Fred Klonsky’s PREA Prez Blog

Leo Casey:

I am personally proud of the principled way in which the UFT and AFT has
supported Clinton, sticking entirely to our view of the issues and Obama’s
and Clinton’s positions on them.

Note: The last time Casey attacked me it was because I said the UFT had supported Clinton. He said that the UFT didn’t support Clinton. Now he says he is proud of their support. You pick.

Casey’s e-mail follows:

This is one of the sleaziest and most outrageous misrepresentations I have
seen in quite a while, and you do yourself absolutely no credit by
reproducing it on your blog and giving it credence.

Every time the question of what we would do if Obama [or earlier, Edwards]
won the Democratic nomination over Clinton has been posed, Randi’s reply has
been completely clear and unequivocal: the differences among the Democratic
candidates on the issues that are paramount for us — education, labor,
human rights — pale next to their differences with the Republicans and
McCain, and we would actively support whomever won the nomination. When the
question was posed at the April Delegate Assembly, at a time when Clinton’s
candidacy looked like it was gaining momentum after Ohio, Texan and
Pennsylvania, and Randi’s answer there was as clear as it could possibly be:
the person who asked the question, an Obama supporter, thanked her for her
answer. Norman Scott knows this, and he also knows, because he makes it his
business to know such things, that she reinforced her statement at the Unity
Caucus meeting later that night, explicitly refuting misrepresentations of
Obama’s positions on Israel — an issue of great concern to many of our
members — and telling members that we would call upon them for November.
Since her words are so clear on this question, he is reduced to a slimy
attempt at suggesting that she means something other than what she has
actually said, again and again.

I am personally proud of the principled way in which the UFT and AFT has
supported Clinton, sticking entirely to our view of the issues and Obama’s
and Clinton’s positions on them. Regardless of what others have done, we
have refused to go down any road other than that of the issues. Our
endorsement, our focus on the issues and our ability to put people into the
field in key battleground states has been one of the few important and
consistent strengths of the Clinton campaign — a point which, I am sure, is
not lost on an Obama campaign looking to November.

If you share with us the view that is potentially a realigning election that
could put a progressive majority in command, than clearly the task is one of
building the most powerful coalition possible for November, so that we can
win the Presidency with strong majorities in Congress. A major component of
that coalition will necessarily be teacher unions, as we are probably the
most significant electoral force in the union movement. Norman Scott could
care less about that goal of winning in November — as always, his purpose
is to sow division. How shameful that you would join in him that exercise,
and give credence to his outrageous misrepresentations.

Leo