can't promise that the changes will always leave everyone better off.But we can do better than one
 bankruptcy every nineteen seconds. We can do better than forcing people to choose between the cost of health care and the cost o
f college. We can do better than big corporations using bankruptcy laws to deny health care and benefits to their employees. And 
we can give people the basic tools and protections they need to believe that in America, your circumstance is no limit to the suc
cess you may achieve and the dreams you may fulfill.And so, while I cannot support this bill the way it is written, I do look for
ward to working with my colleagues in amending this bill so that we can still keep that promise alive. Thank you. Updates on Darf
ur, Immigration and Gas Prices - Podcast Transcript TOPICS: Foreign Policy & Defense, Immigration and Oil & Alternative Fuels Apr
il 27, 2006 Updates on Darfur, Immigration, Gas Prices Complete Transcript Hello, this is Senator Barack Obama and today is Thurs
day, April 27, 2006.A lot of stuff is going on in Washington right now and so what I want to do is provide you some updates on is
sues that have been discussed on this podcast before but I think are absolutely critical to focus on right now.The first is the i
ssue of Darfur. Many of you heard my previous podcast and have been following this issue in the news. We have a situation in whic
h the Sudanese government in Khartoum has backed militias and gangsters that have slaughtered up to 300,000 innocent Africans. We
 have a situation in which two million or so people are internally displaced in the Sudan, incredibly vulnerable to potential fam
ine, disease and we're now seeing a spillover effect from Sudan into Chad, where you have another 200,000 refugees.The Bush admin
istration properly labeled this several years ago as an ongoing genocide. The situation has not improved. The world needs to focu
s its attention on it and America needs to send a message to its leadership that this is a top priority. We need to get a UN prot
ection force in there to protect the two million people who are internally displaced. We've got to start peace talks between the 
rebels and the Khartoum government that provides some basis for a long-term settlement of disputes there and we have to make sure
 that humanitarian aid continues.In the interest of all these issues stopping the genocide in Darfur there are going to be a coup
le of activities that I hope some of you can attend. Number one: this Sunday, we are going to be holding a rally to save Darfur i
n the United States Capitol, in Washington. That will be taking place from two o'clock until four o'clock in front of the United 
States Capitol, between 3rd Streets and 4th Streets. If you are interested in participating, you should get on the website saveda
rfur.org. That will give you all the details. I'm going to be there and Elie Wiesel, the author and Holocaust survivor, is going 
to be there. We're going to have George Clooney there as well as a number of people who have been active on this issue. I hope we
 can have a strong turnout that sends a message that genocide is not acceptable not only in the United States but the United Nati
ons and the international community have to rally behind these folks. There is also going to be a Chicago rally on May 1, 2006 at
 4:30 p.m. in the Federal Plaza in Dearborn and Adams and so for my Chicago listeners or Illinois listeners you can show your sup
port in that fashion if you can't make the rally in Washington.The second issue I just want to give you an update on is immigrati
on. I met with the President and some of my other colleagues in the West Wing this week to discuss with him where we are on immig
ration reform. Obviously this is an issue of great passion. It is an issue that has brought together diverse coalitions of people
 who recognize that we have to change how we approach immigration.I've been one of they key negotiators in the Senate for a compr
ehensive immigration reform bill that includes something that everybody agrees to: we have to improve border security. It also in
cludes internal enforcement, making sure that employers actually are checking a verifiable, tamper-proof ID card to show that a w
orker is legally inside the United States to work. But three, that we're providing a pathway to citizenship for the 11 to 12 mill
ion people who are already in the United States.There's been a lot of talk on cable and talk radio about amnesty and how we shoul
dn't allow lawbreakers to become U.S. citizens. The fact of the matter is that these 11 to 12 million people came here for the sa
me reason that every immigrant group has come here and that's a search for a better life for their children. They didn't do it th
rough the regular processes and they should be penalized for that and as a consequence what we've been setting up is an eleven-ye
ar process that gives people an opportunity for citizenship but still puts them in the back of the line behind those who are appl
ying legally for citizenship.Having said that, it is important for us to bring these folks out of the shadows to ensure that they
 are subject to the same protections that any legal worker has in this country because if we leave them in the shadows, not only 
are they vulnerable, not only are they living in fear, many of these people are our neighbors, our friends, people who are lookin
g after our children, doing work across the country, some of the dirtiest and toughest work without complaint. But if we don't do
 anything, these are also folks who can, because of their tenuous status, undercut the wages of U.S. workers. If they're not subj
ect to minimum wage laws, if they're not subject to worker safety laws, if they can't unionize, than naturally their wages are go
ing to be depressed and that means that there is an incentive for employers to hire these workers instead of U.S. citizens. If, o
n the other hand, they're out of the shadows, they have the same rights and obligations as every other worker who is in this coun
try legally, than they are on even footing in terms of employers making hiring decisions. So don't get caught up in the false rhe
toric about amnesty. What we are talking about is an earned pathway to citizenship. Over the course of eleven years, they would h
ave to pay a fine, they would have to learn English, they would have to pay back taxes and they would be behind those who applied
 here legally. So, they wouldn't' be rewarded for their illegal behavior but we would recognize that our future as a country invo
lves absorbing these people who are already here so we wouldn't have an entire class of second-class citizens.The third point I w
ant to make is that I know gas prices are high out there. There's been a lot of talk by the both the White House and Congress abo
ut how we're going to bring gas prices down. I want to tell people the truth and that is that there aren't a lot of short-term so
lutions to this problem. We have some bills in the Senate that are calling for the taxing of the windfall profits of the big oil 
companies who are making out like bandits. I will vote "aye" on a bill like that if it comes through the Senate. I've been active
 along with other Democrats in pushing to make sure that the Federal Trade Commission is investigating any kind of price-gauging 
that's taking place in gas stations around the country. But the bottom line is that the United States, which has about 3 percent 
of the oil reserves in the world consumes 25 percent of the oil, and we're not going to be able to pump our way out of this probl
em and even if Exxon and Mobile decided they weren't going to make any profits, we'd still have problems because the world's oil 
market has reached $75 a barrel this week. So we are going to have to think about how we are going to wean ourselves off our depe
ndence on oil. That's a national security imperative because right now we are financing both sides of the war on terrorism by sen
ding billions of dollars to some of the most hostile countries on Earth. It is an economic problem; it makes us extraordinarily v
ulnerable every time we see price shocks like this and that pressure is just going to continue as China and India grow and scramb
le for resources. Finally, it's a major contributor to global warming. It's helping us along the path that could lead to an envir
onmental catastrophe that could have an adverse impact for our children and our grandchildren. I've put together a series of spee
ches and proposals that are on my website. I would urge everybody to take a look at them; I won't reiterate them now, but a lot o
f it focuses on increasing fuel efficiency standards and shifting to bio-diesel. I just want everybody to remember as they are pu
tting that $3 a gallon gas in their SUVs that our long-term answer is getting serious about a new energy policy. We have to start
 making those plans now in a serious way and not just resort to cheap rhetoric whenever the gas prices go up.I hope that I see so
me of you at the rallies, either in Washington or in Chicago, about Darfur. I appreciate you listening. Bye-bye. Obama Inaugural 
Address 20th January 2009 My fellow citizens: I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have b
estowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the g
enerosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition. Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The
 words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken am
idst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of th
ose in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding do
cuments. So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans. That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understo
od. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of 
greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a
 new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and ea
ch day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet. These are the indi
cators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable but no less profound is a sapping of confidence across our land
 - a nagging fear that America's decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sights. Today I say to you th
at the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. B
ut know this, America - they will be met. On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over con
flict and discord. On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and wor
n out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics. We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the tim
e has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carr
y forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal,
 all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness. In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we
 understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of short-cuts or settling for less
. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted - for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches a
nd fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things - some celebrated but more often men and women obsc
ure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom. For us, they packed up their few
 worldly possessions and traveled across oceans in search of a new life. For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West; 
endured the lash of the whip and plowed the hard earth. For us, they fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg; Norm
andy and Khe Sahn. Time and again these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we mi
ght live a better life. They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of 
birth or wealth or faction. This is the journey we continue today. We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our w
orkers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed
 than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. But our time of standing pat, of protect
ing narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions - that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves u
p, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America. For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state 
of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act - not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for g
rowth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We 
will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We 
will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and col
leges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do. Now, there are some who que
stion the scale of our ambitions - who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For 
they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common 
purpose, and necessity to courage. What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them - that the stal
e political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government 
is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a ret
irement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And tho
se of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account - to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the
 light of day - because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government. Nor is the question befor
e us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis
 has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control - and that a nation cannot prosper long when it 
favors only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our Gross Domestic Product, bu
t on the reach of our prosperity; on the ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart - not out of charity, but because i
t is the surest route to our common good. As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ide
als. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights 
of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expe
dience's sake. And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small villag
e where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of pe
ace and dignity, and we are ready to lead once more. Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just wi
th missiles and tanks, but with the sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protec
t us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security em
anates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint. We are the ke
epers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort - even 
greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-ea
rned peace in Afghanistan. With old friends and former foes, well work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the
 specter of a warming planet. We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek
 to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be
 broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you. For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We
 are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn 
from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dar
k chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe s
hall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role
 in ushering in a new era of peace. To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. 
To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West - know that your people wil
l judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silenc
ing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench you
r fist. To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to 
nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer 
afford indifference to the suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world's resources without regard to effect. For 
the world has changed, and we must change with it. As we consider the road that unfolds before us, we remember with humble gratit
ude those brave Americans who, at this very hour, patrol far-off deserts and distant mountains. They have something to tell us, j
ust as the fallen heroes who lie in Arlington whisper through the ages. We honor them not only because they are guardians of our 
liberty, but because they embody the spirit of service; a willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves. And y
et, at this moment - a moment that will define a generation - it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all. For as much a
s government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relie
s. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours t
han see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter's courage to storm a stairway fill
ed with smoke, but also a parent's willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate. Our challenges may be new. The 
instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends - honesty and hard work, courage 
and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism - these things are old. These things are true. They have been the 
quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is 
a new era of responsibility - a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the
 world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfyin
g to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task. This is the price and the promise of citi
zenship. This is the source of our confidence - the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny. This is the mea
ning of our liberty and our creed - why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across t
his magnificent mall, and why a man whose father less than sixty years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can n
ow stand before you to take a most sacred oath. So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have trave
led. In the year of America's birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores 
of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At a moment when the outcom
e of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people: "Let it be told to the
 future world...that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive...that the city and the country, alar
med at one common danger, came forth to meet [it]." America. In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, l
et us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may co
me. Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn b
ack nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God's grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom an
d delivered it safely to future generations. Thank you. God bless you and God bless the United States of America. AMENDMENT TO PR
OVIDE MEALS AND PHONE SERVICE TO WOUNDED VETERANS TOPIC: VeteransApril 14, 2005 Statement of Senator Barack Obama Amendment to Pr
ovide Meals and Phone Service to Wounded Veterans Complete Text Mr. President, today I am offering an amendment to the fiscal yea
r 2005 Emergency Supplemental, which I am pleased to announce is being cosponsored by Senators Corzine, Bingaman, and Graham. Thi
s amendment would meet certain needs of our injured service members in recognition of the tremendous sacrifices they have made in
 defense of our country.The other day I had the opportunity to visit some of our wounded heroes at Walter Reed Army Medical Cente
r.I know that many of my colleagues have made the same trip and I'd heard about their visits, but there is nothing that can fully
 prepare you for what you see when you take that first step into the Physical Therapy room.These are kids in there. Our kids. The
 ones we watched grow up. The ones we hoped would live lives that were happy, healthy, and safe. These kids left their homes and 
families for a dangerous place halfway around the world. After years of being protected by their parents, these kids risked their
 lives to protect us.And now, some of them have come home from that war with scars that may change their lives forever - scars th
at may never heal. And yet they sit there in that hospital, so full of hope and still so proud of their country.These kids are th
e best of America. They deserve our highest respect, and they deserve our help.Recently, I learned that some of our most severely
 wounded soldiers are being forced to pay for their own meals and their own phone calls while being treated in medical hospitals.
Up until last year, there was a law on the books that prohibited soldiers from receiving both their basic subsistence allowance a
nd free meals from the military. Basically, this law allowed the government to charge our wounded heroes for food while they were
 recovering from their war injuries.Thankfully, this body acted to change this law in 2003 so that wounded soldiers wouldn't have
 to pay for their meals.But, we're dealing with a bureaucracy here, and as we all know, nothing is ever simple in a bureaucracy. 
So now, because the Department of Defense doesn't consider getting physical therapy or rehabilitation services in a medical hospi
tal as "being hospitalized," there are wounded veterans who still do not qualify for the free meals other veterans receive. And a
fter 90 days, even those classified as hospitalized on an outpatient status lose their free meals as well.Also, while our soldier
s in the field qualify for free phone service, injured service men and women who may be hospitalized hundreds or thousands of mil
es from home do not receive this benefit.For soldiers whose family members aren't able to take off work and travel to a military 
hospital, hearing the familiar voice of a mom or dad or husband or wife on the other side of the phone can make all the differenc
e in the world.And yet, our government will not help pay for these calls. And it will not help pay for those meals.Think about th
at. Think about the sacrifice these kids have made for their country, many of them literally risking life and sacrificing limb.An
d now, at $8.10 a meal, they could end up with a $250 bill from the government that sent them to war every single month. This is 
wrong, and we have a moral obligation to fix it.The first amendment that I'm offering today will do this. It will expand the grou
p of "hospitalized" soldiers who cannot be charged for their meals to include those service members undergoing medical recuperati
on, therapy or otherwise on "medical hold." The number of people affected by this amendment will be small. Only about 4000 servic
e members are estimated to fall under the category of "non-hospitalized."The amendment is retroactive to January 1, 2005, in an e
ffort to provide those injured service members who may have received bills for their meals with some relief from those costs. The
 amendment will also extend free phone service to those injured service members who are hospitalized or otherwise undergoing medi
cal recuperation or therapy. I am proud that this amendement is supported by the American Legion, and I hope my colleagues will j
oin them in that support.I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment. These are our kids out there, and they're r
isking their lives for us. When they come home with injuries, the government that asked these kids to serve should provide them w
ith the best possible care and support. This is a small price to pay for those who have sacrificed so much for their country.I th
ank the Senior Senator from Alaska and my colleague from Mississippi for working with me on this issue. I am hopeful we can reach
 an agreement on this. In Support of HR 9 - the Voting Rights Act TOPIC: Civil Rights July 20, 2006 Remarks of Senator Barack Oba
ma In Support of H.R. 9, the Voting Rights Act Complete Text Mr. President, I rise today, both humbled and honored by the opportu
nity to express my support for renewal of the expiring provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.I want to thank the many peopl
e inside and outside of Congress who worked so hard over the past year to get us here. We owe a debt of gratitude to the leadersh
ip on both sides of the aisle, and we owe special thanks to Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Specter, Ranking Members Conyers and Leahy
, and Rep. Mel Watt. Without their work and dedication - and the support of voting rights advocates around the country - I doubt 
this bill would have come before us so soon.And I want to thank both chambers, and both sides of the aisle, for getting this done
 with the same broad support that drove the original Act 40 years ago. At a time when Americans are frustrated with the partisan 
bickering that too often stalls our work, the refreshing display of bipartisanship we are seeing today reflects our collective be
lief in the success of the Act and reminds us of how effective we can be when we work together.Nobody can deny that we've come a 
long way since 1965.Look at registration numbers. Only two years after passage of the original Act, registration numbers for mino
rity voters in some states doubled. Soon after, not a single state covered by the Voting Rights Act had registered less than half
 of its minority voting-age population.Look at the influence of African-American elected officials at all levels of government. T
here are African-American members of Congress. Since 2001, our nation's top diplomat has been an African-American.In fact, most o
f America's elected African-American officials come from the states covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act - states like M
ississippi and Alabama and Louisiana and Georgia.But to me, the most striking evidence of our progress can be found right across 
this building, in my dear friend, Congressman John Lewis, who was on the front lines of the civil rights movement, risking life a
nd limb for freedom. And on March 7, 1965, he led 600 peaceful protestors demanding the right to vote across the Edmund Pettus Br
idge in Selma, Alabama.I've often thought about the people on the Edmund Pettus Bridge that day. Not only John Lewis and Hosea Wi
lliams leading the march, but the hundreds of everyday Americans who left their homes and their churches to join it. Blacks and w
hites, teenagers and children, teachers and bankers and shopkeepers - a beloved community of God's children ready to stand for fr
eedom.And I wonder, where did they find that kind of courage? When you're facing row after row of state troopers on horseback arm
ed with billy clubs and tear gas...when they're coming toward you spewing hatred and violence, how do you simply stop, kneel down
, and pray to the Lord for salvation?But the most amazing thing of all is that after that day - after John Lewis was beaten withi
n an inch of his life, after people's heads were gashed open and their eyes were burned and they watched their children's innocen
ce literally beaten out of them...after all that, they went back to march again.They marched again. They crossed the bridge. They
 awakened a nation's conscience, and not five months later, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was signed into law. And it was reautho
rized in 1970, 1975, and 1982.Now, in 2006, John Lewis, the physical scars from those marches still visible, is an original cospo
nsor of the fourth reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act, and he was joined last week by 389 of his House colleagues in voting
 for its passage.There are some who argue the Act is no longer needed, that the protections of Section 5's "pre-clearance" requir
ement - a requirement that ensures certain states are upholding the right to vote - are targeting the wrong states. But the evide
nce refutes that notion. Of the 1,100 objections issued by the Department of Justice since 1965, 56% occurred since the last reau
thorization in 1982. So, despite the progress these states have made in upholding the right to vote, it's clear that problems sti
ll exist.Others have argued against renewing Section 203's protection of language minorities. Unfortunately, these arguments have
 been tied to the debate over immigration and muddle a non-controversial issue - protecting the right to vote - with one of today
's most contentious debates.But let's remember: you can't request language assistance if you're not a voter, and you can't be a v
oter if you're not a citizen. And while voters, as citizens, must be proficient in English, many are simply more confident that t
hey can cast ballots printed in their native languages without making errors.A representative of the Southwestern Voter Registrat
ion Project is quoted as saying: "Citizens who prefer Spanish registration cards do so because they feel more connected to the pr
ocess; they also feel they trust the process more when they understand it." These sentiments - connection to and trust in our dem
ocratic process - are exactly what we want from our voting rights legislation.Our challenges don't end at reauthorizing the Votin
g Rights Act either. We have to prevent the problems we've seen in recent elections from happening again. We've seen political op
eratives purge voters from registration rolls for no legitimate reason, prevent eligible ex-felons from casting ballots, distribu
te polling equipment unevenly, and deceive voters about the time, location and rules of elections. Unfortunately, these efforts h
ave been directed primarily at minorities, the disabled, low-income individuals, and other historically disenfranchised groups.Th
e Help America Vote Act was a big step in the right direction, but we need to do more. We need to fully fund HAVA. We need to enf
orce critical requirements like statewide registration databases. We need to make sure polling equipment is distributed equitably
 and that the equipment works. And we need to work on getting more people to the polls on election day.We need to make sure that 
minority voters are not the subject of deplorable intimidation tactics when they do get to the polls. In 2004, Native American vo
ters in South Dakota were confronted by men posing as law enforcement. These hired intimidators joked about jail time for ballot 
missteps, and followed voters to their cars to record their license plate numbers.In Lake County, Ohio, some voters received a me
mo on bogus Board of Elections letterhead informing voters who registered through Democratic and NAACP drives that they could not
 vote.In Wisconsin, a flier purporting to be from the "Milwaukee Black Voters League" was circulated in predominantly African-Ame
rican neighborhoods with the following message: "If you've already voted in any election this year, you can't vote in the preside
ntial election. If you violate any of these laws, you can get ten years in prison and your children will get taken away from you.
"So, we have much more work to do. This occasion is cause for celebration, but it's also an opportunity to renew our commitment t
o voting rights. As Congressman Lewis said last week: "It's clear that we have come a great distance, but we still have a great d
istance to go."The memory of Selma still lives on in the spirit of the Voting Rights Act. Since that day, the Voting Rights Act h
as been a critical tool in ensuring that all Americans not only have the right to vote, but the right to have their vote counted.
 Those of us concerned about protecting those rights can't afford to sit on our laurels upon reauthorization of this bill. We mus
t take advantage of this rare united front and continue the fight to ensure unimpeded access to the polls for all Americans. In o
ther words, we need to take the spirit that existed on that bridge, and we have to spread it across this country.Two weeks after 
the first march was turned back, Dr. King told a gathering of organizers and activists and community members that they should not
 despair because the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice. That's because of the work that each of us 
do to bend it towards justice. It's because of people like John Lewis and Fannie Lou Hamer and Coretta Scott King and Rosa Parks,
 all the giants upon whose shoulders we stand that we are the beneficiaries of that arc bending towards justice.That's why I stan
d here today. I would not be in the United States Senate had it not been for the efforts and courage of so many parents and grand
parents and ordinary people who were willing to reach up and bend that arc in the direction of justice. I hope we continue to see
 that spirit live on, not just during this debate, but throughout all our work here in the Senate. Thank you. AFL-CIO NATIONAL CO
NVENTION TOPIC: Economy & Labor July 25, 2005 AFL-CIO National Convention Chicago, Illinois Compete Text Thank you, and welcome t
o Chicago.It would be naive of me to start without acknowledging what's been on everyone's mind during this convention. As Americ
a tries to find its way in a global economy, we meet here at a challenging time for the labor movement. There are questions of st
rategy and tactics, leadership and power. And I can imagine that many of you are anxious not only about labor's future, but yours
. You're wondering, will I be able to leave my children a better world than I was given? Will I be able to save enough to send th
em to college or plan for a secure retirement? Will my job even be there tomorrow? Who will stand up for me in this new world?In 
this time of change and uncertainty, these questions are expected - but they are by no means unique.From the earliest days of our
 founding, they have been asked and then answered by Americans who have stood in your shoes and shared your concerns about the fu
ture.At the heyday of the Industrial Revolution, millions from around the world flocked to this very city in search of opportunit
y. Immigrants from Europe, African-Americans from the Jim Crow South, and ethnic groups from every corner of America made their h
ome in these neighborhoods and a living from the mills and factories that crowded a bustling Chicago.The work was brutal and the 
pay was low, but none more so than on the South Side between Halsted and Ashland Avenue, where you could smell the stench of the 
meatpacking stockyards from miles away.50,000 worked in what Upton Sinclair would later call "The Jungle," under some of the most
 dangerous and oppressive conditions in America. Twice the workers tried to organize, and twice they were ferociously beaten back
 by employers willing to use violence, race-baiting, and starvation in order to keep wages at 32 cents an hour.But these workers 
made a choice - a choice that this would not be their future. And so in 1937, as the CIO begin organizing mass industries all acr
oss America, meatpacking workers began to follow their lead.Imagine - these people would slave away in these plants all day long,
 freezing in the winter and sweltering in the summer, watching coworkers get their bones crushed in machines and friends get fire
d for even uttering the word "union" - and yet after they punched their card at the end of the day, they organized. They went to 
meetings and they passed out leaflets. They put aside decades of ethnic and racial tension and elected women, African Americans, 
and immigrants to leadership positions so that they could speak with one voice.They could have accepted their lot in life or wait
ed for someone else to save them. Through their actions they risked life and living.They chose to act.In time, they won. It start
ed with victories as small as putting fans on the factory floor, and ended with paid holidays, and wage increases, and a seniorit
y system, and pensions.It started with hope, and it ended with the fulfillment of a long-held ideal. A humble band of laborers ag
ainst an industrial giant - an unlikely triumph against the greatest odds - a story as American as any.For this has always been t
he way with us - at the edge of despair, in the shadow of hopelessness, ordinary people make the extraordinary decision that if w
e stand together, we rise together. And we do.At the end of the Civil War, when farmers and their families began moving into the 
cities to work in the big factories that were sprouting up all across America, we had to decide: Do we do nothing and allow the c
aptains of industry and robber barons to run roughshod over the economy and workers by competing to see who can pay the lowest wa
ge at the worst working conditions? Or do we try to make the system work by setting up basic rules for the market, and institutin
g the first public schools, and busting up monopolies, and fighting so that working people could organize into unions?Through str
ikes and sit-ins, petitions and rallies, and leaders who kept opportunity alive, we chose to act, and we rose together.Years late
r, when the irrational exuberance of the Roaring Twenties came crashing down with the stock market, we had to decide: do we follo
w the call of leaders who would do nothing, or the call of a leader who, perhaps because of his physical paralysis, refused to ac
cept political paralysis?From Roosevelt's decision that political freedom would mean nothing without economic freedom to labor's 
tireless fight for that same principle, we chose to act - regulating the market, putting people back to work, expanding bargainin
g rights to include health care and a secure retirement - and together we rose.Today, we face a challenge and a choice once more.
