(Image: File)

In receiving updates on the status of Herman Cain‘s scandal-plagued presidential campaign, I received the following tweet from one political insider: “Done like last week’s turkey.”

With roughly a month before the Jan. 3 Iowa Caucus—the first contest to determine the Republican nominee—pundits as well as much of the GOP feel the same way. Pressure continues to mount for him to withdraw from the race as the former Godfather’s Pizza honcho contends with allegations from Ginger White, an Atlanta women who claims she had a 13-year extramarital affair that ended this year. He also spent much of the past few weeks defending himself against charges of sexual harassment during his tenure as president of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s.

As his campaign implodes, Cain continues to fight on. He made stops in Ohio and New Hampshire Wednesday where he told a crowd in Manchester: “They keep coming after me. After that firestorm, people thought I was finished. Well, just like Yogi Berra said, it ain’t over ‘til it’s over, and I’m not finished yet.”

But the party, pundits and public have already started to move on, trying to figure out the calculus of how Cain’s supporters will impact the dogfight between GOP front runners former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, himself dogged by past sexual and financial scandals, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

This is a rapid change of fortune for the man who was the GOP front runner just a month ago. According to the independent Quinnipiac University national poll on Nov. 2, Cain led the primary field with 30%, followed by Romney with 23%, Gingrich with 10% and Texas Gov. Rick Perry with 8%. In the Nov. 22 Quinnipiac poll—before White’s allegations—Gingrich took the lead with 26%, Romney stood at 22% and Cain dropped to 14%. Losing ground with conservatives and Tea Party members, his support continues its precipitous decline.

What happened? Cain’s meteoric rise and hard fall offers lessons for all seeking office—whether its national or local. Here are five lessons we can learn:

Click here to continue reading…

Clearly define your strategy. Cain’s campaign was baffling from the beginning.  Dismissed by the mainstream media, he didn’t develop a significant political apparatus in either Iowa or New Hampshire, key states for any presidential candidate to gain traction for the nomination. Instead, he chose to operate in a seat-of-the pants fashion, preferring bus tours in Tennessee which fueled speculation he was more concerned about selling his new autobiography than a presidential run. Even though such campaign unorthodoxy may favor the bold, it doesn’t provide staying power.

One-note campaigns tend to fizzle. Yes, it’s important to stay on message but Cain needed to go beyond his “9-9-9″ plan in which he pushed replacing the current tax code with a simple 9% tax on corporate and personal income, and a 9% national sales tax. Under scrutiny, he was often fuzzy when questioned about how it would produce 6 million jobs and 5% economic growth or whether it would force poor or middle-income households to pay more taxes due to the sales tax provision. It was a catchy, simple bite that connected with his base as our nation grapples with with tough, complex economic times. However, Cain—and to be fair, his other GOP rivals—have not offered a clear vision for America’s future.

Off-the-cuff remarks often backfire. Cain often made statements to appear as a maverick but served to alienate. After winning the Florida Straw Poll in late September, he made a sweeping statement in a CNN interview that a significant portion of Blacks “have been brainwashed into not being open-minded, not even considering a conservative point of view,” raising the ire of many in the African American community. And at another campaign stop in Arizona, he offered the controversial policy proposal of building an electrified fence along the U.S./Mexico border he said could kill people trying to enter the country illegally. In response to criticism, he initially responded that his comments were “a joke” and “America needs to get a sense of humor.” According to a CBSNews.com report, he later reversed course, citing the need for a border fence “and it might be electrified.” His remarks were ripped by the head of the 21-member Hispanic Caucus and other Latino citizens. It’s true candidates must play to their base but the most effective ones see the value of communicating their vision and ideas across constituencies instead of using cheap applause lines that they don’t stand behind under pressure.