Too many of you have seen this challenge up close - when you drive by the old factory around lunchtime and no one walks out anymo
re. When you can't get that raise or that health care plan you hoped for because your employer is competing with companies who pa
y foreign workers a fraction of what you make.I saw it during the campaign when I met the union guys who use to work at the Mayta
g plant down in Galesburg and now wonder what they're gonna do at 55-years-old without a pension or health care; when I met the m
an who's son needs a new liver but doesn't know if he can afford when the kid gets to the top of the transplant list.It's as if s
omeone changed the rules in the middle of the game and no one bothered to tell them.But as we all know, the rules have changed.It
 started with technology and automation that rendered entire occupations obsolete. Then companies were able to pick up and move t
heir factories to the developing world, where workers are a lot cheaper than they are in the U.S. Now, advances in technology and
 communication mean that businesses not only have the ability to move jobs wherever there's a factory, but wherever there's an in
ternet connection.These changes have transformed the American worker into a kind of global free agent - if you can learn the righ
t skills and get a great education, you can out-compete any worker in the world for the high-paying jobs of tomorrow. But it also
 means that the days of lifetime employment at a company that provided wages, health care, and pensions you can bargain for are c
oming to an end.At time of such insecurity and vulnerability, there has never been a greater need for a strong labor movement to 
stand up for American workers.But the question we need to answer is: how will this movement and our people win in this new global
 economy?Once again, we face a choice. We know that globalization is not just another issue you can be for or against - it's here
 to stay. And so the question is not whether we can stop it, but how we respond to it.Some answers are clear. When you have an ad
ministration that says "no" to a labor-friendly labor board, "no" to organizing rights, "no" to overtime pay, and "no" to a highe
r minimum wage, you say "no" to that administration and put someone else in office.The Bush Administration's philosophy says we c
an't do much about the new challenges we face as a nation. And since there is not much to do about global competition, the best t
hat can be done is to give everyone one big refund on their government - divvy it up into individual portions, hand it out, and e
ncourage everyone to use their share to go buy their own health care, their own retirement plan, their own child care, education,
 and so forth.In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society. But in our past there has been another term for it - Social Da
rwinism, every man and woman for him or herself. It's a tempting idea, because it doesn't require much thought or ingenuity. It a
llows us to say to those whose health care or tuition may rise faster than they can afford - tough luck. It allows us to say to t
he factory workers who have lost their job - life isn't fair. It let's us say to the child born into poverty - pull yourself up b
y your bootstraps.But there is a problem. It won't work. It ignores our history. It ignores the fact that it has been government 
research and investment that made the railways and the internet possible. It has been the creation of a massive middle class, thr
ough decent wages and benefits and public schools - that has allowed all of us to prosper. It has been the ability of working men
 and women to join together in unions and demand justice and opportunity that has kept America upwardly mobile.Our economic domin
ance has always depended on individual initiative and belief in the free market, it has also depended on our sense of mutual rega
rd for each other, the idea that everybody has a stake in the country, that we're all in it together and everybody's got a shot a
t opportunity.So part of the fight is political - and part of the solution is to strengthen the right to organize across all indu
stries and professions.But it's not enough just to say "no" to Bush. They may not have helped, and they may have made things wors
e, but they did not cause globalization. And no matter what comes out of this convention, the labor movement must squarely confro
nt the fact that the economy is changing. The old ways of doing business are not working, and we must have a strategy that meets 
these new challenges.I won't stand up here and say that coming up with this strategy will be easy, or pretend to know all the ans
wers.But part of the answer is recognizing that while unions and government can no longer provide this opportunity in the form of
 lifetime employment; they can ensure that every American worker has lifetime employability in this new economy.That means fixing
 our schools to make sure every child in America has the education and the skills they need to compete - and that college is affo
rdable for every American who wants to go. And it means that unions can play a real role in finally creating a real system of lif
elong learning so that workers who lose a job really can retrain for other high-wage jobs. It means spurring job creation and inn
ovation by investing our resources into research and development projects -- not cutting them. It means investing in broadband an
d in medical technology; working with local communities to create centers of innovation. It's time to fuel the genius and the inn
ovation that will lead to the new jobs and new industries of the future.Right now, all across America, there are amazing discover
ies being made. At Pittsburgh's Carnegie Mellon University, researchers have developed a virtual algebra tutor that has helped in
ner-city kids in under-served schools raise their scores an entire letter grade. In rural Virginia, telemedicine recently allowed
 a cardiologist 75 miles from the hospital to view an ultrasound and diagnose a congenital heart defect that required immediate m
edication, saving a young child's life. And in the very cornfields of Illinois, farmers are literally growing the biofuels that c
ould ultimately run our cars on 500 miles per gallon. Breakthroughs like these won't just improve our lives, they'll create thous
ands of jobs that could be filled by American workers trained with new skills and a world-class education.In this new economy, we
 should be able to tell workers that no matter where you work or how many times you switch jobs, you will have health care and a 
pension you can take with you always. We'll never rise together if we allow medical bills to swallow family budgets or let people
 retire penniless after a lifetime of hard work, and so today we must demand that when it comes to commitments made to working me
n and women on health care and pensions, a promise made is a promise kept.Our vision of America is not one where a big government
 runs our lives; it's one that gives every American the opportunity to make the most of their lives. It's not one that tells us w
e're on our own, it's one that realizes that we rise or fall together as one people.And yet, we also know that, in the end, neith
er policy nor politics can replace heart and courage in the struggle you now face. Because in the brief history of the American e
xperiment, it has been the ability of ordinary Americans to act on both that has allowed our nation to achieve extraordinary thin
gs.It's why farmers put down their ploughs and picked up arms to overthrow an Empire for the sake of an idea. It's why young men 
and women would take Freedom Rides down South to work for the Civil Rights movement. And it's why workers would stand cold, hungr
y, and penniless on picket lines until their labor was treated with the dignity it deserved.Almost a century earlier, during the 
struggle for the soul of Chicago's stockyards, Hank Johnson, a leading African-American union organizer, told a crowd of laborers
 that in the end, speeches don't make unions. He said that "The real job of organizing has to be done everyday by the men and wom
en who work right in the plant."That's as true today as it was then - the real job of organizing working America - politics and p
olicy, vision and mission, heart and soul - belongs to each of you. And if you have the courage to succeed, labor will rise again
. America will rise again. And hope will rise again. Thank you and God Bless you. BARACK OBAMA'S 2002 SPEECH AGAINST THE IRAQ WAR
 October 2002 Barack Obama's2002 Speech Against the Iraq War Illinois State senator The Federal Plaza in Chicago Complete Text I 
stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, an
d yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union and d
rive the scourge of slavery from our soil.I don't oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor 
was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed 
over evil.I don't oppose all wars.After September 11, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I sup
ported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and
 I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again.I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to
 is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowi
tz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespect
ive of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to di
stract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate sc
andals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.That's what I'm opposed to. A dum
b war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.Now let me be clear: I suffer no il
lusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.... T
he world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat t
o the United States, or to his neighbors...and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the
 way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.I know that even a successful war against Iraq will requir
e a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.I know that an invasion of Iraq 
without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the
 worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.I am not opposed to all wars
. I'm opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear messag
e to the president.You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coord
inated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that i
nvolves more than color-coded warnings.You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure that...we vigorously enforce a 
nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores o
f nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that
 the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.You want a fight, President Bus
h? Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own peop
le, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow u
p without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.You want a fight, President Bush? Let
's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobi
l.Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and in
tolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair. The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have 
occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not we will not 
travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would pr
ove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain. World AIDS Day Speech - 2006 Global S
ummit on AIDS TOPIC: Healthcare & Health Issues December 1, 2006 Race Against Time 2006 Global Summit on AIDS and the Church Sadd
leback Church Campus Complete Text I want to start by saying how blessed I feel to be a part of today and how grateful I am for y
our church and your pastor, my friend Rick Warren.Ever since Rick and Kay visited Africa to see the pain and suffering wrought by
 AIDS, the Warrens and this church have proved each day that faith is not just something you have, it's something you do. Their d
ecision to devote their time, their money, and their purpose-driven lives to the greatest health crisis in human history is not o
ne that's always reported on the news or splashed across the front pages, but it is quietly becoming one of the most influential 
forces in the struggle against HIV and AIDS. The resources of governments may be vast, and the good works of philanthropists may 
be abundant, but we should never underestimate how powerful the passion of people of faith can be in eradicating this disease.One
 of those passionate individuals is the man we just heard from - my friend and colleague, Sam Brownback. Now, Sam and I may not a
gree on every issue, but I could not be more impressed with his efforts on issues like AIDS, the crisis in the Congo, the genocid
e in Darfur and sexual trafficking - issues that touch some of the world's most vulnerable people. I am proud to work with him on
 many of these issues, and I'm proud to be by his side today.I took my own trip to Africa a few months ago. As I'm sure Rick and 
Kay would agree, it's an experience that stays with you for quite some time. I visited an HIV/AIDS hospital in South Africa that 
was filled to capacity with people who walked hours - even days - just for the chance to seek help. I met courageous patients who
 refused to give up for themselves or their families. And I came across AIDS activists who meet resistance from their own governm
ent but keep on fighting anyway.But of all that I heard, I encountered few stories as heartbreaking as the one recently told by L
aurie Goering, a Chicago Tribune reporter based in Johannesburg who had covered our trip for her newspaper.Three years ago, Lauri
e hired a woman named Hlengiwe Leocardia Mchunu as her nanny. Leo, as she is known, grew up as one of nine children in a small So
uth African village. All through her life, she worked hard to raise her two kids and save every last penny she earned, and by the
 time Leo was hired as Laurie's nanny, she had almost finished paying off the mortgage on her home. She had even hoped to use the
 extra money from her new job to open a refuge for local children who had been orphaned by AIDS.Then one day, Leo received a phon
e call that her eldest brother had fallen ill. At first he told everyone it was diabetes, but later, in the hospital, admitted to
 the family it was AIDS. He died a few days later. His wife succumbed to the disease as well. And Leo took in their three childre
n.Six months later, Leo got another phone call. Her younger brother had also become sick with AIDS. She cared for him and nursed 
him as she did her first brother, but he soon died as well.Leo's pregnant sister was next. And then another brother. And then ano
ther brother.She paid for their caskets and their funerals. She took in their children and paid for their schooling. She ran out 
of money, and she borrowed what she could. She ran out again, and she borrowed even more.And still, the phone calls continued. Al
l across her tiny village, Leo watched more siblings and cousins and nieces and nephews test positive for HIV. She saw neighbors 
lose their families. She saw a grandmother house sixteen orphaned grandchildren under her roof. And she saw some children go hung
ry because there was no one to care for them at all.You know, AIDS is a story often told by numbers. 40 million infected with HIV
. Nearly 4.5 million this year alone. 12 million orphans in Africa. 8,000 deaths and 6,000 new infections every single day. In so
me places, 90% of those with HIV do not know they have it. And we just learned that AIDS is set to become the 3rd leading cause o
f death worldwide in the coming years.They are staggering, these numbers, and they help us understand the magnitude of this pande
mic. But when repeated by themselves, statistics can also numb - they can hide the individual stories and tragedies and hopes of 
the Leos who live the daily drama of this disease.On this World AIDS day, these are the stories that the world needs to hear. The
y are the stories that touch our souls - and that call us to action.I cannot begin to imagine what it would be like if Leo's fami
ly was my own. If I had to answer those phone calls - if I had to attend those funerals. All I know is that no matter how or why 
my family became sick, I would be called to care for them and comfort them and do what I could to help find a cure. I know every 
one of you would do the same if it were your family.Here's the thing - my faith tells me that Leo's family is my family.We are al
l sick because of AIDS - and we are all tested by this crisis. It is a test not only of our willingness to respond, but of our ab
ility to look past the artificial divisions and debates that have often shaped that response. When you go to places like Africa a
nd you see this problem up close, you realize that it's not a question of either treatment or prevention - or even what kind of p
revention - it is all of the above. It is not an issue of either science or values - it is both. Yes, there must be more money sp
ent on this disease. But there must also be a change in hearts and minds; in cultures and attitudes. Neither philanthropist nor s
cientist; neither government nor church, can solve this problem on their own - AIDS must be an all-hands-on-deck effort.Let's tal
k about what these efforts involve. First, if we hope to win this fight, we must stop new infections - we must do what we can to 
prevent people from contracting HIV in the first place.Now, too often, the issue of prevention has been framed in either/or terms
. For some, the only way to prevent the disease is for men and women to change their sexual behavior - in particular, to abstain 
from sexual activity outside of marriage. For others, such a prescription is unrealistic; they argue that we need to provide peop
le with the tools they need to protect themselves from the virus, regardless of their sexual practices - in particular, by increa
sing the use of condoms, as well as by developing new methods, like microbicides, that women can initiate themselves to prevent t
ransmission during sex. And in the debate surrounding how we should tackle the scourge of AIDS, we often see each side questionin
g the other's motives, and thereby impeding progress.For me, this is a false argument. Let me say this - I don't think we can den
y that there is a moral and spiritual component to prevention - that in too many places all over the world where AIDS is prevalen
t - including our own country, by the way - the relationship between men and women, between sexuality and spirituality, has broke
n down, and needs to be repaired.It was striking to see this as I traveled through South Africa and Kenya. Again and again, I hea
rd stories of men and women contracting HIV because sex was no longer part of a sacred covenant, but a mechanical physical act; b
ecause men had visited prostitutes and brought the disease home to their wives, or young girls had been subjected to rape and abu
se.These are issues of prevention we cannot walk away from. When a husband thinks it's acceptable to hide his infidelity from his
 wife, it's not only a sin, it's a potential death sentence. And when rape is still seen as a woman's fault and a woman's shame, 
but promiscuity is a man's prerogative, it is a problem of the heart that no government can solve. It is, however, a place where 
local ministries and churches like Saddleback can, and have, made a real difference - by providing people with a moral framework 
to make better choices.Having said that, I also believe that we cannot ignore that abstinence and fidelity may too often be the i
deal and not the reality - that we are dealing with flesh and blood men and women and not abstractions - and that if condoms and 
potentially microbicides can prevent millions of deaths, they should be made more widely available. I know that there are those w
ho, out of sincere religious conviction, oppose such measures. And with these folks, I must respectfully but unequivocally disagr
ee. I do not accept the notion that those who make mistakes in their lives should be given an effective death sentence. Nor am I 
willing to stand by and allow those who are entirely innocent - wives who, because of the culture they live in, often have no pow
er to refuse sex with their husbands, or children who are born with the infection as a consequence of their parent's behavior -su
ffer when condoms or other measures would have kept them from harm.Another area where we can make significant progress in prevent
ion is by removing the stigma that goes along with getting tested for HIV-AIDS. The idea that in some places, nine in ten people 
with HIV have no idea they're infected is more than frightening - it's a ticking time bomb waiting to go off.So we need to show p
eople that just as there is no shame in going to the doctor for a blood test or a CAT scan or a mammogram, there is no shame in g
oing for an HIV test. Because while there was once a time when a positive result gave little hope, today the earlier you know, th
e faster you can get help. My wife Michelle and I were able to take the test on our trip to Africa, after the Center for Disease 
Control informed us that by getting a simple 15 minute test, we may have encouraged as many as half-a-million Kenyans to get test
ed as well. Rick Warren has also taken the test. Sam Brownback and I took it today. And I encourage others in public life to do t
he same. We've got to spread the word to as many people as possible. It's time for us to set an example for others to follow.Of c
ourse, even as we work diligently to slow the rate of new infection, we also have a responsibility to treat the 40 million people
 who are already living with HIV.In some ways, this should be the easy part. Because we know what works. We know how to save peop
le's lives. We know the medicine is out there and we know that wealthy countries can afford to do more.That's why it was so frust
rating for me to go to South Africa, and see the pain, and see the suffering, and then hear that the country's Minister of Health
 had promoted the use of beet root, sweet potato, and lemon juice as the best way to cure HIV. Thankfully, the South African gove
rnment eventually repudiated this, but it's impossible to overestimate how important it is for political leaders like this to set
 a good example for their people.We should never forget that God granted us the power to reason so that we would do His work here
 on Earth - so that we would use science to cure disease, and heal the sick, and save lives. And one of the miracles to come out 
of the AIDS pandemic is that scientists have discovered medicine that can give people with HIV a new chance at life.We are called
 to give them that chance. We have made progress - in South Africa, treatment provided to pregnant women has drastically reduced 
the incidents of infants born with the infection. But despite such progress, only one in every five people with HIV around the wo
rld is receiving antiretroviral drug treatment. One in every five. We must do better. We should work with drug companies to reduc
e the costs of generic anti-retroviral drugs, and work with developing nations to help them build the health infrastructure that'
s necessary to get sick people treated - this means more money for hospitals and medical equipment, and more training for nurses 
and doctors.We need a renewed emphasis on nutrition. Right now we're finding out that there are people who are on the drugs, who 
are getting treatment, who are still dying because they don't have any food to eat. This is inexcusable - especially in countries
 that have sufficient food supplies. So we must help get them that nutrition, and this is another place where religious organizat
ions that have always provided food to the hungry can help a great deal.And even as we focus on the enormous crisis in Africa, we
 need to remember that the problem is not in Africa alone. In the last few years, we have seen an alarming rise in infection rate
s in the Middle East, Southeast Asia, the former Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, and the Caribbean. And on this World AIDS day, we 
cannot forget the crisis occurring in our own backyard. Right here in the United States, AIDS is now the leading cause of death f
or African American women aged 25-34, and we are also seeing many poorer and rural communities fail to get the resources they nee
d to deal with their vulnerable populations - a problem that unfortunately some in Congress are trying to address by taking money
 away from larger cities that are still facing enormous problems of their own.Now let me say this - I think that President Bush a
nd this past Congress should be applauded for the resources they have contributed to the fight against HIV and AIDS. Through our 
country's emergency plan for AIDS relief, the United States will have contributed more than $15 billion over five years to combat
 HIV-AIDS overseas. And the Global Fund, with money from the United States and other countries, has done some heroic work to figh
t this disease. As I traveled throughout Africa this summer, I was proud of the tangible impact that all this money was having, o
ften through coordinated efforts with the Centers for Disease Control, the State Department, foreign governments, and non-governm
ental organizations.So our first priority in Congress should be to reauthorize this program when it expires in 2008. Our second p
riority should be to reassess what's worked and what hasn't so that we're not wasting one dollar that could be saving someone's l
ife.But our third priority should be to actually boost our contribution to this effort. With all that is left to be done in this 
struggle - with all the other areas of the world that need our help - it's time for us to add at least an additional $1 billion a
 year in new money over the next five years to strengthen and expand the program to places like Southeast Asia, India, and Easter
n Europe, where the pandemic will soon reach crisis proportions.Of course, given all the strains that have been placed on the U.S
. budget, and given the extraordinary needs that we face here at home, it may be hard to find the money. But I believe we must tr
y. I believe it will prove to be a wise investment. The list of reasons for us to care about AIDS is long. In an interconnected, 
globalized world, the ability of pandemics to spread to other countries and continents has never been easier or faster than it is
 today. There are also security implications, as countries whose populations and economies have been ravaged by AIDS become ferti
le breeding grounds for civil strife and even terror.But the reason for us to step up our efforts can't simply be instrumental. T
here are more fundamental reasons to care. Reasons related to our own humanity. Reasons of the soul.Like no other illness, AIDS t
ests our ability to put ourselves in someone else's shoes - to empathize with the plight of our fellow man. While most would agre
e that the AIDS orphan or the transfusion victim or the wronged wife contracted the disease through no fault of their own, it has
 too often been easy for some to point to the unfaithful husband or the promiscuous youth or the gay man and say "This is your fa
ult. You have sinned."I don't think that's a satisfactory response. My faith reminds me that we all are sinners.My faith also tel
ls me that - as Pastor Rick has said - it is not a sin to be sick. My Bible tells me that when God sent his only Son to Earth, it
 was to heal the sick and comfort the weary; to feed the hungry and clothe the naked; to befriend the outcast and redeem those wh
o strayed from righteousness.Living His example is the hardest kind of faith - but it is surely the most rewarding. It is a way o
f life that can not only light our way as people of faith, but guide us to a new and better politics as Americans.For in the end,
 we must realize that the AIDS orphan in Africa presents us with the same challenge as the gang member in South Central, or the K
atrina victim in New Orleans, or the uninsured mother in North Dakota.We can turn away from these Americans, and blame their prob
lems on themselves, and embrace a politics that's punitive and petty, divisive and small.Or we can embrace another tradition of p
olitics - a tradition that has stretched from the days of our founding to the glory of the civil rights movement, a tradition bas
ed on the simple idea that we have a stake in one another - and that what binds us together is greater than what drives us apart,
 and that if enough people believe in the truth of that proposition and act on it, then we might not solve every problem, but we 
can get something meaningful done for the people with whom we share this Earth.Let me close by returning to the story of Leo, tha
t South African woman burdened by so much death and despair. Sometime after the death of her fifth sibling, she decided that she 
wasn't just going to stand idly by. She decided to call the town's first public meeting about the AIDS crisis - something that no
 one had even talked about, let alone met about. 200 people showed up. Some had walked for miles to get there, a few with their g
randchildren on their back.One by one, they stood up and broke their silence, and they told their stories. Stories of tragedy, an
d stories of hope. And when they were done, Leo rose and said, "I don't know whether we will win this war, but I'm looking for pe
ople who will stand up and face the reality. The time for sitting silently has come to an end."Everything did not suddenly get be
tter after that meeting, but some things did. Despite all the children she had to raise and all the sick relatives she still had 
to care for, Leo still decided to open the AIDS orphanage she had dreamed about so long ago. She began building a daycare center 
that would house one hundred orphans. And she started plans on a youth center and a soup kitchen.I hear that part of the story an
d I think, if this woman who has so little, and has lost so much, can do so much good - if she can still make a way out of no way
 - then what are we waiting for?Corinthians says that we are all of one spirit, and that "if one part suffers, every part suffers
 with it." But it also says, "if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it."On this World AIDS day, it is the stories of o
vercoming, and not just illness, that the world needs to hear. Yes, the stories of sadness call us to suffer with the sick. But s
tories like Leo's also call us to honor her example, rejoice in the hope that it brings, and work to help her find that brighter 
future. Thank you, and God Bless you. RESOURCES FOR THE FUTURE TOPIC: Oil & Alternative Fuels September 15, 2005 Resources for th
e Future 1616 P Street, NW Washington, DC Complete Text As the flood waters recede in New Orleans and the survivors of Katrina be
gin to rebuild their lives, one truth has become achingly clear over the past few weeks:Our government wasn't ready to save its o
wn citizens from a catastrophe of biblical proportions. It wasn't even close.Despite years of planning, preparing, and warnings f
rom countless scientists, experts, and government officials - that the levees would break, that our first responders didn't have 
the best tools for communication, that FEMA was under-funded and undervalued - despite all of this, Katrina caught the government
 off-guard, flat-footed, and dangerously disorganized.The most tragic consequence of this slow response was the incalculable loss
 of human life.But miles off the Gulf Coast, as the deadly storm first raged towards shore, another frightening consequence emerg
ed from our government's failure to prepare.In the moments before the hurricane hit, Gulf refineries that made up one-eighth of o
ur country's total capacity were evacuated and shut down. 95% of oil production was immediately suspended in a region where we fi
nd over a quarter of America's oil. And gas prices that were already at record highs shot up even further all over the country - 
reaching $6 a gallon in some places. Today, they're hovering over $3 - a price that experts say will remain for the rest of the y
ear. And what we don't see on television is how in a few months, the price of home heating oil and natural gas will reach new hei
ghts as well.It would be one thing if this storm struck at a time of stability. But over the last few years, limited supplies and
 an unprecedented growth in demand have sent the global oil market itself teetering towards the edge of disaster. With our own En
ergy Department telling us that U.S. demand for oil will jump 40% over the next twenty years and countries like China and India a
dding millions of cars to their roads, the price of oil is reaching levels we just can't handle anymore.A few years ago, we paid 
just $25 for a barrel of oil. Today, we're paying around $63. Since this affects the price of everything from gas to airfare to g
roceries, analysts at Global Insight, an economic consulting firm, say that if we hit $100 a barrel, the U.S. economy could very 
well tumble into recession.Which brings me to one of the central lessons of Katrina, one that goes far beyond the gas hikes and t
he price gouging we're facing today:The days of running a 21st century economy on a 20th century fossil fuel are numbered - and w
e need to realize that before it's too late.Our persistent dependence on oil is a danger our government has known about for years
. And despite constant warnings by researchers and scientists, major corporations and our own government officials, it's a danger
 they have failed to prepare for, listen to, or seriously try to guard against.It's a danger we can no longer afford to ignore. K
atrina, after all, was a natural disaster that affected only our domestic oil supply. But just imagine the threat to our national
 security from a geopolitical disaster - a war or an embargo - that cut off our supply from the rest of the world, where we get m
ost of our oil.Right now, we depend on some of the most politically volatile countries in the Middle East and elsewhere to fuel o
ur energy needs. It doesn't matter if they're budding democracies, despotic regimes with nuclear intentions, or havens for the ma
drassas that plant the seeds of terror in young minds - they get our money because we need their oil.What's worse - it's oil that
's not very well protected. Over the last few years, we know that terrorists have stepped up their attempts to launch attacks on 
the poorly defended oil tankers and pipelines of the Middle East. And a former CIA agent tells us that if a terrorist hijacked a 
plane in Kuwait and crashed it into an oil complex in Saudi Arabia, it could take enough oil off the market to cause more economi
c damage than a direct attack on the United States.At that point, $6 a gallon would look like a steal.Hopefully, this short-term,
 hurricane-induced oil crisis will subside. But the clear and present danger to our economy and our security from America's long-
term dependency on oil will not subside - unless we act now. In fact, it will only get worse.As usual, the American people are al
ready way ahead of Washington. Whether it's Galesburg farmers growing the corn that can fuel our cars or the Chicago factory work
ers making the microchip that let's us plug them in, people across the country have been taking America's energy future into thei
r own hands with the same sense of innovation and optimism that sent the Wright brothers into the sky, led Dr. Salk to a cure for
 polio, and fueled Henry Ford's confidence that his workers could afford the cars they made.But for too long now, this can-do spi
rit has been stifled by a can't-do government that seems to think it has no role in solving great national challenges or rallying
 a country to a cause. One that's content with simply giving more tax breaks to energy industries without asking for anything in 
return. Content with sending $650 million a day to countries like Saudi Arabia to pay for our fuel. And content with energy legis
lation that takes on only the easiest parts of the problem.Now, I voted for the last energy bill. Because it took some baby steps
 in the right direction. It invests in the renewable, homegrown biofuels that could turn out to be some of the most promising alt
ernatives to oil. It contains some provisions that would help us use alternative energy sources, increase our refinery capacity, 
and invest in clean coal technology. And recently, the administration made some executive policy changes that make it more diffic
ult to classify cars as "light trucks," which would increase the production of more fuel-efficient cars.None of these provisions 
do any harm - and a few do some good. But the energy bill and the administration's reforms don't suffer from sins of commission. 
Instead, they suffer from sins of omission. The solutions are too timid - the reforms too small. A bill that reduces our dependen
cy on foreign oil by just 3% when our demand is about to jump 40% is not a serious energy policy. We need to do more.The truth is
, an oil future is not a secure future for America. Indeed, the rest of the world is already moving away from oil, and the longer
 we wait, the more difficult and painful it will be for our companies and our workers to catch up. Countries like China and Japan
 are creating jobs and slowing oil consumption by churning out and buying millions of fuel-efficient cars. Brazil, a nation that 
once relied on foreign countries to import 80% of its crude oil, will now be entirely self-sufficient in a few years thanks to it
s investment in biofuels. By getting more ethanol on the market and equipping their cars with the flexible-fuel engines that allo
w them to run on this fuel, Brazil has succeeded secured its energy supply while still giving consumers a break at the pump.So wh
y can't we do this? Why can't this be one of the great American projects of the 21st century?The answer is, it can. We can do thi
s with technology we have on the shelves right now; we can do it by saving, not crippling, our ailing auto companies; and we can 
do it by using the kind of clean, renewable sources of energy that we can literally grow right here in America.There's no silver 
bullet. A solution to our energy dilemma won't come overnight. But we don't have to accept the wait-and-see attitude anymore. It 
flies in the face of our history and our founding principles. Katrina has shown us what could happen if we don't move away from a
n oil economy, but it has also provided us with a moment to challenge that kind of a future. Now is the time to seize that moment
.In the short-term, this probably means that we'll need to build even more refinery capacity and create not just a Strategic Petr
oleum Reserve, but also a Strategic Gasoline Reserve so that we can deal with the type of shortages we saw from Katrina. It means
 that we'll need to invest more in the clean technology that will allow us to burn more coal, our country's most abundant fossil 
fuel. And it means that we should continue to encourage the use of renewable fuels - by insisting that they make up 20% of our en
ergy use and making sure that every new car in America has a flexible-fuel engine by 2010.But we need to take even greater steps 
than these short-term measures. We need solutions that strike at the very heart of our dependence on oil.Right now, the largest c
onsumers of oil in this country are the cars we drive. And right now, we also have the technology to build cars that travel much 
further on a gallon of gas. We already have thousands of gas-electric hybrid cars driving around that can get 50 miles per gallon
. Soon, plug-in hybrids will be able to get 75 miles per gallon. And experts believe that if we pump biofuels like E85 into a plu
g-in hybrid car, we can actually get up to 500 miles per gallon of gasoline.So the technology is on the shelf. It's ready and ava
ilable for our car companies to use. If we made sure that all passenger vehicles built in the U.S. got 40 miles per gallon, we wo
uld save consumers up to $5,000 at the pump over the life of their cars.If we do this alone, we could reduce our dependence on fo
reign oil by over 1 billion barrels a year by 2020.For years, we've hesitated to raise fuel economy standards as a nation in part
 because of a very legitimate concern - the impact it would have on Detroit. The auto industry is right when they argue that tran
sitioning to more hybrid and fuel-efficient cars would require massive investment at a time when they're struggling under the wei
ght of rising health care costs, sagging profits, and stiff competition from Europe and Japan.But it's precisely because of that 
competition that they don't have a choice. As the demand and waiting lists for hybrid cars skyrocket, demand for SUVs - American 
car companies' biggest source of profit - is expected to plummet. The market is telling the auto industry to move away from oil -
 but so far only foreign companies are listening.China now has a higher fuel economy standard than we do, and it's got 200,000 hy
brids on its roads. Japan's Toyota is doubling production of the popular Prius to sell 100,000 in the U.S. this year, and it's ge
tting ready to open a brand new production plant in China.These companies are running circles around their American counterparts.
 Ford is only making 20,000 Escape Hybrids this year, and GM's brand won't be on the market until 2007. This isn't just costing u
s energy efficiency - it's decimating American businesses and costing American workers their jobs.There is now no doubt that fuel
-efficient cars represent the future of the auto industry. These cars will be built and bought and mass quantities. The only ques
tion is where and by who?If American car companies hope to be a part of that future, if they hope to compete - if they hope to su
rvive - they must make the necessary adjustments so that they can start building these cars. And we must help them do it.There ar
e many ways to do this and many good conversations that already taking place. One option is to provide direct subsidies to the au
to industries so that it can transition its production to more fuel-efficient vehicles. Others have suggested providing tax credi
ts for consumers to buy these cars.Today I'd like to give you another example of a deal that Washington could make with Detroit. 
We'd start by raising the fuel economy standards in this country by 3% a year over the next fifteen years. But to help our auto i
ndustry make the transition - to give them the competitive edge they need against their foreign counterparts - we'd pay for part 
of the biggest costs they face today: retiree health care. Right now, health care costs represent $1,500 of the price of every GM
 car that's made. By picking up part of the tab for the health care costs of their retirees, we'd be lifting a huge burden off th
e auto industry so that they'll invest in the technology that will finally reduce America's dependence on foreign oil.These solut
ions - investing in more hybrids and renewable energy sources; raising CAFE standards and helping our auto industry transition to
 a fuel-efficient future - represent a road to energy independence that will require some tough decisions and difficult politics,
 but as we look toward the future, it's the road we must travel as a nation. We could open up every square inch of America to dri
lling and we still wouldn't even make a dent in our oil dependency. We could open up ANWR today, and at its peak, which would be 
more than a decade from now, it would give us enough oil to take care of our transportation needs for about a month. Clearly, thi
s is not a solution.At the dawn of the Internet Age, Andy Grove of Intel famously said that there are two kinds of businesses: th
ose that use email and those that will. Today, there are two kinds of car companies: those who make fuel-efficient cars and those
 that will. We can't follow the world anymore. We must lead. And if we don't act now, the economic and societal benefits that hav
e always been the hallmark of American innovation will find a home somewhere else.There are few issues in American politics that 
have such a far-reaching effect on almost every aspect of our well-being as a nation, yet remain so absent from public interest a
nd action. But as we cut through all the talk and the politics in the energy debate, we can see what the debate is really about.W
e see the family that thinks twice about what they'll spend at the grocery store this week, because they've been paying $40 to fi
ll up the tank for the last month. We see the grandmother who isn't sure how she'll make her Social Security check cover January'
s heating bill. The autoworker who isn't sure what the future at Ford holds for him. And the mother who sees turmoil in the Middl
e East and worries that someday her son might have to fight to secure our oil supply.Ultimately, we see a nation that cannot cont
rol its future as long as it cannot control the source of energy that keeps it running.Recently, I returned from a trip to Ukrain
e, where I had the opportunity to meet the nation's third president, Viktor Yushchenko. Since the country first broke away from t
he Soviet Union more than a decade earlier, Ukraine has been trying to forge its own identity and assert its own independence fro
m Russia. This culminated earlier this year in the Orange Revolution, a mass demonstration from thousands of protestors who stood
 by Yushchenko and his promise to move his country further from the sphere of Russian influence.President Yushchenko finally won.
 But today, Ukraine remains almost entirely dependent on - guess who -- Russia - for all it's oil and gas supplies. And it is wid
ely expected that in anticipation of next year's parliamentary elections, Russia will triple the prices of both. Despite all the 
soaring rhetoric, the demonstrations and the courage, Ukraine still finds itself at the mercy of its former patron - a nation tha
t can now influence every political and economic decision they make - all because of oil.This will not be America's future - but 
this is the stranglehold that fossil fuels can have on a nation's freedom. Ukraine may have little choice in the matter. The most
 powerful and wealthy nation on earth, teeming with brilliant minds and cutting-edge technology, surely does. The genius of the A
merican people has already shown us the path towards energy independence, now they're just waiting for their government to take t
hem there. Let's finally get it done. Thank you. 21st Century Schools for a 21st Century Economy TOPIC: Education March 13, 2006 
21st Century Schools for a 21st Century Economy Remarks of Senator Barack Obama Chicago, IL Complete Text Awhile back, I was read
ing through Jonathan Kozol's new book, Shame of a Nation. In it, he talks about his recent travels to schools across America, and
 how fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, we have an education system in this country that is still visibly separate an
d painfully unequal.At one point, Kozol tells about his trip to Fremont High School in Los Angeles, where he meets some children 
who explain with heart-wrenching honesty what living in this system is like. One girl told him that she'd taken hairdressing twic
e, because there were actually two different levels offered by the high school. The first was in hairstyling; the other in braidi
ng.Another girl, Mireya, listened as her friend told this story. And she began to cry. When asked what was wrong, she said, "I do
n't want to take hairdressing. I did not need sewing either. I knew how to sew. My mother is a seamstress in a factory. I'm tryin
g to go to college. I don't need to sew to go to college. My mother sews. I hoped for something else."I hoped for something else.
It's a simple dream, but it speaks to us so powerfully because it is our dream - one that exists at the very center of the Americ
an experience. One that says if you're willing to work hard and take responsibility, then you'll have the chance to reach for som
ething else; for something better.The ideal of public education has always been at the heart of this bargain. From the moment we 
built the first schools in the towns of New England, it was the driving force behind Thomas Jefferson's declaration that "...tale
nt and virtue, needed in a free society, should be educated regardless of wealth, birth or other accidental condition."It's a bar
gain our government kept as we moved from a nation of farms to a nation of factories, setting up a system of free public high sch
ools across the country. It's a bargain we expanded after World War II, when we sent over two million returning heroes to college
 on the GI Bill, creating the largest middle class in history.And even when our government refused to hold up its end of this bar
gain and forced Linda Brown to walk miles to a dilapidated Topeka school because she wasn't allowed in the well-off, white-only s
chool; even then, ordinary people stood up and spoke out until the day when the arrival of nine little children at a school in Li
ttle Rock made real the decision that in America, separate could never be equal. Because in America, it's the promise of a good e
ducation for all that makes it possible for any child to transcend the barriers of race or class or background and achieve their 
God-given potential.In this country, it is education that allows our children to hope for something else.As the twenty-first cent
ury unfolds, we are called once again to make real this hope - to meet the new challenges of a global economy by carrying forth t
he ideals of progress and opportunity through public education in America.We now live in a world where the most valuable skill yo
u can sell is knowledge. Revolutions in technology and communication have created an entire economy of high-tech, high-wage jobs 
that can be located anywhere there's an internet connection. And today, a child in Chicago is not only competing for jobs with on
e in Boston, but thousands more in Bangalore and Beijing who are being educated longer and better than ever before.America is in 
danger of losing this competition. We now have one of the highest high school dropout rates of any industrialized country. By 12t
h grade, our children score lower on their math and science tests than most other kids in the world. And today, countries like Ch
ina are graduating eight times as many engineers as we do.And yet, as these fundamental changes are occurring all around us, we s
till hear about schools that are giving students the choice between hairstyling and braiding.Today we are failing too many of our
 children. We're sending them out into a 21st century economy by sending them through the doors of 20th century schools.Right now
, six million middle and high school students are reading at levels significantly below their grade level. Half of all teenagers 
can't understand basic fractions; half of all nine year olds can't perform basic multiplication or division. For some students, t
he data is even worse: almost 60% of African-American fourth-graders can't read at even the basic level, and by 8th grade, nearly
 nine in ten African-American and Latino students are not proficient in math. More students than ever are taking college entrance
 exams, but these tests are showing that only twenty percent are prepared to take college-level classes in English, math, and sci
ence. For African-American students, the figure dips to just ten percent.What happens to these children? What happens to the one 
in four eighth graders who never go on to finish high school in five years? What happens to the one in two high school graduates 
who never go on to college?Thirty or forty years ago, they may have gone on to find a factory job that could pay the bills and su
pport a family. But we no longer live in that world.Today, the average salary of a high school graduate is only $33,000 a year. F
or high school dropouts, it's even closer to the poverty line - just $25,000.If we do nothing about this, if we accept this kind 
of economy; this kind of society, we face a future where the ideal of American meritocracy could turn into an American myth. A fu
ture that's not only morally unacceptable for our children; but economically untenable for a nation that finds itself in a global
ized world, as countries who are out-educating us today out-compete our workers tomorrow.The President promised that he would cha
nge all this with No Child Left Behind Act. Unfortunately, the Administration has failed on the implementation of that law. Not o
nly have they failed to provide billions in adequate funding, they've also failed to design better assessment tests that provide 
a clearer path for schools to raise achievement.They've failed to work with states so that they could honor their own commitment 
to provide every child with a highly qualified teacher. As a result, they've had to exempt numerous states from meeting certain p
rovisions of No Child Left Behind, and now it appears unlikely that they will meet their own goal of getting our children to grad
e level by the year 2014.This is unacceptable. If we truly believe in our public schools, then we have a moral responsibility to 
do better - to break the either-or mentality around the debate over education that asks us to choose between more money or more r
eform, and embrace a both-and mentality. Because we know that good schools will require both the structural reform and the resour
ces necessary to prepare our kids for the future.We can learn from innovation taking place all over the country and right here in
 Chicago. Chicago Public Schools are collaborating on a number of innovations with foundations and groups like New Leaders for Ne
w Schools, Teach for America, the New Teacher Project, the Chicago Public Education Fund, The Academy for Urban School Leadership
 and the University of Chicago Urban Education Initiative. The Chicago Teachers Union is also now collaborating on the Fresh Star
t Schools, and we're watching that experiment with great interest. It's not easy, it's not popular with everyone, and, in the end
, some of the experiments may be rejected. But we can't stop trying. We have to keep moving ahead for the sake of our children.No
w, the problem on a national level is that we are not applying what we're learning from these reforms to our national education p
olicy. And so we need new vision for education in America - one where we move past ideology to experiment with the latest reforms
, measure the results, and make policy decisions based on what works and what doesn't.Fortunately, educational leaders like the p
eople in this room know what reforms really work: a more challenging and rigorous curriculum with emphasis on math, science, and 
literacy skills. Longer hours and more days to give kids the time and attention they need to learn. Early childhood education for
 every child so they're not left behind before they even start school, a measure Governor Blagojevich has recently introduced. Me
aningful, performance-based assessments that can give us a fuller picture of how a student is doing. And putting effective teache
rs and transformative principals in front of our kids.All of these reforms need to be scaled-up and replicated across the country
. But in the time I have remaining, let me use just talk about a few to point to what's possible, starting with one place where I
 think we can start making a big difference in education right now.From the moment our children step into a classroom, new eviden
ce shows that the single most important factor in determining their achievement today is not the color of their skin or where the
y come from; it's not who their parents are or how much money they have.It's who their teacher is. It's the person who will brave
 some of the most difficult schools, the most challenging children, and accept the most meager compensation simply to give someon
e else the chance to succeed.One study shows that two groups of students who started third grade at about the same level of math 
achievement finished fifth grade at vastly different levels. The group with the effective teacher saw their scores rise by nearly
 25%. The group with the ineffective teacher actually saw their scores drop by 25%.But even though we know how much teaching matt
ers, in too many places we've abandoned our teachers and principals, sending them into some of the most impoverished, underperfor
ming schools with little experience or pay; little preparation or support. After a few years of experience, most will leave to pi
ck wealthier, less challenging schools.The result is that some of our neediest children end up with less-experienced, poorly-paid
 teachers who are far more likely to be teaching subjects in which they have no training. Minority students are twice as likely t
o have these teachers. In Illinois, students in high-poverty schools are more than three times as likely to have them.If we hope 
to give our children a chance, it's time we start giving our teachers and our principals a chance. We can't change the whole coun
try overnight. But what we can do is give more school districts the chance to revolutionize the way they approach teaching. By he
lping spark complete reform across an entire school district, we can learn what actually works for our kids and then replicate th
ose policies throughout the country.So here's the legislation I'm introducing this week - it's the creation of what I call Innova
tion Districts. School districts from around the country that want to become seedbeds of reform would apply and we'd select the t
wenty with the best plans to put effective, supported teachers in all classrooms and increase achievement for all students. We'd 
offer these districts substantial new resources to do this, but in return, we'd ask them to try systemic new reforms. Above all, 
we'd require results.In Innovation Districts, we'd begin by working with these districts to strengthen their teaching, and we'd s
tart with recruitment.Right now we don't have nearly enough effective teachers and principals in the places we need them most: ur
ban and rural schools, and subject areas like math and science. One of the main reasons for this, cited by most teachers who leav
e the profession, is that no one gives them the necessary training and preparation.Around the country, organizations like the Aca
demy for Urban School Leadership right here in Chicago are changing this by recruiting and training new, highly-qualified teacher
s for some of the hardest-to-teach classrooms in the country. We need to expand this by giving districts help in creating new tea
cher academies that will partner with organizations like this to recruit effective teachers for low-performing, high-poverty scho
ols. Each teacher would undergo an extensive training program before they begin, including classroom observation and participatio
n.These teacher academies are also showing us that it's not enough to just put outstanding teachers in the classroom - we have to
 place outstanding principals in the schools as well. In districts across the country, the role of principal is being transformed
 from bureaucratic manager to instructional leader who can set high standards and recruit great talent. With 230 New Leaders serv
ing more than 100,000 kids annually, New Leaders for New Schools has been at the cutting edge of this process - a process we need
 to expand nationally.After we recruit great teachers, we need to pay them better. Right now, teaching is one of the only profess
ions where no matter how well you perform at your job, you're almost never rewarded for success. But with six-figure salaries lur
ing away some of our most talented college graduates from some of our neediest schools, this needs to change.That's why teachers 
in these Innovation Districts who are successful in improving student achievement would receive substantial pay increases, as wou
ld those who choose to teach in the most troubled schools and the highest-need subject areas, like math and science. The city of 
Denver is trying pay increases in partnership with the local union, and when Chattanooga, Tennessee offered similar incentives fo
r teachers who taught in high-need schools, student reading scores went up by over 10%.Of course, teachers don't just need more p
ay, they need more support. One thing I kept hearing when I visited Dodge Elementary here in Chicago is how much an encouraging p
rincipal or the advice of an experienced teacher can make a difference. That's why teachers would be paired with mentor teachers 
who've been there before. After a few years of experience, they'd then have the chance to become mentor teachers themselves.We al
so know that teachers can't teach and our kids can't learn when there's violence in and around our schools, a problem we've seen 
right here in Chicago this year in too many tragic incidents. If our kids can't go to school in a safe place, nothing else we do 
matters. As we move forward with reform, we must makes safety a top priority. In the innovation districts, we'd help do this by e
xpanding programs already being used in various states that teach students about positive behavior.Finally, we would also require
 Innovation Districts to work with their unions to uncover bureaucratic obstacles that leave poor kids without good teachers, inc
luding hiring, funding and transfer policies. Districts would work with unions to tackle these problems so that we can provide ev
ery child with an effective teacher.Beyond policies that help teachers specifically, we'd also ask Innovation Districts to try re
forms that create a more effective teaching environment. To give teachers more time with their students and more time to learn fr
om each other, these districts would be asked to restructure their schedules and implement either longer days or summer school.In
 December, I also introduced the STEP Up Act that addresses this by providing summer learning opportunities for children at high 
risk early in their school careers. In addition to more learning, this would provide kids a safe, educational environment while t
heir parents are at work.To hold schools and teachers accountable for the results of all these reforms, districts that don't impr
ove would be removed from the program. To find out what works and what doesn't, we'd provide them with powerful data and technolo
gy, and also give them the option of partnering with local universities to help them improve performance.These reforms would take
 an important first step toward fixing our broken system by putting qualified, supported teachers in the schools that need them m
ost. But beyond that, they would show us the progress we can make when money is well spent. And they would allow us to finally br
eak free from the either-or mentality that's put bureaucracy and ideology ahead of what works; ahead of what's best for our kids.