Know your facts—and don’t risk becoming a caricature. As his campaign pressed on, his novelty wore off. Cain showed his lack of command of issues beyond his beloved 9-9-9 plan—especially in the foreign affairs arena. In a session with the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel editorial board, a flustered Cain struggled with a simple question: “So, you agree with President Obama on Libya, or not?”After fidgeting and seconds of silence, he asked for clarification of the question and then said he didn’t “agree with the way he handled it.” He immediately reversed himself, conceding he “got all this stuff twirling around in my head.” In fact, his poor performance made Gov. Perry’s brain-freeze moment at the Nov. 9 GOP debate a distant memory. He was later quoted as saying, “We need a leader, not a reader” in explaining his foreign policy stumbles. I’m positive Cain wouldn’t have had any patience for such flip remarks from staffers who didn’t do their homework at Godfather’s Pizza, National Restaurant Association or when he served on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. Such behavior diminished his candidacy and viewed by many as lacking the presidential gravitas needed to tackle foreign affairs, national defense and other substantive matters.

Be prepared for everything because anything goes. That’s what L. Douglas Wilder once shared with me when I interviewed him during his campaign for the governorship of the state of Virginia two decades ago. “When you run for office, you must be beyond reproach,” asserted Wilder, who eventually became the first African American elected to the statehouse. Since then, a few candidates have survived scandal to be voted into office. The most notable: Bill Clinton who was elected to the presidency in 1992 despite allegations of an extramarital affair and being dogged with other such charges during his tenure in the Oval Office. The charges against Cain has hammered his campaign with the impact of a wrecking ball. Moreover, he has yet to have the “stand-by-your-man” moment similar to Bill and Hillary Clinton‘s appearance on 60 Minutes in which they displayed side-by-side husband-and-wife unity . For seasoned, masterful politicians like the Clintons they proved to be an exception to the rule. That’s unlikely to happen in this case. One thing is for sure: repeated denials and the use of a lawyer as mouthpiece has not—and will not—stop the press from its pursuit of details nor negative speculation.

As a front runner,  you’re constantly in the spotlight. Your whole life is an open book as the press and public reviews past performance, previous polices and character clues. It’s similar to an onion-peeling process, uncovering layer after layer until they discover the candidate’s core.

For the defiant Cain, it appears he will be a footnote as a 2012 GOP front runner. For those seeking office—or any major position—the mistakes of his campaign serves as a primer on actions to avoid as you get ready for prime time.

That line from President Barack Obama’s deficit reduction speech, delivered from the Rose Garden on Monday, was an instant classic. It cut to the heart of the matter and sparked a deafening sigh of relief from democrats and legions of presidential supporters who have been increasingly (if reluctantly) expressing their displeasure with him around the water cooler, on camera, and on Twitter for months.

Ironically, when he took to the microphone, I was a few blocks away, interviewing Labor Secretary Hilda Solis about his jobs proposal, presented the week before. So I didn’t get to see Obama yank the gloves off in a live speech, whose tone was later described as “combative” and “confrontational.” But I watched online afterward and then heaved my own sigh of relief as a mighty fan base that had fallen silent—wanting to defend the president, but also wanting in the area of powerful ammunition with which to do it—seemed to come back to life.

A dear friend of mine who lives in Oregon falls into that category. She emailed me about a week ago to confess that she was “disappointed” in our president.

“He’s not been fighting,” she wrote. “He’s a conciliator by nature who found a calling as a community organizer. Since he’s been in office he has tried repeatedly to continue in that vain of bringing people together and treating the Republican House as decent, well-meaning people despite the fact that they have done everything [they can] to bring him down. He just seems to be going along to get along, with maybe a not-so-hidden desire to be liked.”

“They’re never going to like him,” an old college boyfriend ranted on the phone. “Forget them! Why does he care? He has to let that go!”

Obama was the first presidential candidate either of these friends (or I) truly believed in. So confessing their disappointment in him was painful for them and it ignited a visceral reaction from me.

I am not disappointed in our president. I’m upset that he has been seemingly unable to assemble a team of insulators, a group of staff, cabinet members, mouthpieces and supporters willing to launch the snares and arrows on his behalf and to take the hits for him when they come firing back. No one seems to go to bat for him. No one seems to have his back, we who voted for him included.

The GOP and others live and breathe to dismantle and destroy him. It’s their sole purpose, they’ve made no bones about it, and they don’t appear to mind destroying the country in the process. Meanwhile, Democrats and other onetime presidential supporters, stand aside and wait for him to fix everything by himself or suffer the consequences. They refuse to stand with him, to wrap him in a cloak of unqualified support and solidarity.