When it comes to education, the time for excuses has passed - for all of us.During my visit to Dodge Elementary, I was able to sp
eak with a few of the teachers about some of the challenges they're facing in educating their students. And one teacher mentioned
 to me that in one of the biggest obstacles in her view is what she referred to as the "These Kids" syndrome.She said that when i
t comes to educating students today, people always seem to find a million excuses for why "these kids" can't learn. That you'll h
ear how "these kids are nothing but trouble," or "these kids come from tough backgrounds," or "these kids don't want to learn."An
d the more people talk about them as "these kids," the easier it is for "these kids" to become somebody else's problem.But of cou
rse, the children in this country - the children in Dodge Elementary, and South Central L.A., and rural Arkansas, and suburban Ma
ryland - they are not "these kids." They are our kids. They want a chance to achieve - and each of us has a responsibility to giv
e them that chance.In the end, children succeed because somewhere along the way, a parent or teacher instills in them the belief 
that they can. That they're able to. That they're worth it.At Earhart Elementary in Chicago, one little girl, raised by a single 
mom from a poor background, was asked the secret to her academic success.She said, "I just study hard every night because I like 
learning. My teacher wants me to be a good student, and so does my mother. I don't want to let them down."In the months and years
 to come, it's time for this nation to rededicate itself to the ideal of a world class education for every American child. It's t
ime to let our kids hope for something else. It's time to instill the belief in every child that they can succeed - and then make
 sure we make good on the promise to never let them down. Thank you. Southern Illinois University School of Medicine Commencement
 TOPIC: Commencement and Healthcare & Health Issues May 20, 2006 Southern Illinois University School of Medicine Commencement Add
ress Complete Text Congratulations! After four long years of endless work, sleepless nights, and constant stress, you can finally
 look forward to three years of even more work, less sleep, and stress that may tempt you to self-prescribe.But hey, at least the
re's June!Of course, you knew all of this coming in. You understood the sacrifices involved and the commitment necessary to becom
e a doctor. You were aware that it would take years of your life and leave you with significant debt.And yet, you signed up anywa
y.You chose this profession because you heard a calling; and in answering that call revealed that you don't just see this as a pr
ofession. From now on, doctor won't just be a title you'll hold, it will be a part of who you are - a healer, a saver of life. An
d no matter where you may be or what situation you may find yourself, you will forever come forward at the first sound of the que
stion, "Is there a doctor in the house?"This is a good thing. I mention it not to add to the burdens that must already weigh heav
ily on your shoulders, but to point out that your distinct commitment and compassion for the lives of your fellow human beings is
 a quality that has intrinsic value far outside the doctor's office or the operating room.And it is because of this quality that 
I want to ask something of you.Life often happens in a way that makes it easy for us to miss the larger obligations we have towar
d one another. The demands of work and time and money tend to narrow our focus and cause us to turn inward. You might flip on the
 news or pick up the paper and feel moved by a story about genocide in Darfur or the AIDS epidemic or the fifteen-year-old who wa
s gunned down in front of his house. You may even feel compelled to do something about it. But inevitably, it becomes time to stu
dy, or go to work, or cook dinner, or put the kids to bed - and so we often turn away from the big stuff and concentrate on simpl
y surviving the small.This is perfectly human. It is perfectly understandable. And yet, the survival of our country has always re
quired more. It has required ordinary men and women to look beyond their own lives; to think about the larger challenges we face 
as a people - and then rise to meet them.This is what I'd like to ask you to do today.In a few months, your residencies will begi
n. And on a daily basis, you will encounter patients with every disease and ailment imaginable. There will be heart problems and 
lung problems; common colds and deadly flus; broken bones and painful diagnoses.But after being there for awhile, you will encoun
ter another, more pervasive affliction that affects more than just individual patients. Perhaps you will first notice it when a d
octor tells a woman that her husband will need a life-saving procedure that their insurance will not cover and their family canno
t afford. Perhaps it will be the late-stage diagnosis of a cancer that could have been prevented with a routine screening that th
e patient's health care plan just doesn't cover. Perhaps it will be the endless stream of people who wait and wait in an Emergenc
y Room which is the only place that will treat the uninsured.At some point in your residency, you'll see firsthand that there is 
something fundamentally broken about our health care system. You'll realize that for millions upon millions of Americans, the car
e you provide is becoming far too costly for them to afford. And you'll have to decide what, if anything, you're going to do abou
t it.You've all heard the statistics - 46 million Americans uninsured. 5 million more in just the last four years. Family premium
s up 65%. Deductibles up 50%.It's a cost crisis that traps us all in a vicious cycle. Because the uninsured can't afford health c
are, they put off seeing a doctor or end up in the ER when they get sick. Then their care is more expensive, and so premiums for 
all Americans go up. Because everyone's premiums go up, more Americans lose their health care.From the smallest mom and pop store
s to major corporations like GM, businesses who can't afford these rising costs are cutting back on insurance, workers, or both. 
States with bigger Medicaid bills and smaller budgets are being forced to choose whether they want their citizens to be unhealthy
 or uneducated. And over half of all family bankruptcies today are caused by medical bills.This is affecting your profession too.
 Whether it's Medicaid reimbursements, the rising price of medical malpractice insurance, or having HMOs look over your shoulder,
 all the hard work and sacrifice you've put in during medical school is becoming less rewarding than it once was.And so today I a
sk you to be more than just practitioners of medicine; I ask you to be advocates for medicine. I ask you to be advocates for a he
alth care system that is fair, that is just, and that provides every single American with the best your profession has to offer.J
ust like generations before, you must dare to believe - not only as tomorrow's physicians, but as tomorrow's parents, workers, bu
siness owners, and citizens. You must choose: Will the medical miracles you perform over the next generation reach only the lucki
est few? Or will history look back at this moment as the time when we finally made care available at a cost that we can afford?Th
ere isn't one person sitting here today who wants to turn a sick patient away because they can't pay. Not one person who wants th
e care they deliver denied to those whose lives depend on it. Each of you has dedicated yourselves to this calling because where 
there is a sick person, you want to heal them. Where there is a life in jeopardy, you want to save it.And so today, when you leav
e here, it will not only be with great knowledge, but with even greater responsibility. Because if we do nothing about the rising
 cost of health care, it will keep climbing, and in ten years, the number of uninsured could grow to 54 million.We can solve this
 problem. Challenging as it may seem, all over America there are already business owners and political leaders and labor represen
tatives and members of the medical profession who are coming up with new and different ways to cut costs and improve quality in o
ur health care system. In Massachusetts, they just signed into law a groundbreaking plan that would cover most all of its citizen
s.This can be our future, but everyone needs to stay involved, and everyone needs to put the pressure on Washington, because they
 sure won't do it on their own. Just a little while ago, we were told that it was "Health Care Week" in the U.S. Senate. Five day
s later, we had failed to debate even a single bill that would have fundamentally improved access for the 46 million Americans wi
thout health insurance.This is why we need you. We need you to dream, we need you to speak out, and we need you to act. And toget
her, we can build a health care system in this country that finally works for every American.We can have a system where no matter
 how many times you switch jobs or how large or small your employer is, you have a health care plan that stays with you forever.W
e can have a system that reduces medical error and cuts costs by using 21st century technology to put all of our medical informat
ion online. A system where every doctor and nurse can sit by a patient's bedside with a laptop and pull up their entire medical h
istory with the click of a mouse. Where every patient has an electronic bracelet that you could scan to find out the exact type a
nd amount of medication they needed so there are no mistakes made. Where you could go online and monitor a patient's breathing an
d heart rate while they were home to track their recovery.We can have a system of evidence-based health care that shares informat
ion about what works and what doesn't, so we can actually provide patients with the care they need when they need it.And we can h
ave a health care system where we focus on preventing deadly and costly illnesses before they occur - where we ensure that every 
American has routine check-ups and screenings and information about how to live a healthy lifestyle.We can do all of this - but w
e need your help to get it done.Of course, no one's forcing you to meet these challenges. Each of you has been blessed with extra
ordinary gifts and talent. And so if you want, you can leave here and focus on your own medical career and your own success, not 
giving another thought to the plight of the growing millions who can't afford the care you will provide. After all, there is no c
ommunity service requirement in the real world; and no one's forcing you to care.But I hope that you do. Not because you have a d
ebt to all of those who helped you get to where you are, although you do have that debt. Not because you have an obligation to th
ose who are less fortunate, although you do have that obligation. You need to take on the challenges that your country is facing 
because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because it's only w
hen you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you will realize your true potential.Looking out at this class of
 2006, I think my hope is well-placed. With the field you have chosen, you've already shown how much you care about the lives of 
others; how strongly you have heard the calling to be healers in this world. Today, I ask you to remember that call always, and t
o remember how it could include more than the patient sitting in your office. It could also include the patients who can't afford
 to get there, the ones who aren't being provided the best care, and the general health of all Americans.When you think about the
se challenges, I also ask you to remember that in this country, our history of overcoming the seemingly impossible always comes a
bout because individuals who care really can make a difference.A century ago, who would have dared to believe that in just one hu
ndred years, we would add thirty years to the average lifespan and witness a 90% drop in the rate of infant death? Who would have
 dared to believe that with a simple vaccine, we could eliminate a disease that left millions without the ability to walk? That w
e could transplant a heart or resuscitate one that stopped? That we could unlock the greatest mysteries of life from the most bas
ic building blocks of our existence?In a time where you were lucky to live past fifty and doomed if you came down with the flu, w
ho would have dared to believe these things?The people who once sat in your position - they did. The doctors and nurses, research
ers and scientists who came before. Who grew up believing that in America, the most improbable of all experiments, the place wher
e we continue to defy the odds and write our own history, that they could be the ones to improve, extend, and save human life. Th
at they could be the healers.And as you go forth from here in your own life, you can keep this history alive if you only find the
 courage to try. Good luck with this journey, and congratulations on all of your achievements. Thank you. CONFIRMATION HEARING OF
 JOHN BOLTON TOPIC: Confirmations April 11, 2005 Opening Statement of Senator Barack Obama Confirmation Hearing of John Bolton Mr
. Chairman and Senator Biden, the position of United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations is one of the most imp
ortant diplomatic positions in the entire U.S. government. Some of the most distinguished Americans - Democrats and Republicans l
ike Daniel Patrick Moynihan, George H.W. Bush, and Henry Cabot Lodge - have served with honor in this position.Yet, there is one 
man from my home state of Illinois whose experience as Permanent Representative is quite relevant today.Adlai Stevenson served in
 this position during the Cuban Missile Crisis. And, as we all know, it was Stevenson's presentation to the U.N. Security Council
 that proved to the world that the Soviets were moving intermediate range missiles into Cuba. Using charts and photos to build a 
compelling case, Stevenson declared to Soviet Ambassador Zorin that he was prepared to wait "until Hell freezes over" for Zorin's
 response to the U.S. charges.What few people remember is that Stevenson's presentation came on the heels of what one might call 
an "intelligence failure." A year earlier, Stevenson had been misled by the White House and the CIA into publicly stating that th
e United States was not behind the Bay of Pigs invasion. Stevenson almost resigned over the incident.This series of events is imp
ortant to keep in mind today. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, we were able to succeed diplomatically because of the stature and 
integrity of our Permanent Representative to the United Nations. In fact, President Kennedy said that, "the integrity and credibi
lity of Adlai Stevenson constitute one of our greatest national assets."As a result, Adlai Stevenson was able to get tough, isola
te the Soviets, and convince the world we were right.Today, we face a similar situation. With the rest of the world questioning o
ur intelligence capabilities, and nuclear proliferation threats from Iran to North Korea that may require action by the U.N. Secu
rity Council, we must be able to convince the world that we are right. Now, more than ever, we need a credible messenger at the U
.N.Unfortunately, I have some serious reservations about whether Mr. Bolton is the right man for the job:First, senior U.S. intel
ligence officials have called into question Mr. Bolton's credibility on statements he's made about non-proliferation. There are a
lso accusations related to political pressure on intelligence analysts who did not agree with Mr. Bolton's statements. Considerin
g that he's the top arms control official at the State Department, this is troubling to say the least.Second, Mr. Bolton's histor
y of inflammatory statements about the U.N. would seem to make it more difficult for him to advance U.S. interests at the U.N. I 
am concerned about whether Mr. Bolton even believes the U.N. is a viable institution and a useful instrument of U.S. foreign poli
cy. Saying that it wouldn't make a difference if you lop off ten floors of the UN building in New York isn't exactly the best way
 to earn people's respect and support - whatever the context.Finally, Mr. Bolton appears to have an overly confrontational histor
y with several member-states on the Security Council. Like Adlai Stevenson, I believe there are times to be tough. But statements
 like "I don't do carrots" coming from someone who wants to be our chief diplomat at the U.N. certainly give me pause.Mr. Chairma
n, there is no question that we need someone in New York who is unafraid to shake things up and challenge the status quo. But, we
 also need someone with the credibility, temperament, and diplomatic skill to work with other nations, form coalitions, and advan
ce U.S. interests.That is why I've invoked the memory of Adlai Stevenson here today: he was tough; he was credible; he was diplom
atic. Most importantly, he was effective. Stevenson proved that we should not make compromises or trade-offs when selecting our R
epresentative to the U.N.I want to give Mr. Bolton a chance to speak on these issues, and so my mind is not made up yet. I want t
o hear from him as to how he can be an effective and credible advocate for the U.S. I look forward to hearing his testimony and a
nswers to the Committee's questions. Senate Floor Statement - The PATRIOT Act TOPIC: Homeland Security December 15, 2005 Senate F
loor Statement of Senator Barack Obama The PATRIOT Act Complete Text Four years ago, following the most devastating attack in our
 history, this body passed the USA PATRIOT Act in order to give our nation's law enforcement the tools they need to track down te
rrorists who plot and lurk within our own borders and all over the world - terrorists who, right now, are looking to exploit weak
nesses in our laws and our security to carry out even deadlier attacks than we saw on September 11th.We all agree that we needed 
legislation to make it harder for suspected terrorists to go undetected in this country. And we all agree we needed to make it ha
rder for them to organize and strategize and get flight licenses and sneak across our borders. Americans everywhere wanted that.B
ut soon after the PATRIOT Act passed, a few years before I ever arrived in the Senate, I began hearing concerns from people of ev
ery background and political leaning that this law - the very purpose of which was to protect us - was also threatening to violat
e our rights and freedoms as Americans. That it didn't just provide law enforcement the powers it needed to keep us safe, but pow
ers it didn't need to invade our privacy without cause or suspicion.In Washington, this issue has tended degenerate into an "eith
er-or" type debate. Either we protect our people from terror or we protect our most cherished principles. But that is a false cho
ice. It asks too little of us and assumes too little about America.That's why as it's come time to reauthorize this law, we've be
en working in a bipartisan way to do both - to show the American people that we can track down terrorists without trampling on ou
r civil liberties. To show the American people that the federal government will only issue warrants and execute searches because 
it needs to, not because it can. What we have been trying to achieve, under the leadership of a bipartisan group of Senators, is 
some accountability in this process - to get answers and see evidence where there is suspicion.Several weeks ago, this work bore 
fruit. The Judiciary Committee and the U.S. Senate managed to pass a piece of bi-partisan legislation that, while I can't say is 
perfect, was able to address many of these most serious problems in the existing law.Unfortunately, that strong bi-partisan legis
lation has been tossed aside in Conference. Instead, we have been forced to consider a piece of rushed legislation that fails to 
address the concerns of members of both parties as well as the American people.This is legislation that puts our own Justice Depa
rtment above the law. When National Security Letters are issued, they allow federal agents to conduct any search on any American,
 no matter how extensive or wide-ranging, without ever going before a judge to prove that the search is necessary. They simply ne
ed sign-off from a local FBI official. That's all.Once a business or a person receives notification that they will be searched, t
hey are prohibited from telling anyone about it, and they are even prohibited from challenging this automatic gag order in court.
 Even though judges have already found that similar restrictions violate the First Amendment - this Conference Report disregards 
the case law and the right to challenge the gag order.If you do decide to consult an attorney for legal advice - you have to tell
 the FBI that you have done so. This is unheard of - there is no such requirement in any other area of law, and I don't see why i
t is justified here.And if someone wants to know why their own government has decided to go on a fishing expedition through every
 personal record or private document - through library books they've read and phone calls they've made - this legislation gives p
eople no rights to appeal the need for such a search in a court of law. No judge will hear their plea, no jury will hear their ca
se.This is just plain wrong.Giving law enforcement the tools they need to investigate suspicious activity is one thing - and it's
 the right thing - but doing it without any real oversight seriously jeopardizes the rights of all Americans and the ideals Ameri
ca stands for.Supporters of this Conference Report have argued that we should just hold our noses and support the legislation, be
cause it's not going to get any better. That does not convince me that I should support this report. I believe we owe it to the n
ation to do whatever we can to make this legislation better. We don't have to settle for a PATRIOT Act that sacrifices our libert
ies or our safety - we can have one that secures both.There have been proposals on both sides of Congress, from both parties, to 
extend the PATRIOT Act for three months so that we can reach agreement on this bill. I support those efforts and will oppose clot
ure on this unacceptable Conference Report. Darfur: Current Policy Not Enough Security - Podcast Transcript TOPIC: Foreign Policy
 & Defense February 15, 2006 Darfur: Current Policy Not Enough Security Complete Transcript Hello, this is Senator Barack Obama, 
and today is Wednesday, February 15, 2006. For more than two years now, we have been watching a rolling genocide take place in Da
rfur, western Sudan. Many of you I'm sure are aware of the tragedy that has been unfolding there. For those of you who are not, e
ssentially what we have seen is a systematic targeting on the part of the Khartoum government and the Janjaweed Arab militia that
 have systematically uprooted, killed, murdered, pillaged, raped, Africans, driven them from their homes into enormous displaced-
person camps. Refugee camps, within Sudan. It's estimated that at least 300,000 people have been killed. It's known that at least
 2 million people have been displaced. The administration early on in this tragedy acknowledged that this was genocide that was t
aking place. I think there has been broad recognition in the international community that the behavior of the Sudanese government
 has been scandalous. The rationale that has provided from the Sudanese government for what has been taking place is that there i
s a battle going on between Sudanese government and rebels that operate within the area. But, the real victims have not been rebe
l sympathizers, or the rebels themselves, they've been innocent men, women and children.For more than a year now, I've been worki
ng with other Senators to see what we can do to really push the Administration to take this as seriously as it warrants. To the A
dministration's credit, the United States government has probably paid more attention to this issue than some of our European all
ies. We have been a major contributor of aid to the region; we have helped to finance the African Union, to provide peace-keeping
 forces in the Darfur area. So, in a lot of ways, the United States government has been much more on top of this than Europeans, 
Canadians, and others, who oftentimes accuse the Untied States of being indifferent to the problems of the third world. On the ot
her hand, what has been done is not enough. The few thousand African Union troops who have been placed in Darfur are primarily pr
oviding witness to some of the atrocities that are taking place there, but they don't have clear rules of engagement, they are un
der-armed, under-trained, they don't really provide the sort of protective force that would be needed to not only ensure that exi
sting villages aren't ravaged by the Janjaweeds, but more importantly, that the 2 million displaced people could actually safely 
start returning home.Recent reports indicate that in the past few weeks alone, more than 20,000 people have been displaced. There
 are also indications that the Janjaweed, recognizing that the AU forces, the African Union forces, are not particularly effectiv
e, have started targeting them. So there is a sense of deterioration in Darfur, the situation may be getting worse, rather than b
etter. And, what's most disturbing is that the United States government seems to be backing off a little bit, the commitment that
 it made to deal with the problem. There was a quote from the under-secretary for African Affairs, Secretary Frasier, in which sh
e indicated that, maybe this was not a genocide after all. And, if that ends up being the United State's attitude, then we could 
see continuing problems of a scale that might eventually reach the same scale in which happened in Rwanda.So, here are a couple o
f things that we think need to happen. Number one: we need a UN peace-keeping mission in Darfur. There have been conversations; t
he UN Secretary General, Koffee Annan, the AU forces, and the Bush Administration have all acknowledged this. There's got to be a
 sense of urgency in which the US diplomatic efforts are focused on getting this UN peace-keeping force up to about 20,000 troops
, and placing them in Darfur as quickly as possible with a strong protection mandate, rather than a monitoring one. In the mean t
ime, it's going to take about year, at best, to get a UN peace-keeping force in place. We're going to have to supply and rally, b
ridging money and forces for the AU throughout this year, because, since it's sort of in lame-duck status, the Janjaweed recogniz
e that AU forces are not particularly effective, they may become more and more of a target. We're going to have to provide this s
uccessor UN force with our own lift and logistic assets. We're going to have to provide our military hardware, like transport and
 attack helicopters, and so forth. And, we're going to have to really force other countries like Canada, Australia, some of the E
uropean countries that are not engaged in peace-keeping in other places, or at least are not immediately involved in major activi
ty in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, as we are, to deliver the troops that are needed.So, it is absolutely critical that we st
art focusing on this now. The situation, as bad as it is, could deteriorate further. This is something that is of interest, I thi
nk, to all of us, not just for humanitarian reasons, although when you read the accounts of women being raped when they are out c
ollecting firewood, when you read just horrendous accounts of entire villages being decimated and children being murdered, that i
t just breaks your heart, and humanitarian concerns should be sufficient, but we also have a strong national security interest. I
f you start seeing more and more failed states, more and more displaced persons, more and more refugees, all of that becomes a br
eeding ground for terrorist activity, it becomes a breeding ground for disease, and it creates refugees that put pressure on our 
own borders. In an inner-connected world we can't insulate ourselves from these tragedies. So, we're going to, over time, have to
 develop some strategy as the world's remaining super-power to address these issues, and Darfur is an important test case. We've 
already failed one test in Rwanda, we shouldn't fail another.Anyway, if you are interested in the issues related to Darfur, you c
an always contact my office, or get on the website. Your voice is obviously critical in this issue. I appreciate you, as always l
istening in. Thank you for downloading, and I will talk to you next week. Bye bye. North Carolina Primary Night Raleigh, NC May 6
, 2008You know, some were saying that North Carolina would be a game-changer in this election. But today, what North Carolina dec
ided is that the only game that needs changing is the one in Washington, DC.I want to start by congratulating Senator Clinton on 
her victory in the state of Indiana. And I want to thank the people of North Carolina for giving us a victory in a big state, a s
wing state, and a state where we will compete to win if I am the Democratic nominee for President of the United States.When this 
campaign began, Washington didn't give us much of a chance. But because you came out in the bitter cold, and knocked on doors, an
d enlisted your friends and neighbors in this cause; because you stood up to the cynics, and the doubters, and the nay-sayers whe
n we were up and when we were down; because you still believe that this is our moment, and our time, for change tonight we stand 
less than two hundred delegates away from securing the Democratic nomination for President of the United States.More importantly,
 because of you, we have seen that it's possible to overcome the politics of division and distraction; that it's possible to over
come the same old negative attacks that are always about scoring points and never about solving our problems. We've seen that the
 American people aren't looking for more spin or more gimmicks, but honest answers about the challenges we face. That's what you'
ve accomplished in this campaign, and that's how we'll change this country together.This has been one of the longest, most closel
y fought contests in history. And that's partly because we have such a formidable opponent in Senator Hillary Clinton. Tonight, m
any of the pundits have suggested that this party is inalterably divided that Senator Clinton's supporters will not support me, a
nd that my supporters will not support her.Well I'm here tonight to tell you that I don't believe it. Yes, there have been bruise
d feelings on both sides. Yes, each side desperately wants their candidate to win. But ultimately, this race is not about Hillary
 Clinton or Barack Obama or John McCain. This election is about you the American people and whether we will have a president and 
a party that can lead us toward a brighter future.This primary season may not be over, but when it is, we will have to remember w
ho we are as Democrats that we are the party of Jefferson and Jackson; of Roosevelt and Kennedy; and that we are at our best when
 we lead with principle; when we lead with conviction; when we summon an entire nation around a common purpose a higher purpose. 
This fall, we intend to march forward as one Democratic Party, united by a common vision for this country. Because we all agree t
hat at this defining moment in history a moment when we're facing two wars, an economy in turmoil, a planet in peril we can't aff
ord to give John McCain the chance to serve out George Bush's third term. We need change in America.The woman I met in Indiana wh
o just lost her job, and her pension, and her insurance when the plant where she worked at her entire life closed down she can't 
afford four more years of tax breaks for corporations like the one that shipped her job overseas. She needs us to give tax breaks
 to companies that create good jobs here in America. She can't afford four more years of tax breaks for CEOs like the one who wal
ked away from her company with a multi-million dollar bonus. She needs middle-class tax relief that will help her pay the skyrock
eting price of groceries, and gas, and college tuition. That's why I'm running for President.The college student I met in Iowa wh
o works the night shift after a full day of class and still can't pay the medical bills for a sister who's ill she can't afford f
our more years of a health care plan that only takes care of the healthy and the wealthy; that allows insurance companies to disc
riminate and deny coverage to those Americans who need it most. She needs us to stand up to those insurance companies and pass a 
plan that lowers every family's premiums and gives every uninsured American the same kind of coverage that Members of Congress gi
ve themselves. That's why I'm running for President.The mother in Wisconsin who gave me a bracelet inscribed with the name of the
 son she lost in Iraq; the families who pray for their loved ones to come home; the heroes on their third and fourth and fifth to
ur of duty they can't afford four more years of a war that should've never been authorized and never been waged. They can't affor
d four more years of our veterans returning to broken-down barracks and substandard care. They need us to end a war that isn't ma
king us safer. They need us to treat them with the care and respect they deserve. That's why I'm running for President.The man I 
met in Pennsylvania who lost his job but can't even afford the gas to drive around and look for a new one he can't afford four mo
re years of an energy policy written by the oil companies and for the oil companies; a policy that's not only keeping gas at reco
rd prices, but funding both sides of the war on terror and destroying our planet in the process. He doesn't need four more years 
of Washington policies that sound good, but don't solve the problem. He needs us to take a permanent holiday from our oil addicti
on by making the automakers raise their fuel standards, corporations pay for their pollution, and oil companies invest their reco
rd profits in a clean energy future. That's the change we need. And that's why I'm running for President.The people I've met in s
mall towns and big cities across this country understand that government can't solve all our problems and we don't expect it to. 
We believe in hard work. We believe in personal responsibility and self-reliance.But we also believe that we have a larger respon
sibility to one another as Americans that America is a place that America is the place where you can make it if you try. That no 
matter how much money you start with or where you come from or who your parents are, opportunity is yours if you're willing to re
ach for it and work for it. It's the idea that while there are few guarantees in life, you should be able to count on a job that 
pays the bills; health care for when you need it; a pension for when you retire; an education for your children that will allow t
hem to fulfill their God-given potential. That's the America we believe in. That's the America I know.This is the country that ga
ve my grandfather a chance to go to college on the GI Bill when he came home from World War II; a country that gave him and my gr
andmother the chance to buy their first home with a loan from the government.This is the country that made it possible for my mot
her a single parent who had to go on food stamps at one point to send my sister and me to the best schools in the country on scho
larships.This is the country that allowed my father-in-law a city worker at a South Side water filtration plant to provide for hi
s wife and two children on a single salary. This is a man who was diagnosed at age thirty with multiple sclerosis who relied on a
 walker to get himself to work. And yet, every day he went, and he labored, and he sent my wife and her brother to one of the bes
t colleges in the nation. It was a job that didn't just give him a paycheck, but a sense of dignity and self-worth. It was an Ame
rica that didn't just reward wealth, but the work and the workers who created it.Somewhere along the way, between all the bickeri
ng and the influence-peddling and the game-playing of the last few decades, Washington and Wall Street have lost touch with these
 values. And while I honor John McCain's service to his country, his ideas for America are out of touch with these values. His pl
ans for the future are nothing more than the failed policies of the past. And his plan to win in November appears to come from th
e very same playbook that his side has used time after time in election after election.Yes, we know what's coming. We've seen it 
already. The same names and labels they always pin on everyone who doesn't agree with all their ideas. The same efforts to distra
ct us from the issues that affect our lives by pouncing on every gaffe and association and fake controversy in the hope that the 
media will play along. The attempts to play on our fears and exploit our differences to turn us against each other for pure polit
ical gain to slice and dice this country into Red States and Blue States; blue-collar and white-collar; white and black, and brow
n.This is what they will do no matter which one of us is the nominee. The question, then, is not what kind of campaign they'll ru
n, it's what kind of campaign we will run. It's what we will do to make this year different. I didn't get into race thinking that
 I could avoid this kind of politics, but I am running for President because this is the time to end it.We will end it this time 
not because I'm perfect I think by now this campaign has reminded all of us of that. We will end it not by duplicating the same t
actics and the same strategies as the other side, because that will just lead us down the same path of polarization and gridlock.
We will end it by telling the truth forcefully, repeatedly, confidently and by trusting that the American people will embrace the
 need for change.Because that's how we've always changed this country not from the top-down, but from the bottom-up; when you the
 American people decide that the stakes are too high and the challenges are too great.The other side can label and name-call all 
they want, but I trust the American people to recognize that it's not surrender to end the war in Iraq so that we can rebuild our
 military and go after al Qaeda's leaders. I trust the American people to understand that it's not weakness, but wisdom to talk n
ot just to our friends, but our enemies like Roosevelt did, and Kennedy did, and Truman did.I trust the American people to realiz
e that while we don't need big government, we do need a government that stands up for families who are being tricked out of their
 homes by Wall Street predators; a government that stands up for the middle-class by giving them a tax break; a government that e
nsures that no American will ever lose their life savings just because their child gets sick. Security and opportunity; compassio
n and prosperity aren't liberal values or conservative values they're American values.Most of all, I trust the American people's 
desire to no longer be defined by our differences. Because no matter where I've been in this country whether it was the corn fiel
ds of Iowa or the textile mills of the Carolinas; the streets of San Antonio or the foothills of Georgia I've found that while we
 may have different stories, we hold common hopes. We may not look the same or come from the same place, but we want to move in t
he same direction towards a better future for our children and our grandchildren.That's why I'm in this race. I love this country
 too much to see it divided and distracted at this moment in history. I believe in our ability to perfect this union because it's
 the only reason I'm standing here today. And I know the promise of America because I have lived it.It is the light of opportunit
y that led my father across an ocean.It is the founding ideals that the flag draped over my grandfather's coffin stands for it is
 life, and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.It's the simple truth I learned all those years ago when I worked in the shadows
 of a shuttered steel mill on the South Side of Chicago that in this country, justice can be won against the greatest of odds; ho
pe can find its way back to the darkest of corners; and when we are told that we cannot bring about the change that we seek, we a
nswer with one voice yes we can.So don't ever forget that this election is not about me, or any candidate. Don't ever forget that
 this campaign is about you about your hopes, about your dreams, about your struggles, about securing your portion of the America
n Dream.Don't ever forget that we have a choice in this country that we can choose not to be divided; that we can choose not to b
e afraid; that we can still choose this moment to finally come together and solve the problems we've talked about all those other
 years in all those other elections.This time can be different than all the rest. This time we can face down those who say our ro
ad is too long; that our climb is too steep; that we can no longer achieve the change that we seek. This is our time to answer th
e call that so many generations of Americans have answered before by insisting that by hard work, and by sacrifice, the American 
Dream will endure. Thank you, and may God Bless the United States of America. Sex on TV 4" Report TOPIC: Domestic Policy November
 9, 2005 Remarks of U.S. Senator Barack Obama "Sex on TV 4" Report Kaiser Family Foundation Washington, DC Complete Text I want t
o start by thanking the Kaiser foundation for the work you've done not only on today's report, but on making these issues of medi
a and family a part of the national conversation.This is a subject many of us come to not as politicians or policy makers, as but
 as parents most of all.Because it's one thing to discuss sex and violence on television within the larger context of the culture
 wars - as a values debate between First Amendment crusaders and those who believe government should decide what we can and canno
t watch - but it's a another thing altogether to be faced with these issues while you're sitting in front of the TV with your chi
ld.I watch with my daughters, Sasha and Malia, and I can tell you that when we're in the middle of a family program and a commerc
ial for Cialis comes on, it's more than troubling to find yourself wondering how you'll explain certain medical conditions that l
ast longer than three hours to a four-year-old and a seven-year-old.From the time they're young, we try to instill in our childre
n a sense of what's right and wrong; a sense of what's important, of what's worth striving for. As best we can, we also try to sh
ield them from the harsher elements of life, and introduce them to the realities of adulthood at the appropriate age.But the conc
ern shared by so many parents today - a concern that frankly hasn't been taken seriously enough by some on the left - is that rai
sing your children this way has become exceedingly difficult in a mass media culture that saturates our airwaves with a steady st
ream of sex, violence, and materialism.Revolutions in information and technology over the last few decades have caused this strea
m to grow exponentially, as we're bombarded at every turn with sounds and images from DVDs, iPods, video games, and websites that
 we can't always control.At the center of it all sits the television, which still consumes the vast majority of our media use - e
ven more so for our children. And as we're spending more free time immersed in this media culture, the amount of questionable con
tent spilling across our screens is growing by the year.Still, it's important for us to realize that the real problem we're facin
g is not simply one of quantity, or even the existence of sex and violence in the media per se.After all, the adult content in Sc
hindler's List is far different from the type on Desperate Housewives, and the violence in Saving Private Ryan is not the same as
 the kind our kids try to imitate in some of the most popular video games.Rather, as your study today demonstrates, the larger co
ncern here is one of message; it's what the media is teaching our kids about what is ok and what is not; about how to treat other
s and how to treat themselves.It's a concern that mass media is contributing to an overall coarsening of our culture.That with al
l the time our children are spending in front of the television, with all the choices they have to see whatever they want wheneve
r they want, the content of their viewing is not enriching their minds, but numbing them; not broadening intellectual curiosity o
r appreciation for the arts, but trivializing the important and desensitizing us to the tragic.It may seem to some that the effec
t on our children has been overstated. But the studies coming in from the NIH and others show that the connection is real. When c
hildren are exposed to sex without consequences, they're more likely to have it.When they are shown the risks and responsibilitie
s that go along with sex, at least one major subgroup - African-American youth - are more likely to abstain. Mindless violence an
d macho aggression on television begets the same behavior in our kids. And when eighty percent of African-American teens in a cit
y like Washington think that they'll be rich and over half think they'll be famous, it hurts to hear them say that the path to su
ccess lies with the hoop dreams and rap careers glorified on television.We don't teach our children that healthy relationships in
volve drunken, naked parties in a hot tub with strangers - but that's what they see when they turn on The Real World. We don't te
ach them to express their anger by seeing how much blood they can draw with a round of ammo - but that's what they learn in the m
ost popular video games. And we don't teach our kids that the height of success is inheriting a family fortune to buy Gucci bags 
without ever working a serious day in your life - but that's how Paris Hilton gets by on The Simple Life. You can say that kids k
now this isn't real, but when they're fed a steady diet of these depictions over and over again from the time they're very young,
 this behavior becomes acceptable - even normal.So what do we do about this? What do we do when bad television becomes the enemy 
of good parenting?We start by turning off the TV altogether. Our children now spend an average of three hours a day in front of t
he television - for African-American children, it's four hours. Two out of every three households have the TV on during meals.Thi
s is too much - period. And so I think it would help if parents start setting down stricter rules on how much TV their kids watch
 and limit their hours. I know this is difficult. At the end of a long day, when Michelle and I are tired, it's easy to just sit 
the kids in front of the television and relax.But I think that as parents, we have an obligation to our children to turn off the 
TV, pick up a book, and read to them more often.Beyond that, when our kids do watch television, we should be watching it with the
m - this means finding programming that everyone can watch as a family and being there to answer any questions it may raise with 
our kids.Now, at a time when both parents are more likely to work longer hours outside the home, this is a lot easier said than d
one. We try to compete with these media messages, but it's nearly impossible to be there every moment our kids are watching telev
ision. And so there's a broader responsibility here.We know that with the pervasiveness of mass media today - the existence of so
 many means of communication that are so easily accessible all over the world - it's very difficult to regulate our way out of th
is problem. And for those of us who value our First Amendment freedoms - who value artistic expression - we wouldn't want to.But 
that doesn't mean we have to accept this coarsening of our culture.Decades ago, when television was still in its infancy, we prov
ided broadcasters free use of the public airwaves, which they were to operate as trustees for the public. And just last week, the
 Senate voted to set a final date for the transition to digital television.Today, we need to make it clear that the free use of t
he public airwaves continues to come with certain specific obligations. But we also need to make it clear that for both broadcast
ers and their competitors there are larger civic obligations to the American public. Obligations to reflect not the basest elemen
ts of American culture, but the profound and the proud.Obligations to seek not just the quick buck or the bottom line, but health
y discussion and debate in the public square of the information age. Obligations to our children; to our families.Today, we have 
far more choice in what we watch than we could have ever imagined - more channels and more programming. As we move further into t
he digital age, the transformation of entertainment will be even more dramatic than the one from stage to screen.And yet, with al
l these new choices for consumers, there has been remarkably little done to give parents the tools and the information necessary 
to make their own informed choices about what their children are watching.This is what the industry must do today. As we move tow
ards a digital environment, there is a golden opportunity for them to do it on their own - to use the latest in technology to giv
e parents more information and more choice.For example, this technology could make it possible for parents to create their own fa
mily tier just by programming their television to block certain channels, block certain genres of programming like dramas, or blo
ck television at certain times of the day. There's no reason the industry can't make it as easy to find family-friendly televisio
n as it is to program TiVo.But if the industry fails to act - if it fails to give parents advanced controls and new choices - Con
gress will.I know that Senator Stevens and Senator Inouye are putting pressure on both broadcasters and cable companies to do a b
etter job fighting indecency, and I'm fully behind their efforts to get the industry to change. I also applaud their announcement
 that they will be convening a summit on these issues with the goal of achieving immediate, meaningful reforms.But I'd like to ou
tline some additional reforms that I think can make a difference for parents today.First, parents should be able to get better in
formation right away - by improving the voluntary rating system we currently have. Right now, our television ratings involve noth
ing more than a tiny box containing some letters and numbers that flashes in the upper left-hand corner of the screen for a few s
econds at the beginning of each program. It's hard to understand and easy to miss. Broadcasters must improve this system to inclu
de a full-screen, detailed rating that gives parents a more precise understanding of exactly what content will be shown in the pr
ogram.They must also ensure that promos for horror movies and ads for the show Las Vegas aren't being shown in the middle of a ca
rtoon or a family sitcom with a more restrictive rating.Beyond simply blocking out negative messages, however, we also know from 
Kaiser's studies that television has the power to promote positive messages that can influence behavior and raise awareness.Publi
c service announcements have actually led to reductions in teen pregnancy, and we should all be proud of the media initiative und
ertaken by the Kaiser Foundation with Viacom, BET, UPN and other networks to eradicate ignorance about HIV and AIDS.There has bee
n a long debate about what obligations broadcasters will have to the public in this new digital age. The FCC took a first step in
 defining these obligations by requiring that broadcasters air children's educational programming on all their digital streams.As
 they continue this process, the FCC must make sure they spell out these obligations before the transition to digital programming
 is complete.When they do this, they need to make sure that broadcasters have a concrete obligation to provide public service ann
ouncements at times when people can actually see them, as well as better coverage of elections. They should donate the public ser
vice time to a third-party like the Ad Council that works with reputable non-profits. If they do not do this, Congress should.In 
addition, we should also fight to prevent any attempt to gut funding or support for the Public Broadcasting System - positive tel
evision with educational messages that generations of children have been raised on.Finally, there's current legislation out there
 that would promote further studies - like this one - which would study the effects of media on the health and development of our
 children. This will provide parents with even more information, it's got bipartisan support in Congress, and I think it's a good
 idea to pursue.In Newton Minow's famous "Vast Wasteland" speech to the National Association of Television Broadcasters, he told 
them that,"It is not enough to cater to the nation's whims - you must also serve the nation's needs."Four decades later, we find 
ourselves immersed in a mass media culture that is at once more vast and more wasteful than ever before. And so once again, we fi
nd ourselves asking those in charge to serve the needs of a nation that has a higher calling than simply peddling indecency and m
aterialism for profit. We don't have to accept what we see today as inevitable. We can all work together to make media a place wh
ere big ideas and great debates are communicated. We owe this much to ourselves, and we certainly owe it to our children. Thank y
ou. Moving Forward in Iraq TOPIC: Iraq November 22, 2005 Moving Forward in Iraq Chicago Council on Foreign Relations Complete Tex
t It is a privilege to give this speech at the Council on Foreign Relations here in Chicago.A few months ago, I had the opportuni
ty to visit Walter Reed Army Medical Center. While I was there, I met a young man whose legs had been blown off from mortar fire 
and who had sustained severe nerve damage in his arms and hands. He was sewing as a means of regaining his small motor skills, an
d as his wife looked on, they talked about their efforts to piece their lives back together. They talked about the wonderful way 
their young daughter had embraced her father and told him she loved him despite his disfigurement.I also met a young man who had 
lost a leg and an arm and who now had a breathing tube in his throat. He was working with two of the therapists in a mock-up kitc
hen to cook hamburgers on his own.We went down to the physical therapy area where I talked to a 19-year-old former track star who
 had lost both his legs and was working out on one of the weight machines. And I spoke to a sergeant from Iowa who had lost one o
f his legs but was working vigorously to get accustomed to his prosthetic leg so he could return to Iraq as soon as he could. I t
hen went up to the wards to visit with other injured veterans - to take pictures, talk about basketball, and to say thank you.Lis
tening to the stories of these young men and women, most of them in their early twenties, I had to ask myself how I would be feel
ing if it were my son, my nephew, or my sister lying there. I asked myself how I would be feeling if it were me struggling to lea
rn how to walk again? Would I feel bitter? Would I feel hopeless?I don't know. None of us can answer that question fully until we
 find ourselves in that situation. What I do know is that the extraordinary men and women that I met seemed uninterested in rage 
or self-pity. They were proud of their service. They were hopeful for their future. They displayed the kind of grit and optimism 
and resourcefulness that represents the very best of America.They remind us, in case we need reminding, that there is no more pro
found decision that we can make than the decision to send this nation's youth to war, and that we have a moral obligation not onl
y to send them for good reasons, but to constantly examine, based on the best information and judgment available, in what manner,
 and for what purpose, and for how long we keep them in harm's way.Today, nearly 160,000 American soldiers, sailors, airmen, and 
marines are risking their lives in the Middle East. They are operating in some of the most dangerous and difficult circumstances 
imaginable. Well over 2,000 men and women have made the ultimate sacrifice - given their full measure of devotion. Thousands more
 have returned with wounds like those that I saw at Walter Reed.These men and women are willing to lay down their lives to protec
t us. When they were told there was danger that needed to be confronted they said, "I will go. I will leave my family and my frie
nds and the life I knew and I will fight." And they went. And they're fighting still.And so as the war rages on and the insurgenc
y festers - as another father weeps over a flag-draped casket and another wife feeds her husband the dinner he can't fix for hims
elf - it is our duty to ask ourselves hard questions. What do we want to accomplish now that we are in Iraq, and what is possible
 to accomplish? What kind of actions can we take to ensure not only a safe and stable Iraq, but that will also preserve our capac
ity to rebuild Afghanistan, isolate and apprehend terrorist cells, preserve our long-term military readiness, and devote the reso
urces needed to shore up our homeland security? What are the costs and benefits of our actions moving forward? What urgency are w
e willing to show to bring our troops home safely? What kind of answers are we willing to demand from those in charge of the war?