Dick Cheney defended George Bush at every turn—and I don’t get the sense that he even much liked or respected the man. Still, he was willing to be both Bush’s key hit man and bodyguard. Who does that for Barack Obama? No one. Where are his Cheney, his Rumsfeld, his Powell, and his Rice?

Click here to continue reading…

Not one Democrat has consistently stood up and aggressively championed him, fought alongside him, openly honored, admired, or unabashedly supported him. Bill Clinton doesn’t break ranks, but he doesn’t bring the vintage Bill-dazzle when he speaks of the president and his lackluster demeanor is lost on no one. Hillary Clinton has already said she’s a one-termer no matter what happens come the election; she’s entitled to make her choices, but did she really have to announce them so early in the game—she, who is exceedingly clear on what the stakes are and how the game of presidential politics is played?

Condoleezza Rice used to actually beam whenever Bush was nearby. He was her guy and she wore it on her sleeve and her face. When’s the last time our current Secretary of State stood at the mic and championed her boss no less gushed like a teenaged groupie?

But, to be honest, I don’t expect much from politicians as they all serve multiple masters; the rest of us don’t have that excuse.

President Obama was elected by an enthusiastic, optimistic, relieved majority. Like my emailing friend Ann, in Oregon, most of us cried tears of joy when the last vote was counted; some of us still choke up every time he appears. But most of us also receded back into our lives after the election, dabbing our eyes as we waited for him to work miracles. And we knew it would take miracles—not only because there was a mighty contingent appalled that a Black man was president—but because the deck he was handed was stacked high against him, and against us all.

When he proved to be a mere mortal (although one could easily argue that he has held up rather well given the superhuman nature of a job that just keeps spiraling into territory unprecedented for its overwhelming challenges including from Mother Nature her mighty self) we went mute and let the liars, the haters, the extremists and opportunists take over. Do we blame him for that or do we blame ourselves?

President Obama is constantly criticized for the changes he promised that we don’t yet see. But his campaign for change clearly required that we all change; it required that we sacrifice and continue to stand with him once he was off the campaign trail and actually working to enact a new approach that he (and we) knew would be an uphill battle.

His change demanded that Americans maintain the optimism, interest, and level of engagement that led us to change ourselves enough to vote a Black man into the White House in the first place. But no sooner was he there than we changed back, tweeting our gripes, Facebooking our frustrations, bitching and moaning and doing almost nothing to help him move us forward.

As African Americans, once again, we have a vital role to play at a critical moment in history—and there’s not a moment to spare. In a twist on the president’s own line, this is not rocket science; it’s right. When it comes to opening the door to real change, he can turn the lock, but we hold the key.

To see my interview with Secretary of Labor Hilda Soliz on the president’s job creation proposal, watch the season premiere of Black Enterprise Business Report this weekend on TV One. Please check your local listings for times.

(Image: ThinkStock)

9/11 forever changed our world.

As America marks the 10th anniversary, we can take away a positive affirmation from that day of infamy: Our demonstration of resilience, heroism and humanity in the face of unspeakable tragedy. We have a remarkable ability to bounce back.

The aftermath of that tragic event also offers valuable lessons in leadership. In reviewing our archives related to coverage a decade ago, I found fascinating stories of undaunted executives and entrepreneurs from Wall Street to Main Street—those affected directly and indirectly—who kept their enterprises humming not only to meet payroll but to provide assistance, service and comfort to victims, employees and community members.

The following examples give us clues on how to lead in times of crisis as well as tenets that reinforce how we should operate on a daily basis.

Click here to continue reading…

Kenneth Chenault

Embrace your responsibility as a leader. Considered the paragon of corporate leadership, Kenneth I. Chenault dealt with 9/11 just months after becoming chairman and CEO of American Express. He had to find a home for more than 5,000 displaced employees when corporate headquarters, adjacent to the World Trade Center area, was damaged and forced to shut down for nearly a year.  To make matters more tragic: 11 employees had lost their lives. In addition to the human toll, Amex’s major lines of business, such as charge cards and travel services, took a battering in a devastated post-9/11 economy.