In other words -- What kind of debate are we willing to have?Last week, the White House showed exactly what kind of debate it wan
ts on future of Iraq - none.We watched the shameful attempt to paint John Murtha - a Marine Corp recipient of two-purple hearts a
nd a Bronze Star - into a coward of questionable patriotism. We saw the Administration tell people of both parties - people who a
sked legitimate questions about the intelligence that led us to war and the Administration's plan for Iraq - that they should kee
p quiet, end the complaining, and stop rewriting history.This political war - a war of talking points and Sunday news shows and s
pin - is not one I'm interested in joining. It's a divisive approach that only pushes us further from what the American people ac
tually want - a pragmatic solution to the real war we're facing in Iraq.I do want to make the following observations, though. Fir
st, I am part of that post Baby Boom generation that was too young to fight in Vietnam, not called to fight in Desert Storm, too 
old for the current conflict. For those like me who - for whatever reason - have never seen battle, whether they be in the Admini
stration or in Congress, let me suggest that they put the words "coward" and "unpatriotic" out of their vocabulary - at least whe
n it comes to veterans like John Murtha who have put their lives on the line for this country. I noticed that the President recog
nized this bit of wisdom yesterday. I hope others do to.Second - the Administration is correct to say that we have real enemies, 
that our battle against radical Islamist terrorism will not be altered overnight, that stability in the Middle East must be part 
of our strategy to defeat terrorism, that military power is a key part of our national security, that our strategy cannot be poll
 driven. The Administration is also correct when it says that many overestimated Saddam's biological and chemical capacity, and t
hat some of its decisions in going to war were prompted by real errors in the intelligence community's estimates.However, I think
 what is also true is that the Administration launched the Iraq war without giving either Congress or the American people the ful
l story. This is not a partisan claim - you don't have to take my word for it. All you need to do is to match up the Administrati
on's statements during the run-up to the war with the now declassified intelligence estimates that they had in their possession a
t the time. Match them up and you will conclude that at the very least, the Administration shaded, exaggerated and selectively us
ed the intelligence available in order to make the case for invasion.The President told the American people about Iraqi attempts 
to acquire yellow cake during the State of the Union. The Vice-President made statements on national television expressing certai
nty about Iraq's nuclear weapons programs. Secretary Rice used the words "mushroom cloud" over and over again.We know now that ev
en at the time these unequivocal statements were made, intelligence assessments existed that contradicted these claims. Analysis 
from the CIA and State Department was summarily dismissed when it did not help the Administration make the case for war.I say all
 this not to score cheap political points. I say this because war is a serious business. It requires enormous sacrifice, in blood
 and treasure, from the American people. The American people have already lost confidence in the credibility of our leadership, n
ot just on the question of Iraq, but across the board. According to a recent Pew survey, 42% of Americans agree with the statemen
t that the U.S. should "mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own" -
 a significant increase since the immediate aftermath of 9/11. We risk a further increase in isolationist sentiment unless both t
he Administration and Congress can restore the American people's confidence that our foreign policy is driven by facts and reason
, rather than hopes and ideology. And we cannot afford isolationism - not only because our work with respect to stabilizing Iraq 
is not complete, but because our missteps in Iraq have distracted us from the larger threat of terrorism that we face, a threat t
hat we can only meet by working internationally, in cooperation with other countries.Now, given the enormous stakes in Iraq, I be
lieve that those of us who are involved in shaping our national security policies should do what we believe is right, not merely 
what is politically expedient. I strongly opposed this war before it began, though many disagreed with me at that time. Today, as
 Americans grow increasingly impatient with our presence in Iraq, voices I respect are calling for a rapid withdrawal of our troo
ps, regardless of events on the ground.But I believe that, having waged a war that has unleashed daily carnage and uncertainty in
 Iraq, we have to manage our exit in a responsible way - with the hope of leaving a stable foundation for the future, but at the 
very least taking care not to plunge the country into an even deeper and, perhaps, irreparable crisis. I say this not only becaus
e we owe it to the Iraqi people, but because the Administration's actions in Iraq have created a self-fulfilling prophecy - a vol
atile hotbed of terrorism that has already begun to spill over into countries like Jordan, and that could embroil the region, and
 this country, in even greater international conflict.In sum, we have to focus, methodically and without partisanship, on those s
teps that will: one, stabilize Iraq, avoid all out civil war, and give the factions within Iraq the space they need to forge a po
litical settlement; two, contain and ultimately extinquish the insurgency in Iraq; and three, bring our troops safely home.Last w
eek's re-politicization of the war makes this kind of focus extremely difficult. In true Washington fashion, the Administration h
as narrowed an entire debate about war into two camps: "cut-and-run" or "stay the course." If you offer any criticism or even men
tion that we should take a second look at our strategy and change our approach, you're branded cut-and-run. If you're ready to bl
indly trust the Administration no matter what they do, you're willing to stay the course.A variation on this is the notion that a
nything short of an open-ended commitment to maintain our current troop strength in Iraq is the equivalent of issuing a "timetabl
e" that will, according to the Administration, undermine our troops and strengthen the insurgency. . This simplistic framework no
t only misstates the position of thoughtful critics on both sides of the aisle - from Republican Senator Chuck Hagel to Democrat 
Russ Feingold. It completely misses where the American people are right now.Every American wants to see a peaceful and stable Ira
q. No American wants to leave behind a security vacuum filled with terrorism, chaos, ethnic cleansing and genocide. But no Americ
an wants a war without end - a war where our goals and strategies drift aimlessly regardless of the cost in lives or dollars spen
t, and where we end up with arbitrary, poll-driven troop reductions by the Administration - the worst of all possible outcomes.It
 has been two years and seven months since the fall of Baghdad and any honest assessment would conclude that the Administration's
 strategy has not worked. The civilian efforts to rebuild Iraq, establish a secure environment, and broker a stable political fra
mework have, thus far, come up short.The Administration owes the American people a reality-based assessment of the situation in I
raq today. For the past two years, they've measured progress in the number of insurgents killed, roads built, or voters registere
d. But these benchmarks are not true measures of fundamental security and stability in Iraq.When the Administration now talks abo
ut "condition-based" withdrawal, we need to know precisely what those conditions are.This is why the amendment offered by Senator
 Levin and the one that passed from Senator Warner are so important. What the Administration and some in the press labeled as a "
timetable" for withdrawal was in fact a commonsense statement that: one, 2006 should be the year that the Iraqi government decrea
ses its dependency on the United States; two, that the various Iraqi factions must arrive at a fair political accommodation to de
feat the insurgency; and three, the Administration must make available to Congress critical information on reality-based benchmar
ks that will help us succeed in Iraq.We need to know whether the Iraqis are making the compromises necessary to achieve the broad
-based and sustainable political settlement essential for defeating the insurgency.We need to know how many Iraqi security forces
 and police and the level of skill they will require to permit them to take the lead in counter-insurgency operations, the defens
e of Iraq's territory, and maintaining law and order throughout the country.We need to get accurate information regarding how man
y Iraqi troops are currently prepared for the transition of security responsibilities, and a realistic assessment of the U.S. res
ources and time it will take to make them more prepared.And, we need to know the Administration's strategy to restore basic servi
ces, strengthen the capacities of ministries throughout the country, and enlist local, regional, and international actors in find
ing solutions to political, economic, and security problems.Straight answers to critical questions - for the most part, that is w
hat both the Levin Amendment and the Warner Amendment call for. Members of both parties and the American people have now made cle
ar that it is not enough to for the President to simply say "we know best" and "stay the course."As I have said before, there are
 no magic bullets for a good outcome in Iraq. I am not the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of State, or the 
Director of National Intelligence. I have neither the expertise nor the inclination to micro-manage war from Washington.Neverthel
ess, given the best information I have, and in an effort to offer constructive ideas, I would suggest several broad elements that
 should be included in any discussion of where we go from here. I should add that some of these ideas have been put forward in gr
eater detail by other senators and foreign policy experts - I claim no pride of authorship, but rather offer my best assessment o
f the steps we need to take to maximize the prospects for success.First and foremost, after the December 15 elections and during 
the course of next year, we need to focus our attention on how reduce the U.S. military footprint in Iraq. Notice that I say "red
uce," and not "fully withdraw."This course of action will help to focus our efforts on a more effective counter-insurgency strate
gy and take steam out of the insurgency.On this point, I am in basic agreement with our top military commander in Iraq. In testim
ony before Congress earlier this year, General Casey stated that a key goal of the military was to "reduce our presence in Iraq, 
taking away one of the elements that fuels the insurgency: that of the coalition forces as an occupying force."This is not and sh
ould not be a partisan issue. It is a view shared by Senator Chuck Hagel, a decorated Vietnam veteran, and someone with whom I am
 proud to serve on the Foreign Relations Committee.I believe that U.S. forces are still a part of the solution in Iraq. The strat
egic goals should be to allow for a limited drawdown of U.S. troops, coupled with a shift to a more effective counter-insurgency 
strategy that puts the Iraqi security forces in the lead and intensifies our efforts to train Iraqi forces.At the same time, suff
icient numbers of U.S. troops should be left in place to prevent Iraq from exploding into civil war, ethnic cleansing, and a have
n for terrorism.We must find the right balance - offering enough security to serve as a buffer and carry out a targeted, effectiv
e counter-insurgency strategy, but not so much of a presence that we serve as an aggravation. It is this balance that will be cri
tical to finding our way forward.Second, we need not a time-table, in the sense of a precise date for U.S. troop pull-outs, but a
 time-frame for such a phased withdrawal. More specifically, we need to be very clear about key issues, such as bases and the lev
el of troops in Iraq. We need to say that there will be no bases in Iraq a decade from now and the United States armed forces can
not stand-up and support an Iraqi government in perpetuity - pushing the Iraqis to take ownership over the situation and placing 
pressure on various factions to reach the broad based political settlement that is so essential to defeating the insurgency.I agr
ee with Senator Warner that the message should be "we really mean business, Iraqis, get on with it." Without a time-frame, this m
essage will not be sent.With the Shiites increasingly in control of the government, the U.S. is viewed as the military force that
 is keeping the Shiites in power, picking sides in the conflict, driving a wedge between the factions, and keeping the Sunnis out
 of the government.Wrong as these perceptions may be, they are one of the key elements unifying the insurgency and serving as its
 best recruiting slogan.We need to immediately recognize and address this problem.On October 25, Ambassador Khailizad stated that
 he believes that the United States is on the right track to start significant reductions of U.S. military forces in the coming y
ear. Earlier in the year, when I pressed Ambassador Khalizad on this during his confirmation hearing to be more specific about a 
time-frame for withdrawal, he said that there would not be a U.S. presence in Iraq a decade from now. That's at a start - but I t
hink we need to be clearer than somewhere between one and ten years.Third, we need to start thinking about what an Iraqi governme
nt will look like in the near term.The post-election period will be critically important in working with the Shia and Kurdish lea
ders to help address Sunni concerns and to take steps to bring them into the government.In testimony before Congress, Secretary R
ice stated that while she believed it was possible to create a multi-ethnic, democratic Iraq under a unified national government,
 it was also possible that, in the near term, Iraq may look more like a loose federation and less like a tightly-knit, multi-ethn
ic society. According to the deal struck in the writing of the Constitution, the structure of the national government may still b
e altered by discussion among the three major factions. If it is the Administration's most realistic assessment that the Iraqi go
vernment will take the form of a loose confederation, then we need to be thinking about how we should calibrate our policies to r
eflect this reality. We cannot, and should not, foist our own vision of democracy on the Iraqis, and then expect our troops to ho
ld together such a vision militarily.Fourth, we have to do a much better job on reconstruction in Iraq.The Iraqi people wonder wh
y the United States has been unable to restore basic services - sewage, power, infrastructure - to significant portions of Iraq. 
This has caused a loss of faith among the Iraqi people in our efforts to rebuild that nation and help it recover from decades of 
brutal tyranny.The Administration tells us there can not be reconstruction without security, but many Iraqis make the opposite ar
gument. They say Iraq will never be secure until there is reconstruction and citizens see that a better future awaits them.The Ad
ministration also tells us that they are making progress, but can not publicize the specific successes out of security concerns.I
f we are unable to point out the progress, how are Iraqis - especially ones we are trying to persuade to claim a bigger stake in 
the future of their country - ever to know that the Americans efforts are helping to make their lives better? How does this appro
ach help to quell the insurgency?We need to break this cycle. We have to get more Iraqis involved with the reconstruction efforts
. After all, it is the Iraqis who best know their country and have the greatest stake in restoring basic services.We need to work
 with the best and brightest Iraqis, inside and outside of government to come up with a plan to get the power back on in Baghdad 
and help to restore the faith of the Iraqi people in our important mission in Iraq.Fifth, we have to launch a major diplomatic ef
fort to get the international community, especially key neighboring states and Arab nations, more involved in Iraq. If one looks 
at the Balkans - our most recent attempt to rebuild war torn nations - the international community, from the European Union to NA
TO to the United Nations, were all deeply involved. These organizations, driven largely by European countries in the region, prov
ided legitimacy, helped with burden-sharing, and were an essential part of our exit strategy. Ten years later, conditions are not
 perfect, but the blood-shed has been stopped, and the region is no longer destabilizing the European Continent. And so a part of
 any strategy in Iraq must more deeply integrate Iraq's neighbors, international organizations, and regional powers around the wo
rld.Finally, it is critical for this Administration, and Congress, to recognize that despite the enormous stakes the United State
s now has in seeing Iraq succeed, we cannot let this mission distract us from the larger front of international terrorism that re
mains to be addressed. Already we are getting reports that the situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating. Our progress in improvi
ng our intelligence capabilities - particularly human intelligence - has lagged. Iraq has absorbed resources that could have gone
 into critical homeland security measures, or in improved coordination with our global allies and partners. At the outset of this
 war, I challenged the Administration's assertion that deposing Saddam Hussein was the central measure in our war on terrorism. A
nd although I believe we must stabilize Iraq, I continue to believe that the Administration's tendency to equate the military def
eat of the Iraqi insurgency with the defeat of international terrorism is dangerously short-sighted.Long the before the war in Ir
aq, international terrorism posed a grave security threat to the United States. Well over two years after the start of the Iraq w
ar, these threats to our way of life remain every bit as serious. Some have argued that these threats have grown. The Administrat
ion has to be capable of finding a solution in Iraq and strengthening our efforts to combat international terrorism.In the end, I
raq is not about one person's legacy, a political campaign, or rigid adherence to an ideology.What is happening in Iraq is about 
the security of the United States. It is about our men and women in uniform. It is about the future of the Middle East. It is abo
ut the world in which our children will live.Responsible voices from all parts of the political spectrum are coming forth to say 
this in increasing numbers.Colin Powell had the courage to call his presentation to the United Nations on Iraq a "blot" on his di
stinguished record. And recently John Edwards said he made a mistake in voting to go to war in Iraq, and accepted responsibility 
for this decision.It is no coincidence that both Mr. Edwards and Mr. Powell no longer serve the government in Washington. Those o
f us in Washington are falling behind the debate that is taking place across America on Iraq. We are failing to provide leadershi
p on this issue.Iraq was a major issue in last year's election.But that election is now over.We need to stop the campaign.The Pre
sident could take the politics out of Iraq once and for all if he would simply go on television and say to the American people "Y
es, we made mistakes. Yes, there are things I would have done differently. But now that we're here, I am willing to work with bot
h Republicans and Democrats to find the most responsible way out."Nearly four decades ago, John F. Kennedy took responsibility fo
r the Bay of Pigs Invasion. He admitted that mistakes had been made. He didn't spend a good deal of time publicly blaming the pre
vious Administration, or the other party, or his critics. And through these decisive actions, he earned the respect of the Americ
an people and the world - respect that allowed his diplomacy to be trusted a few years later during the Cuban Missile Crisis.Amer
icans everywhere are crying out for this kind of leadership today. They want to find pragmatic solutions to the difficult and com
plicated situation in Iraq. They want to move forward on of the greatest foreign policy challenges that this nation has faced in 
a generation. And they want to get it right for every American son and daughter who's been willing to put their lives on the line
 to defend the country they love. It's time for us in Washington to offer the rest of the country this leadership. Thank you. Mar
ch 4th Primary Night Texas and Ohio San Antonio, TX March 4, 2008 Well, we are in the middle of a very close race right now in Te
xas, and we may not even know the final results until morning. We do know that Senator Clinton has won Rhode Island, and while th
ere are a lot of votes to be counted in Ohio, it looks like she did well there too, and so we congratulate her on those states. W
e also know that we have won the state of Vermont. And we know this - no matter what happens tonight, we have nearly the same del
egate lead as we did this morning, and we are on our way to winning this nomination.You know, decades ago, as a community organiz
er, I learned that the real work of democracy begins far from the closed doors and marbled halls of Washington.It begins on stree
t corners and front porches; in living rooms and meeting halls with ordinary Americans who see the world as it is and realize tha
t we have it within our power to remake the world as it should be.It is with that hope that we began this unlikely journey - the 
hope that if we could go block by block, city by city, state by state and build a movement that spanned race and region; party an
d gender; if we could give young people a reason to vote and the young at heart a reason to believe again; if we could inspire a 
nation to come together again, then we could turn the page on the politics that's shut us out, let us down, and told us to settle
. We could write a new chapter in the American story.We were told this wasn't possible. We were told the climb was too steep. We 
were told our country was too cynical - that we were just being nave; that we couldn't really change the world as it is.But then 
a few people in Iowa stood up to say, "Yes we can." And then a few more of you stood up from the hills of New Hampshire to the co
ast of South Carolina. And then a few million of you stood up from Savannah to Seattle; from Boise to Baton Rouge. And tonight, b
ecause of you - because of a movement you built that stretches from Vermont's Green Mountains to the streets of San Antonio, we c
an stand up with confidence and clarity to say that we are turning the page, and we are ready to write the next great chapter in 
America's story.In the coming weeks, we will begin a great debate about the future of this country with a man who has served it b
ravely and loves it dearly. And tonight, I called John McCain and congratulated him on winning the Republican nomination.But in t
his election, we will offer two very different visions of the America we see in the twenty-first century. Because John McCain may
 claim long history of straight talk and independent-thinking, and I respect that. But in this campaign, he's fallen in line behi
nd the very same policies that have ill-served America. He has seen where George Bush has taken our country, and he promises to k
eep us on the very same course.It's the same course that threatens a century of war in Iraq - a third and fourth and fifth tour o
f duty for brave troops who've done all we've asked them to, even while we ask little and expect nothing of the Iraqi government 
whose job it is to put their country back together. A course where we spend billions of dollars a week that could be used to rebu
ild our roads and our schools; to care for our veterans and send our children to college.It's the same course that continues to d
ivide and isolate America from the world by substituting bluster and bullying for direct diplomacy - by ignoring our allies and r
efusing to talk to our enemies even though Presidents from Kennedy to Reagan have done just that; because strong countries and st
rong leaders aren't afraid to tell hard truths to petty dictators.And it's the same course that offers the same tired answer to w
orkers without health care and families without homes; to students in debt and children who go to bed hungry in the richest natio
n on Earth - four more years of tax breaks for the biggest corporations and the wealthiest few who don't need them and aren't eve
n asking for them. It's a course that further divides Wall Street from Main Street; where struggling families are told to pull th
emselves up by their bootstraps because there's nothing government can do or should do - and so we should give more to those with
 the most and let the chips fall where they may.Well we are here tonight to say that this is not the America we believe in and th
is is not the future we want. We want a new course for this country. We want new leadership in Washington. We want change in Amer
ica.John McCain and Senator Clinton echo each other in dismissing this call for change. They say it is eloquent but empty; speech
es and not solutions. And yet, they should know that it's a call that did not begin with my words. It began with words that were 
spoken on the floors of factories in Ohio and across the deep plains of Texas; words that came from classrooms in South Carolina 
and living rooms in the state of Iowa; from first-time voters and life-long cynics; from Democrats and Republicans alike.They sho
uld know that there's nothing empty about the call for affordable health care that came from the young student who told me she ge
ts three hours of sleep because she works the night shift after a full day of college and still can't pay her sister's medical bi
lls.There's nothing empty about the call for help that came from the mother in San Antonio who saw her mortgage double in two wee
ks and didn't know where her two-year olds would sleep at night when they were kicked out of their home.There's nothing empty abo
ut the call for change that came from the elderly woman who wants it so badly that she sent me an envelope with a money order for
 $3.01 and a simple verse of scripture tucked inside.These Americans know that government cannot solve all of our problems, and t
hey don't expect it to. Americans know that we have to work harder and study more to compete in a global economy. We know that we
 need to take responsibility for ourselves and our children - that we need to spend more time with them, and teach them well, and
 put a book in their hands instead of a video game once in awhile. We know this.But we also believe that there is a larger respon
sibility we have to one another as Americans.We believe that we rise or fall as one nation - as one people. That we are our broth
er's keeper. That we are our sister's keeper.We believe that a child born tonight should have the same chances whether she arrive
s in the barrios of San Antonio or the suburbs of St. Louis; on the streets of Chicago or the hills of Appalachia.We believe that
 when she goes to school for the first time, it should be in a place where the rats don't outnumber the computers; that when she 
applies to college, cost is no barrier to a degree that will allow her to compete with children in China or India for the jobs of
 the twenty-first century.We believe that these jobs should provide wages that can raise her family, health care for when she get
s sick and a pension for when she retires.We believe that when she tucks her own children into bed, she should feel safe knowing 
that they are protected from the threats we face by the bravest, best-equipped, military in the world, led by a Commander-in-Chie
f who has the judgment to know when to send them into battle and which battlefield to fight on.And if that child should ever get 
the chance to travel the world, and someone should ask her where she is from, we believe that she should always be able to hold h
er head high with pride in her voice when she answers "I am an American."That is the course we seek. That is the change we are ca
lling for. You can call it many things, but you cannot call it empty.If I am the nominee of this party, I will not allow us to be
 distracted by the same politics that seeks to divide us with false charges and meaningless labels. In this campaign, we will not
 stand for the politics that uses religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon.I owe what I am to this country I love, and I
 will never forget it. Where else could a young man who grew up herding goats in Kenya get the chance to fulfill his dream of a c
ollege education? Where else could he marry a white girl from Kansas whose parents survived war and depression to find opportunit
y out west? Where else could they have a child who would one day have the chance to run for the highest office in the greatest na
tion the world has ever known? Where else, but in the United States of America?It is now my hope and our task to set this country
 on a course that will keep this promise alive in the twenty-first century. And the eyes of the world are watching to see if we c
an.There is a young man on my campaign whose grandfather lives in Uganda. He is 81 years old and has never experienced true democ
racy in his lifetime. During the reign of Idi Amin, he was literally hunted and the only reason he escaped was thanks to the kind