Maintaining that a leader’s reputation is made in times of crisis, Chenault told BE at the time: “Our objective is to improve our ability to manage through volatile times and to adapt to a wide variety of business conditions.”

During this period, he set clear goals that included keeping the company liquid and profitable while making investments for market share growth. It required tough decisions like headcount reduction. In other cases, he encouraged his troops to develop innovative products and find new channels to reach consumers.

Applying his integrity-driven leadership approach, he brought focus to anxious people. Fully engaged in fostering assurance and diminishing fear, he held televised town-hall meetings, hosted local sessions and visited sites around the globe.

Among business icons tapped by then-President Bush to help rehabilitate Ground Zero, Chenault concentrated on meeting responsibilities to all stakeholders: employees, customers, vendors, shareholders and his institution. This m.o. would serve him well during the financial meltdown of 2008.

Click here to continue reading…

J. Donald Rice

In times of crisis, move quickly or lose your business. J. Donald Rice, CEO of Rice Financial Products Co. (No. 4 in tax-exempt securities with $568 million in lead issues on the 2011 BE INVESTMENT BANKS list) was at home when he discovered his offices in the north tower had been decimated on that fateful day. In fact, he took great pride that his investment bank had been one of the few African American firms to occupy space there. Rice said at the time: “I feel like they came in and blew up my second home. ”

After making calls to confirm his staff’s safety, Rice sprung into action. He transformed his home into the company’s base of operation and scoured the city for computers so they could trade securities and structure deals. Within four business days, the firm moved into new quarters in downtown New York. To further inspire confidence, Rice took the first available flight to Los Angeles just five days after the attack and met face-to-face with clients.

BE asked him why he felt compelled to move so quickly after the life-altering event. He said that his competitors, without sentimentality or delay, tried to steal business from his firm.

So remember: Vultures will begin circling and picking bones—even if you’re not a corpse.

Click here to continue reading…

Bernard Beal

Do well by doing good. Weeks after 9/11, another BE 100s Wall Street titan Bernard Beal, CEO of M.R. Beal & Co. (No. 5 in taxable securities with $1.57 billion in lead issues and No. 3 in tax-exempt securities with $2.2 billion in lead issues on the BE INVESTMENT BANKS list) admitted that when he and his staff were forced to leave their offices near the World Trade Center the firm “lost hundreds of thousands of dollars because of the attack.” He’s always believed the best way to tackle a crisis is through communications, informing his team and clients and then charging full steam ahead with his agenda. So not one to let terrorists torpedo his company, Beal wore protective gear and went back to his Wall Street digs to work the phones and close deals.

Beal, however, found another way to become involved in 9/11 relief efforts and advance its reputation. On September 12, the firm helped one of its clients, Numotech Inc., a Northridge, California medical device company, get supplies to burn victims at New York area hospitals by working with then-Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton‘s office. Due to the success of Numotech’s new, inventive wound-care product in aiding patients, the federal government awarded the company a contract to sell the device to its agencies and, in turn, Beal was able to generate investor interest in a private placement offering.

9/11 proved that the only event that can be anticipated in business and life is the unexpected. That’s why leaders must have core principles to move their organizations forward whether it’s Chenault’s ethical approach to responsibility, Rice’s urgent response to promote solidity or Beal’s constant communication to identify and pursue opportunity. It all starts with making connections with people, understanding their anxieties and issues.

In his many interviews on leadership, Chenault’s best definition comes from, of all places, the 19th Century French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte: “Define reality, give hope.”

Although two centuries old, it’s the right course for leaders dealing with the uncertainties of our post-9/11 world.

First Lady Michelle Obama in Alexander McQueen at the 2011 state dinner (Getty Images)

I was both pleased and perturbed by the “On the Runway” story in the Sunday New York Times Style section on January 30^th. Titled “First in Fashion Only?” the article reported on how the fashion publication Women’s Wear Daily, designer Oscar de la Renta and the Council of Fashion Designers of America are “trying to shame Mrs. Obama for her sin of wearing fashion by a non-American designer.” The fuss is over the red Alexander McQueen gown worn by Mrs. Obama to the state dinner for China in January.