ness of others and a few good-sized trunks. And on the night of the Iowa caucuses, that 81-year-old man stayed up until five in t
he morning, huddled by his television, waiting for the results.The world is watching what we do here. The world is paying attenti
on to how we conduct ourselves. What will we they see? What will we tell them? What will we show them?Can we come together across
 party and region; race and religion to restore prosperity and opportunity as the birthright of every American?Can we lead the co
mmunity of nations in taking on the common threats of the 21st century - terrorism and climate change; genocide and disease?Can w
e send a message to all those weary travelers beyond our shores who long to be free from fear and want that the United States of 
America is, and always will be, the last best, hope of Earth?We say; we hope; we believe - yes we can. SPEECH HIGHLIGHTPresidenta
l Annoucement February 10 2007 TOPIC: Our Past, Future & Vision for America February 10, 2007 Obama Presidential Announcement Spr
ingfield, Illinois Complete Text Let me begin by saying thanks to all you who've traveled, from far and wide, to brave the cold t
oday. We all made this journey for a reason. It's humbling, but in my heart I know you didn't come here just for me, you came her
e because you believe in what this country can be. In the face of war, you believe there can be peace. In the face of despair, yo
u believe there can be hope. In the face of a politics that's shut you out, that's told you to settle, that's divided us for too 
long, you believe we can be one people, reaching for what's possible, building that more perfect union. That's the journey we're 
on today. But let me tell you how I came to be here. As most of you know, I am not a native of this great state. I moved to Illin
ois over two decades ago. I was a young man then, just a year out of college; I knew no one in Chicago, was without money or fami
ly connections. But a group of churches had offered me a job as a community organizer for $13,000 a year. And I accepted the job,
 sight unseen, motivated then by a single, simple, powerful idea - that I might play a small part in building a better America. M
y work took me to some of Chicago's poorest neighborhoods. I joined with pastors and lay-people to deal with communities that had
 been ravaged by plant closings. I saw that the problems people faced weren't simply local in nature - that the decision to close
 a steel mill was made by distant executives; that the lack of textbooks and computers in schools could be traced to the skewed p
riorities of politicians a thousand miles away; and that when a child turns to violence, there's a hole in his heart no governmen
t could ever fill. It was in these neighborhoods that I received the best education I ever had, and where I learned the true mean
ing of my Christian faith. After three years of this work, I went to law school, because I wanted to understand how the law shoul
d work for those in need. I became a civil rights lawyer, and taught constitutional law, and after a time, I came to understand t
hat our cherished rights of liberty and equality depend on the active participation of an awakened electorate. It was with these 
ideas in mind that I arrived in this capital city as a state Senator. It was here, in Springfield, where I saw all that is Americ
a converge - farmers and teachers, businessmen and laborers, all of them with a story to tell, all of them seeking a seat at the 
table, all of them clamoring to be heard. I made lasting friendships here - friends that I see in the audience today. It was here
 we learned to disagree without being disagreeable - that it's possible to compromise so long as you know those principles that c
an never be compromised; and that so long as we're willing to listen to each other, we can assume the best in people instead of t
he worst. That's why we were able to reform a death penalty system that was broken. That's why we were able to give health insura
nce to children in need. That's why we made the tax system more fair and just for working families, and that's why we passed ethi
cs reforms that the cynics said could never, ever be passed. It was here, in Springfield, where North, South, East and West come 
together that I was reminded of the essential decency of the American people - where I came to believe that through this decency,
 we can build a more hopeful America. And that is why, in the shadow of the Old State Capitol, where Lincoln once called on a div
ided house to stand together, where common hopes and common dreams still, I stand before you today to announce my candidacy for P
resident of the United States. I recognize there is a certain presumptuousness - a certain audacity - to this announcement. I kno
w I haven't spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington. But I've been there long enough to know that the ways of Washing
ton must change. The genius of our founders is that they designed a system of government that can be changed. And we should take 
heart, because we've changed this country before. In the face of tyranny, a band of patriots brought an Empire to its knees. In t
he face of secession, we unified a nation and set the captives free. In the face of Depression, we put people back to work and li
fted millions out of poverty. We welcomed immigrants to our shores, we opened railroads to the west, we landed a man on the moon,
 and we heard a King's call to let justice roll down like water, and righteousness like a mighty stream. Each and every time, a n
ew generation has risen up and done what's needed to be done. Today we are called once more - and it is time for our generation t
o answer that call. For that is our unyielding faith - that in the face of impossible odds, people who love their country can cha
nge it. That's what Abraham Lincoln understood. He had his doubts. He had his defeats. He had his setbacks. But through his will 
and his words, he moved a nation and helped free a people. It is because of the millions who rallied to his cause that we are no 
longer divided, North and South, slave and free. It is because men and women of every race, from every walk of life, continued to
 march for freedom long after Lincoln was laid to rest, that today we have the chance to face the challenges of this millennium t
ogether, as one people - as Americans. All of us know what those challenges are today - a war with no end, a dependence on oil th
at threatens our future, schools where too many children aren't learning, and families struggling paycheck to paycheck despite wo
rking as hard as they can. We know the challenges. We've heard them. We've talked about them for years. What's stopped us from me
eting these challenges is not the absence of sound policies and sensible plans. What's stopped us is the failure of leadership, t
he smallness of our politics - the ease with which we're distracted by the petty and trivial, our chronic avoidance of tough deci
sions, our preference for scoring cheap political points instead of rolling up our sleeves and building a working consensus to ta
ckle big problems. For the last six years we've been told that our mounting debts don't matter, we've been told that the anxiety 
Americans feel about rising health care costs and stagnant wages are an illusion, we've been told that climate change is a hoax, 
and that tough talk and an ill-conceived war can replace diplomacy, and strategy, and foresight. And when all else fails, when Ka
trina happens, or the death toll in Iraq mounts, we've been told that our crises are somebody else's fault. We're distracted from
 our real failures, and told to blame the other party, or gay people, or immigrants. And as people have looked away in disillusio
nment and frustration, we know what's filled the void. The cynics, and the lobbyists, and the special interests who've turned our
 government into a game only they can afford to play. They write the checks and you get stuck with the bills, they get the access
 while you get to write a letter, they think they own this government, but we're here today to take it back. The time for that po
litics is over. It's time to turn the page. We've made some progress already. I was proud to help lead the fight in Congress that
 led to the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate. But Washington has a long way to go. And it won't be easy. That's why we
'll have to set priorities. We'll have to make hard choices. And although government will play a crucial role in bringing about t
he changes we need, more money and programs alone will not get us where we need to go. Each of us, in our own lives, will have to
 accept responsibility - for instilling an ethic of achievement in our children, for adapting to a more competitive economy, for 
strengthening our communities, and sharing some measure of sacrifice. So let us begin. Let us begin this hard work together. Let 
us transform this nation. Let us be the generation that reshapes our economy to compete in the digital age. Let's set high standa
rds for our schools and give them the resources they need to succeed. Let's recruit a new army of teachers, and give them better 
pay and more support in exchange for more accountability. Let's make college more affordable, and let's invest in scientific rese
arch, and let's lay down broadband lines through the heart of inner cities and rural towns all across America. And as our economy
 changes, let's be the generation that ensures our nation's workers are sharing in our prosperity. Let's protect the hard-earned 
benefits their companies have promised. Let's make it possible for hardworking Americans to save for retirement. And let's allow 
our unions and their organizers to lift up this country's middle-class again. Let's be the generation that ends poverty in Americ
a. Every single person willing to work should be able to get job training that leads to a job, and earn a living wage that can pa
y the bills, and afford child care so their kids have a safe place to go when they work. Let's do this. Let's be the generation t
hat finally tackles our health care crisis. We can control costs by focusing on prevention, by providing better treatment to the 
chronically ill, and using technology to cut the bureaucracy. Let's be the generation that says right here, right now, that we wi
ll have universal health care in America by the end of the next president's first term. Let's be the generation that finally free
s America from the tyranny of oil. We can harness homegrown, alternative fuels like ethanol and spur the production of more fuel-
efficient cars. We can set up a system for capping greenhouse gases. We can turn this crisis of global warming into a moment of o
pportunity for innovation, and job creation, and an incentive for businesses that will serve as a model for the world. Let's be t
he generation that makes future generations proud of what we did here. Most of all, let's be the generation that never forgets wh
at happened on that September day and confront the terrorists with everything we've got. Politics doesn't have to divide us on th
is anymore - we can work together to keep our country safe. I've worked with Republican Senator Dick Lugar to pass a law that wil
l secure and destroy some of the world's deadliest, unguarded weapons. We can work together to track terrorists down with a stron
ger military, we can tighten the net around their finances, and we can improve our intelligence capabilities. But let us also und
erstand that ultimate victory against our enemies will come only by rebuilding our alliances and exporting those ideals that brin
g hope and opportunity to millions around the globe. But all of this cannot come to pass until we bring an end to this war in Ira
q. Most of you know I opposed this war from the start. I thought it was a tragic mistake. Today we grieve for the families who ha
ve lost loved ones, the hearts that have been broken, and the young lives that could have been. America, it's time to start bring
ing our troops home. It's time to admit that no amount of American lives can resolve the political disagreement that lies at the 
heart of someone else's civil war. That's why I have a plan that will bring our combat troops home by March of 2008. Letting the 
Iraqis know that we will not be there forever is our last, best hope to pressure the Sunni and Shia to come to the table and find
 peace. Finally, there is one other thing that is not too late to get right about this war - and that is the homecoming of the me
n and women - our veterans - who have sacrificed the most. Let us honor their valor by providing the care they need and rebuildin
g the military they love. Let us be the generation that begins this work. I know there are those who don't believe we can do all 
these things. I understand the skepticism. After all, every four years, candidates from both parties make similar promises, and I
 expect this year will be no different. All of us running for president will travel around the country offering ten-point plans a
nd making grand speeches; all of us will trumpet those qualities we believe make us uniquely qualified to lead the country. But t
oo many times, after the election is over, and the confetti is swept away, all those promises fade from memory, and the lobbyists
 and the special interests move in, and people turn away, disappointed as before, left to struggle on their own. That is why this
 campaign can't only be about me. It must be about us - it must be about what we can do together. This campaign must be the occas
ion, the vehicle, of your hopes, and your dreams. It will take your time, your energy, and your advice - to push us forward when 
we're doing right, and to let us know when we're not. This campaign has to be about reclaiming the meaning of citizenship, restor
ing our sense of common purpose, and realizing that few obstacles can withstand the power of millions of voices calling for chang
e.By ourselves, this change will not happen. Divided, we are bound to fail. But the life of a tall, gangly, self-made Springfield
 lawyer tells us that a different future is possible. He tells us that there is power in words.He tells us that there is power in
 conviction.That beneath all the differences of race and region, faith and station, we are one people. He tells us that there is 
power in hope.As Lincoln organized the forces arrayed against slavery, he was heard to say: "Of strange, discordant, and even hos
tile elements, we gathered from the four winds, and formed and fought to battle through." That is our purpose here today.That's w
hy I'm in this race.Not just to hold an office, but to gather with you to transform a nation. I want to win that next battle - fo
r justice and opportunity. I want to win that next battle - for better schools, and better jobs, and health care for all. I want 
us to take up the unfinished business of perfecting our union, and building a better America. And if you will join me in this imp
robable quest, if you feel destiny calling, and see as I see, a future of endless possibility stretching before us; if you sense,
 as I sense, that the time is now to shake off our slumber, and slough off our fear, and make good on the debt we owe past and fu
ture generations, then I'm ready to take up the cause, and march with you, and work with you. Together, starting today, let us fi
nish the work that needs to be done, and usher in a new birth of freedom on this Earth. SIUC COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE 50TH ANNIVERS
ARY TOPIC: Oil & Alternative Fuels Saturday, April 23, 2005 SIUC College of Agriculture's 50th Anniversary Full Text of Barack Ob
amas Speech Thank you. It's always great to be here in Carbondale, and a real honor to speak here at SIUC's first Agriculture Ind
ustry Day.Now, I'll be honest - I haven't done all that much farming living on the South Side of Chicago. But I have to say, my f
ondest farming memory is when I once offered to help out a friend with his harvest. Knowing the full range of my agricultural exp
erience and expertise, he took one look at me and said..."no thanks."So when I saw that you guys needed a keynote speaker for a l
ecture entitled, "Growing the Food, Agriculture, and Natural Resource Economy in Southern Illinois," I said "sign me up."But seri
ously, while I don't farm, what I did do during my eight years in the Illinois State Senate, and what I'm doing now as a Senator 
in Washington, is to constantly listen and learn from people who do farm and who do know the business. And that has helped me tre
mendously in figuring out how I can best stand up and speak out on the issues that matter to family farmers and to the future of 
agriculture in this country.Thanks to all the hard work you're doing here at SIU, that future holds more promise and more potenti
al for America with each passing day. Because in a world where globalization has made it possible for a student in Carbondale to 
share ideas with one in Calcutta, yet necessary for them to compete for the same jobs, the advances you're making in agriculture 
could lead to the breakthroughs we need to maintain America's global leadership in the years to come.This is our new challenge fo
r the new century - and it's different than anything we've ever faced before.Just think about what the world was like only fifty 
years ago, when the College of Agriculture was a small, five-man department that taught its students in a few old army barracks. 
Back then, the big challenge was navigating the soils found in the hills and valleys of southern Illinois. If you could master th
at, you were ready to graduate and live the farming life, knowing that it would be enough to provide for you and your family.And 
even if you didn't go to a fine school like SIU, in those days you still had a shot at the American Dream. Because whether it was
 on the farm or in a factory, a middle-class job that paid a decent wage and good benefits was easy to come by - and it would pro
bably last you a lifetime. Hard work and sacrifice paid off for most families, and because of the wealth they built, America's ec
onomic leadership was unchallenged.But the world has certainly changed since then, hasn't it?Today, even a college degree doesn't
 guarantee a middle-class job that will support a family. What's worse, the cost of getting that degree and the price of health c
are on that job are rising higher and faster than ever before. Family farmers are being squeezed by big agribusiness, and factory
 jobs are heading across the ocean where labor is cheap.We can make sure that the new jobs and new industries that take their pla
ce stay in America - but it won't happen by itself. Countries like India and China are churning out more and more qualified colle
ge graduates who can compete directly with Americans for jobs that can now be done anywhere in the world. If we want to stay on t
op, we'll need a nationwide commitment to better education, better training, and the research and discovery that have always made
 America a land of innovation and optimism.This is where you guys come in.The title of this lecture - "Growing the Food, Agricult
ure, and Natural Resource Economy in Southern Illinois" - is really too narrow to capture the full potential of the work you're d
oing here at the College of Agriculture. Fifty years ago, it may have only been about the economy in southern Illinois. Fifty yea
rs ago, the work you're doing may not have had an impact beyond the farms and borders of a small town like Carbondale.But today w
e live in a different world.Today, a discovery made right here in your Food and Nutrition department could save a person from a l
ifetime of diabetes in southern California. An SIU student who publishes a paper online about the benefits of soy in preventing p
rostate cancer could attract the attention of a researcher in Boston who's working on a cure. And a professor who makes a breakth
rough in developing drought-resistant crops could save millions from hunger in Africa.Today, the work you're doing here not only 
has the potential to improve the lives of people in Illinois and across the world; it offers the opportunity to develop new ideas
 that will lead to new jobs and a new competitive edge for America in the 21st century. This is the way we can win in the global 
economy, and here at this school in this Illinois small town, you're helping us get there.Right now, researchers at this college 
are studying ways to improve the production and efficiency of ethanol. Again, this may sound small, but just imagine what this co
uld do for our country.Any of you who've pulled into a gas station lately have noticed how high the prices are getting. You might
 have decided to drive your car less, or you might have noticed that the cost of gas is cutting into your family budget. The pric
e of oil has now climbed to a record of over $50 a barrel, and we don't even know how much worse it's going to get.So what do we 
do about this?We only have 3% of the world's oil reserves - 65% of our oil is imported from the Middle East. So unless we want to
 stay dependent forever on a region of the world that's dangerous, politically unstable, and willing to do lord-knows-what with t
he price of oil, we must find new sources of energy here in America.It seems like politicians have been saying this forever. But 
when you look at the record gas prices, and the possibility for more war and turmoil in the Middle East, it's clear that we need 
less talk and more action.We can start by producing more ethanol in America.The future of energy in this country doesn't have to 
remain in the deserts of the Middle East; we can find it in the corn fields of Illinois and across the Midwest.Imagine running ou
r cars with a fuel we can literally grow as much as we want of. Imagine using a fuel that's clean and healthy, that's selling for
 50 cents cheaper than gasoline, and that places America's energy needs in America's hands.This kind of future is here - but to e
xpand ethanol's promise across the nation, you guys need to keep up the great research here and we need to step up the legislativ
e process in Washington.Recently, I joined a few other Senators in introducing a bill that would increase America's renewable fue
l standard and increase ethanol production along with it. A bill like this that's already passed the Senate twice would've provid
ed us with 500,000 barrels a day of refined ethanol for use in gasoline and would save us $4 billion every year in imported oil a
nd gasoline costs.Just think of what this would do for our economy. Farmers would earn more for their corn, businesses would inve
st more in the type of community-sized ethanol facilities that would grow the downstate economy, and over 200,000 jobs would be c
reated. We've got bipartisan support for this bill, so I'm pretty confident that this is the year we're finally going to get it d
one.The other ethanol bill I've introduced would make it easier for more cars to be powered by cheaper, cleaner, ethanol-based fu
el. As most of you probably know, there's a fuel known as E85 that's made from 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline. It's a great alterna
tive to gasoline, but the only problem is that we're in short supply of E85 fueling stations. Down here in southern Illinois, you
 drive by miles and miles of corn fields that can produce ethanol, but only 3 E85 stations in all of southern Illinois, and not o
ne in Carbondale. So the bill I'm sponsoring would provide a tax credit of 50% to anyone who wants to build an E85 fuel station. 
And to give consumers a good deal too, it'll provide a tax credit of 35 cents per gallon of E85 fuel. We've talked for too long a
bout energy independence in this country, and I think these proposals finally give us an opportunity to do something about it. Yo
u've all been doing your part here at SIU, and it's high time for Washington to do our part.I've always believed that the incredi
ble story of progress that is America has been built by those who ask why, what if, and why not - questions asked by the very stu
dents at this college every day they choose to confront the challenges of this new century. It is this fundamental character of t
he American spirit - the desire to move forward, look around the next corner, and reach for the unreachable - that put the first 
man on the moon, led to a cure for polio, and launched the technological revolution of the nineties.And as the College of Agricul
ture looks ahead to its next fifty years, we'd do well to ask ourselves "What will they say about us at the 100th anniversary?" A
s we face a new and different world that brings both great promise and great peril, what will we do move America towards a new an
d better day?You won't find the answers from your professors - and certainly not from politicians. You'll find them by continuing
 to ask yourselves those questions - why, what if, and why not. And as you keep studying and researching here at school, remember
 that the answers you discover will not only have an impact where you live and learn, but across a world that is just waiting to 
hear from the next generation of dreamers. Thank you. KEYNOTE ADDRESS AT THE 2004 DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTIONOBAMA DNC SPEECH 
PART 1 OBAMA DNC SPEECH PART 2July 27, 2004 Keynote Address 2004 Democratic National ConventionCompete Text On behalf of the grea
t state of Illinois, crossroads of a nation, land of Lincoln, let me express my deep gratitude for the privilege of addressing th
is convention. Tonight is a particular honor for me because, let's face it, my presence on this stage is pretty unlikely. My fath
er was a foreign student, born and raised in a small village in Kenya. He grew up herding goats, went to school in a tin-roof sha
ck. His father, my grandfather, was a cook, a domestic servant.But my grandfather had larger dreams for his son. Through hard wor
k and perseverance my father got a scholarship to study in a magical place: America, which stood as a beacon of freedom and oppor
tunity to so many who had come before. While studying here, my father met my mother. She was born in a town on the other side of 
the world, in Kansas. Her father worked on oil rigs and farms through most of the Depression. The day after Pearl Harbor he signe
d up for duty, joined Patton's army and marched across Europe. Back home, my grandmother raised their baby and went to work on a 
bomber assembly line. After the war, they studied on the GI Bill, bought a house through FHA, and moved west in search of opportu
nity.And they, too, had big dreams for their daughter, a common dream, born of two continents. My parents shared not only an impr
obable love; they shared an abiding faith in the possibilities of this nation. They would give me an African name, Barack, or "bl
essed," believing that in a tolerant America your name is no barrier to success. They imagined me going to the best schools in th
e land, even though they weren't rich, because in a generous America you don't have to be rich to achieve your potential. They ar
e both passed away now. Yet, I know that, on this night, they look down on me with pride.I stand here today, grateful for the div
ersity of my heritage, aware that my parents' dreams live on in my precious daughters. I stand here knowing that my story is part
 of the larger American story, that I owe a debt to all of those who came before me, and that, in no other country on earth, is m
y story even possible. Tonight, we gather to affirm the greatness of our nation, not because of the height of our skyscrapers, or
 the power of our military, or the size of our economy. Our pride is based on a very simple premise, summed up in a declaration m
ade over two hundred years ago, "We hold these truths to he self-evident, that all men are created equal. That they are endowed b
y their Creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."That is the tru
e genius of America, a faith in the simple dreams of its people, the insistence on small miracles. That we can tuck in our childr
en at night and know they are fed and clothed and safe from harm. That we can say what we think, write what we think, without hea
ring a sudden knock on the door. That we can have an idea and start our own business without paying a bribe or hiring somebody's 
son. That we can participate in the political process without fear of retribution, and that our votes will he counted ? or at lea
st, most of the time.This year, in this election, we are called to reaffirm our values and commitments, to hold them against a ha
rd reality and see how we are measuring up, to the legacy of our forbearers, and the promise of future generations. And fellow Am
ericans ? Democrats, Republicans, Independents ? I say to you tonight: we have more work to do. More to do for the workers I met 
in Galesburg, Illinois, who are losing their union jobs at the Maytag plant that's moving to Mexico, and now are having to compet
e with their own children for jobs that pay seven bucks an hour. More to do for the father I met who was losing his job and choki
ng back tears, wondering how he would pay $4,500 a month for the drugs his son needs without the health benefits he counted on. M
ore to do for the young woman in East St. Louis, and thousands more like her, who has the grades, has the drive, has the will, bu
t doesn't have the money to go to college.Don't get me wrong. The people I meet in small towns and big cities, in diners and offi
ce parks, they don't expect government to solve all their problems. They know they have to work hard to get ahead and they want t
o. Go into the collar counties around Chicago, and people will tell you they don't want their tax money wasted by a welfare agenc
y or the Pentagon. Go into any inner city neighborhood, and folks will tell you that government alone can't teach kids to learn. 
They know that parents have to parent, that children can't achieve unless we raise their expectations and turn off the television
 sets and eradicate the slander that says a black youth with a book is acting white. No, people don't expect government to solve 
all their problems. But they sense, deep in their bones, that with just a change in priorities, we can make sure that every child
 in America has a decent shot at life, and that the doors of opportunity remain open to all. They know we can do better. And they
 want that choice.In this election, we offer that choice. Our party has chosen a man to lead us who embodies the best this countr
y has to offer. That man is John Kerry. John Kerry understands the ideals of community, faith, and sacrifice, because they've def
ined his life. From his heroic service in Vietnam to his years as prosecutor and lieutenant governor, through two decades in the 
United States Senate, he has devoted himself to this country. Again and again, we've seen him make tough choices when easier ones
 were available. His values and his record affirm what is best in us.John Kerry believes in an America where hard work is rewarde
d. So instead of offering tax breaks to companies shipping jobs overseas, he'll offer them to companies creating jobs here at hom
e. John Kerry believes in an America where all Americans can afford the same health coverage our politicians in Washington have f
or themselves. John Kerry believes in energy independence, so we aren't held hostage to the profits of oil companies or the sabot
age of foreign oil fields. John Kerry believes in the constitutional freedoms that have made our country the envy of the world, a
nd he will never sacrifice our basic liberties nor use faith as a wedge to divide us. And John Kerry believes that in a dangerous
 world, war must be an option, but it should never he the first option.A while back, I met a young man named Shamus at the VFW Ha
ll in East Moline, Illinois. He was a good-looking kid, six-two or six-three, clear-eyed, with an easy smile. He told me he'd joi
ned the Marines and was heading to Iraq the following week. As I listened to him explain why he'd enlisted, his absolute faith in
 our country and its leaders, his devotion to duty and service, I thought this young man was all any of us might hope for in a ch
ild. But then I asked myself: Are we serving Shamus as well as he was serving us? I thought of more than 900 service men and wome
n, sons and daughters, husbands and wives, friends and neighbors, who will not be returning to their hometowns. I thought of fami
lies I had met who were struggling to get by without a loved one's full income, or whose loved ones had returned with a limb miss
ing or with nerves shattered, but who still lacked long-term health benefits because they were reservists. When we send our young
 men and women into harm's way, we have a solemn obligation not to fudge the numbers or shade the truth about why they're going, 
to care for their families while they're gone, to tend to the soldiers upon their return, and to never ever go to war without eno
ugh troops to win the war, secure the peace, and earn the respect of the world.Now let me be clear. We have real enemies in the w
orld. These enemies must be found. They must be pursued and they must be defeated. John Kerry knows this. And just as Lieutenant 
Kerry did not hesitate to risk his life to protect the men who served with him in Vietnam, President Kerry will not hesitate one 
moment to use our military might to keep America safe and secure. John Kerry believes in America. And he knows it's not enough fo
r just some of us to prosper. For alongside our famous individualism, there's another ingredient in the American saga.A belief th
at we are connected as one people. If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it
's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and 
the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandmother. If there's an Arab American family being rounded up without
 benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It's that fundamental belief ? I am my brother's keepe
r, I am my sister's keeper ? that makes this country work. It's what allows us to pursue our individual dreams, yet still come to
gether as a single American family. "E pluribus unum." Out of many, one.Yet even as we speak, there are those who are preparing t
o divide us, the spin masters and negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of anything goes. Well, I say to them tonight, th
ere's not a liberal America and a conservative America there's the United States of America. There's not a black America and whit
e America and Latino America and Asian America; there's the United States of America. The pundits like to slice-and-dice our coun
try into Red States and Blue States; Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I've got news for them, too. We w
orship an awesome God in the Blue States, and we don't like federal agents poking around our libraries in the Red States. We coac
h Little League in the Blue States and have gay friends in the Red States. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and pat
riots who supported it. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United
 States of America.In the end, that's what this election is about. Do we participate in a politics of cynicism or a politics of h
ope? John Kerry calls on us to hope. John Edwards calls on us to hope. I'm not talking about blind optimism here ? the almost wil
lful ignorance that thinks unemployment will go away if we just don't talk about it, or the health care crisis will solve itself 
if we just ignore it. No, I'm talking about something more substantial. It's the hope of slaves sitting around a fire singing fre
edom songs; the hope of immigrants setting out for distant shores; the hope of a young naval lieutenant bravely patrolling the Me
kong Delta; the hope of a millworker's son who dares to defy the odds; the hope of a skinny kid with a funny name who believes th
at America has a place for him, too. The audacity of hope!In the end, that is God's greatest gift to us, the bedrock of this nati
on; the belief in things not seen; the belief that there are better days ahead. I believe we can give our middle class relief and
 provide working families with a road to opportunity. I believe we can provide jobs to the jobless, homes to the homeless, and re
claim young people in cities across America from violence and despair. I believe that as we stand on the crossroads of history, w
e can make the right choices, and meet the challenges that face us. America!Tonight, if you feel the same energy I do, the same u
rgency I do, the same passion I do, the same hopefulness I do ? if we do what we must do, then I have no doubt that all across th
e country, from Florida to Oregon, from Washington to Maine, the people will rise up in November, and John Kerry will be sworn in
 as president, and John Edwards will be sworn in as vice president, and this country will reclaim its promise, and out of this lo
ng political darkness a brighter day will come. Thank you and God bless you. CURE KEYNOTE ADDRESS REMARKS OF BARACK OBAMA Friday,
 March 11, 2005CURE Keynote Address Complete Text Thank you David for that warm introduction. David is not only one of the most b
rilliant political minds in the business today, he is a loving husband, a committed father, and a dear friend who I've been honor
ed to have by my side. Thank you David for everything you do.I also want to thank Susan Axelrod and the entire leadership of CURE
 for allowing me the honor of speaking here this evening. As many of you know, Susan lives and breathes this organization, from t
he earliest hours of the morning until late at night, every day of her life. And I have no doubt that if the rest of us are willi
ng to offer just a fraction of her level of passion and commitment to this cause, one day we'll be gathered here to finally celeb
rate a cure.Since I first learned about this organization from David and Susan, I've often thought about the simple act of hope t
hat began its journey.I've thought about three mothers, sitting around a kitchen table, sharing the pain and the helplessness tha
t go along with watching the child you love, the child whose happiness you live for, struggle with a disease that mom and dad can
't fix. A disease that doesn't necessarily go away with the doctor's medicine, that isn't talked about most nights on the news, t
hat isn't funded and recognized like a lot of the other diseases.But then I also thought about how on that day, those three mothe
rs said "no more." Maybe it was the memory of the first time they saw a seizure take their child to that lonely place where they 
could no longer reach them. Maybe they thought about the 2.5 million Americans who suffer from epilepsy, the tens of thousands wh
o succumb to it, and the 181,000 more who will be diagnosed this year.Or maybe as they sat around that kitchen table, three frien
ds living similar experiences, they simply realized that there are some challenges in life you can't take on by yourself. That th
ere is power and strength in the ability of a community to make a difference. And that as that community reaches out and grows an
d finds its voice, so grows the hope that it will someday find a cure.Well, seven years, thirty research grants, one White House 
conference, and over $3 million in donations later, I can see tonight that the kitchen table has become a lot more crowded and th
at this community is on its way.And yet despite all the progress, the question still weighing on your minds is, "how do we get al
l the way there?" How do we get all the way there when, despite the fact that epilepsy affects more Americans than Parkinson's, m
ultiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, and cerebral palsy combined, it still receives far fewer federal research dollars than any
 of these diseases? How do we get there when too many policy makers and too much of the public still think that epilepsy is, as B
rendan Malone told us in the video, an "inconvenience," rather than a serious, and possibly deadly disease?I think that we get th
ere the same way that so many of you got us here - by continuing to share your stories and your children's stories with the faith
 that more and more Americans will open their hearts to listen. With the faith that if there's a little boy who can't sit through
 a class without suffering the pain and uncomfortable stares that accompany a seizure, it matters to every mother, even if it's n
ot her son. That if there's a young woman who can't work and can't take care of herself and can't have children of her own becaus
e of the brain damage caused by epilepsy, it matters to every father, even if it's not his daughter.Personally, I can't begin to 
imagine what a parent who has a child with epilepsy goes through on a daily basis. But I know what it's like to be a parent. And 
as a father with a little girl who suffers from asthma, I can understand the terror you feel when your child wakes you in the mid
dle of the night gasping for air. When you would rather stop breathing yourself if it meant that she could start breathing just a
 little easier.In this way, your stories touch me as both a father and a friend, and I will leave here tonight having adopted you
r cause as my own, as so many have done before me. I will go back to Washington and work with my colleague Rahm Emanuel and other
s to demand more federal funding for epilepsy research.But I also believe that if each of us walks out of here and tells the stor
y of the 2.5 million parents, brothers, sisters, daughters, and sons with epilepsy, it will touch others who may not understand t
his disease, because they are mothers and fathers and friends too. And as they embrace our cause, we will expand this community o
f concern until there isn't any room left in this country not to listen.This has been the story of CURE ever since its founding -
 the inspiring idea that those of you who have dedicated so much of yourselves to this cause are doing so knowing full well that 
a cure may not arrive in time to heal your loved ones. And yet, you continue fighting with the hope that you may spare a nameless
 face the pain your families have known. That kind of compassion is heroic, and it is the kind that will eventually defeat this d
isease.We need this victory now more than ever because today, we face a new threat in the potential spread of epilepsy to thousan
ds more Americans. Just last week, USA Today reported that hundreds of U.S. soldiers are returning from Iraq with a condition kno
wn as traumatic brain injury, or TBI. Even though new technology and better body armor are helping them survive bomb and rocket a
ttacks, the blasts are still causing these soldiers brain damage. As of January, 437 cases have been diagnosed in Army hospitals 
alone, and some doctors are saying that it could become the "signature wound of the Iraq war."As some of you may know, TBI is the
 greatest risk factor for developing epilepsy. In fact, a study of Vietnam vets showed that 51 percent of those who suffered TBI 
went on to develop the disease.We have asked these brave men and women to leave their homes, leave their families, and fight for 
our freedom on the other side of the world. And now we are finding out that when they come home, they may develop a life-threaten
ing, debilitating disease that this country has not done nearly enough to treat. We simply cannot tell our heroes that when it co
mes to dealing with TBI or epilepsy, they're on their own. I know CURE won't, and I will go back to Washington and make sure the 
federal government won't either. I plan to work with my colleagues in Congress to provide the VA with the funds to research TBI a
nd epilepsy so we can learn more about the disease and develop better tools to care for our heroes. These soldiers have moms and 
dads waiting for them at home, they are a part of our community, and we will speak for them.I know that a lot of you have been st
ruggling with epilepsy for a long time now, and that you've seen both good days and bad. On the bad days, it may seem like salvat
ion will never come, that parents and children will be suffering with this disease for decades to come.But I think we find hope b
y remembering that we've been here before. That there was a time when America watched helplessly as a mysterious disease left tho
usands - especially children - disabled for life. And just as it seemed that no one was paying attention and nothing could be don
e, a community of compassion awoke and led a March of Dimes to find the cure for polio.Organized with the help of Franklin Roosev
elt and backed by the federal government, the March of Dimes galvanized a nation to conquer polio, dime by dime. And while Roosev
elt knew that his own polio would never be cured by the discovery of a vaccine, he also knew that at its best, government can be 
used a force to accomplish together what we cannot achieve on our own.And so the people began to care and the dimes piled up and 
the funding started to flow, and fifty years ago next month, Jonas Salk discovered the polio vaccine.I know that we don't have a 
President with epilepsy, or a major celebrity spokesperson, but we do have a growing community that is on the march. We have alli
es in government who know that we can defeat this disease if we work together. And we have the hope that every parent has for the
ir child.The hope you have the first time you bring them to the doctor's office, and you just want them to walk out with some med
icine and a lollipop. The hope you have the first day you watch them get on the bus, when you want them to fit in with the rest o
f the kids and do well in school. The hope you have the day of their first job, when you want them to call you and let you know h
ow great it went. The hope you have when they walk down the aisle, when you want nothing more than for them to find love and happ
iness in life.These are hopes we hold not only for our own children, but for every parent and every child every where. And if we 
leave here tonight determined to turn those hopes into action, into a sustained commitment to fight epilepsy that's more than jus
t about one fundraiser or one benefit, we will find a cure and we will keep hope alive for millions of families for generations t
o come. Thank you, and God Bless you. Floor Speech in Opposition to the Amendment Requiring a Photo ID TOPIC: Civil Rights May 24
, 2006 Senator Obama's Floor Speech Opposition to the Amendment Requiring a Photo ID Complete Text Thank you very much, Mr. Presi
dent. Let me just echo Senator Kennedy's strong opposition to the amendment that is offered by the Senator from Kentucky.There is
 no more fundamental right accorded to United States citizens by the Constitution than the right to vote. The unimpeded exercise 
of this right is essential to the functioning of our democracy. Unfortunately, history has not been kind to certain citizens in p
rotecting their ability to exercise this right.For a large part of our nation's history, racial minorities have been prevented fr
om voting because of barriers such as literacy tests, poll taxes and property requirements. We've come a long way. That was clear
 a few weeks ago when Democrats and Republicans, members of the Senate and the House stood on the Capitol steps to announce the i
ntroduction of a bill to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act. That rare and refreshing display of bipartisanship reflects our colle
ctive belief that more needs to be done to remove barriers to voting.Right now, the Senate is finishing a historic debate about i
mmigration reform. It's been a difficult discussion, occasionally contentious. It's required bipartisan cooperation. After severa
l weeks and many, many amendments, we're less than an hour away from voting for cloture. Considering our progress and the delicat
e balance we're trying to maintain, this amendment could not come at a worse time.Let's be clear. This is a national voter ID law
. This is a national voter ID law that breaks the careful compromise struck by a 50-50 Senate four years ago. It would be the mos
t restrictive voter ID ever enacted, one that could quite literally result in millions of disenfranchised voters and utter chaos 
at the state level.Now, I recognize there's a certain simplistic appeal to this amendment. Why shouldn't we require people to hav
e a voter ID card when they vote? Don't we want to make sure voters are who they claim to be? And shouldn't we make sure non-citi
zens are casting ballots to change the outcome of elections?There are two problems with the argument: number one, there's been no
 showing that there's any significant problem with voter fraud in the 50 states. There certainly is no showing that non-citizens 
are rushing to try to vote: this is a solution in search of a problem.The second problem is that historically disenfranchised gro
ups - minorities, the poor, the elderly and the disabled - are most affected by photo ID laws. Let me give you a few statistics, 
overall 12% of voting age American do not have a driver's license, most of whom are minority, new U.S. citizens, the indigent, th
e elderly or the disabled. AARP reports that 3.6 million disabled Americans have no driver's license. A recent study in Wisconsin
 this year found that white adults were twice as likely to have driver's licenses as African Americans over 18. In Louisiana, Afr
ican Americans are four to five times less likely to have photo IDs than white residents.Now, why won't poor people be able to ge
t photo IDs or Real IDs? It's simple. Because they cost money. You need a birth certificate, passport or proof naturalization and
 that can cost up to $85. Then you need to go to the state office to apply for a card. That requires time off work, possibly a lo
ng trip on public transportation assuming there's an office near you. Imagine if you only vote once ever two or four years, it's 
not very likely you'll take time off work, take a bus to pay $85 just so you can vote. That is not something that most folks are 
going to be able to do.The fact of the matter, Mr. President, is that this is an idea that has been batted around not with respec
t to immigration but with respect to generally attempting to restrict the approach for people voting throughout the country. This
 is not the time to do it.The Carter-Baker commission in 2002-2004 said fraudulent votes make up .000003% of the votes cast. That
's a lot of zeros. Let me say it a different way. Out of almost 200 million votes that were cast during these elections, 52 were 
fraudulent. To put that into some context, you are statistically more likely to get killed by lightning than to find a fraudulent
 vote in a federal election.Mr. President, this is not the appropriate time to be debating this kind of amendment. We've got a lo
t of serious issues with respect to immigration. I would ask that all my colleagues reject the amendment so we can move on to the
 important business at hand. Thank you, Mr. President. AMERICAN LEGION LEGISLATIVE RALLY REMARKS BY SENATOR BARACK OBAMAMarch 1, 
2005American Legion Legislative Rally Remarks by Senator Barack Obama Thank you. It's an honor to be here today with all of you L
egionnaires. Since joining the Veterans Affairs Committee last month, I've been holding town halls with veterans all over Illinoi
s, and I can tell you that in the days ahead, there will be few issues I'll work harder on than ensuring that the brave men and w
omen who serve our country receive the support they deserve and the benefits they've earned when they come home.In the coming wee
ks, you'll hear a lot of debate over the veterans' budget that President Bush submitted to Congress. You'll hear people talk abou
t what we can afford and what adds up on paper, about where we can save money and what percentage increase or decrease we should 
give to this program or that program.But I know those aren't the first things that came to your mind when you heard about this bu
dget. And they're not the first things that came to my mind either.I thought about my grandfather, who signed up for duty in Worl
d War II the day after Pearl Harbor. He marched across Europe in Patton's army, and when he came home, it was the education and o
pportunity offered by the GI Bill that allowed his family to build their own American Dream.I thought about the hundreds of Illin
ois veterans I've met over the last few years. We asked them to leave their homes, leave their families, and risk their lives in 
some far-off place to protect us. And yet, somehow, we're still hearing stories like the one I heard from a veteran named Bill Al
len, who told me that on a trip to Chicago, he actually saw homeless veterans fighting over access to the dumpsters. That's what 
I thought about. And finally, I thought about a young man named Seamus Ahern, who I met during the campaign at a V.F.W. hall in E
ast Moline, Illinois. He told me about how he'd joined the Marines because he was so proud of this country, and he felt that as a
 young person in his early twenties he wanted to give something back. He was getting shipped out to Iraq the following week, and 
as I listened to him explain why he?d enlisted, the absolute faith he had in our country and its leaders, his devotion to duty an
d service, I thought this young man was all that any of us might hope for in a child. But then I asked myself: When Shamus comes 
home, will we serve him as well as he served us? That's the question we should be asking ourselves when we talk about veterans' b
enefits and the veterans' budget. And that's the standard we should meet.But how do we meet that standard and serve our veterans 
when we have a budget that, when adjusted for inflation, has even less money for veterans than it did a year ago? When we have le
ss for health care, for hospitals, and for disability pay?This budget tells our veterans that if you want increased funding for t
he VA, you'll have to pay for it yourself. It's a budget that charges 2.2 million veterans a $250 enrollment fee just to enter in
to the health care program they were promised upon enlisting. A budget that more than doubles veterans' prescription drug co-paym
ents. That will cut $351 million in funding for veterans' nursing homes, and will eliminate more than $100 million in state grant
s that are desperately needed by VA facilities across the country.And this is a budget that tells all those veterans still waitin
g for help to keep waiting. There are roughly 480,000 compensation and pension claims still unprocessed, but this budget only cal
ls for 113 new employees to help deal with this backlog ? not enough to make a dent. In Chicago, veterans are waiting an average 
of 138 days just to start the sometimes decade-long process of getting their disability claim processed. 138 days. How can we mak
e our heroes wait this long?As troops continue to come home from Iraq and Afghanistan, the numbers and the need will only increas
e. We know that soldiers are already coming home with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and we know that a recent Army study showed
 that one in six soldiers in Iraq reported symptoms of major depression. Some experts predict that more than 100,000 soldiers may
 need some kind of mental health treatment when they come home. For tens of thousands of others, the wounds they suffered in batt
le will need care that could last a lifetime.It is not only our patriotic duty to provide this care, it is our moral duty at the 
most fundamental level. When our troops return from battle, we should welcome them with the promise of opportunity, not the threa
t of poverty.Over half a century ago, it was American Legion National Commander Harry Colmery who first drafted the legislation l
onghand that would become the GI Bill of Rights ? a bill that has since provided education and training for nearly 8 million Amer
icans, housing for nearly 2 million families, and led to the creation of the great American middle-class. That was a bill that to
ld our heroes "When you come home, we're here for you, because we're all in this together."Today, we shouldn't be scraping to fin
d the bare minimum in benefits and health care for our veterans. And with the largest deployment of troops since Vietnam fighting
 for freedom in an increasingly dangerous world, we should be talking about a GI Bill for the 21st Century.Fortunately, my collea
gue, Congressman Rahm Emanuel, has just introduced such a bill. It's called the Welcome Home Package, and it offers veterans the 
exact same health care they received during their time in the service, double the education benefit they receive now, and a $5,00
0 down payment on a home.When veterans look to Congress for help, this is the kind of legislation they should hear about ? not bu
dget cuts and increased fees.It's time to reassess our priorities. A budget is more than just a series of numbers on a page; it i
s an embodiment of our values. The President never hesitates to praise the service of our veterans and acknowledge the debt we ow
e them for their service, and I commend him for that. Now I hope he will renew his commitment by increasing funding for the VA, a
nd ensure that our veterans receive more than just words of praise, but also the health care and benefits they?ve earned.George W
ashington once said: "the willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall 
be directly proportional to how they perceive veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by our nation."Washington und
erstood then what every veteran here knows now ? that when we make the decision to send our troops to war, we also make the decis
ion to care for them, to speak for them, and to think of them ? always ? when they come. Thank you and God Bless you. @