The article also pointed out that, with the exception of de la Renta, many members of the CFDA, “including its president, Diane Von Furstenberg, manufacture a significant portion of their clothes outside the United States, mainly Asia.” Based on that fact, it may be safe to conclude that the issue is not whether Mrs. Obama is wearing American designers, it’s that she’s not wearing their designs. But others in the fashion industry have lauded the First Lady’s support of lesser known designers, which interestingly enough includes Moises de la Renta–Oscar’s son. Not that this means criticism of First Lady’s wardrobe will stop.

While I appreciated the article pointing out the hypocrisy in the fashion establishment’s argument, what concerned me was the author’s declaration: “Here’s my problem with Mrs. Obama: I want her to be known for something other than fashion.” And although Cathy Horyn recognizes that the First Lady supports notable American causes, she suggests that only Mrs. Obama can change the perception of her focus and interests.

The truth of the matter is that American first ladies are often judged–celebrated or ridiculed–on their style and their looks. Barbara Bush was often taunted for her matronly appearance and Hillary Clinton was teased about her pants suits. Jacqueline Kennedy, who went a little further than Mrs. Obama in creating her style statement by sketching many of her own designs, is still revered for her fashion sense. Is it fair to suggest that celebrating her as a fashion icon diminished her civic accomplishments, such as the founding of the White House Historical Association? Should we blame her for not redirecting our fashion focus?

First Lady Michelle Obama and President Obama at the 2011 state dinner (Getty Images)

Stories of the fascination with First Ladies and fashion date back to Dolly Madison and Mary Lincoln. Edith Wilson, wife of Woodrow reportedly spent considerable time focused on style and felt that a fashionable representation of her position actually elevated how Americans were viewed on the world stage. And now it seems Mrs. Obama inspires the same sentiment.

It’s a shame that a woman’s looks continue to be a barometer for how we feel about her value. The pressure of society on women to look a certain way even burdened Eleanor Roosevelt, one of our most admired first ladies who often lamented that she was not beautiful. The fact that Mrs. Obama makes no apologies for her wardrobe is part of what makes her superior in her position. The First Lady has partnered with some of the biggest and most well-known entities to gain momentum and traction on causes like Let’s Move, focused on childhood obesity and her efforts to support military families. In a recent interview to talk about these programs, she was also asked about the red dress. “Look, women, wear what you love. It’s nice to have on a nice suit, but it’s a lot nicer to change a generation in terms of their health,” she said redirecting the conversation to her initiatives.

I think our First Lady is focused on the important work, Ms. Horyn. She just happens to look fabulous while she’s doing it.

Read more on Michelle Obama and fashion…

• The Michelle Obama Fashion Effect Boosts Company Stock Values
• Michelle Obama’s profitable style profile
• Working Your Style with Daisy Lewellyn: How to make a Good First Impression

She's on his team now. But suppose Obama had followed Clinton's advice and Clinton had not?

So, I’m a little behind the news blitz—okay way behind, but I recently began reading the controversial book Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime, by political analysts John Heilemann and Mark Halperin. When it was first released it created a firestorm of controversy around the colorful behavior of key candidates in play during the 2008 historic presidential election. It is a great read giving incredible insight not only into the characters of the candidates, their wives and their political teams, but general laws of business.

Of course, what we learn from the book—and the election—is that the best campaigns are framed by a successful message—one that is well thought out, consistent, sincere, and relevant. The message shapes the brand and the brand is how the electorate identifies with a candidate. According to www.businessdictionary.com a brand is a “unique design, sign, symbol, word, or a combination of these, employed in creating an image that identifies a product and differentiates it from its competitors. Over time, this image becomes associated with a level of credibility, quality and satisfaction in the consumer’s mind.”

This definition obviously connects branding to a product, but in business (and politics) people have brands as well. Everyone does, whether they know it or not; whether they like it or not.  How your brand is developed and managed makes all the difference in how you are perceived. Why is perception so important? In elections it determines who wins and loses. At the office it determines how you are judged at work. And it runs the gamut from situations like always being early or always running late; being a great contributor or having a disagreeable demeanor. Strong brands get rewarded with opportunities. Weak brands are overlooked, ignored, and eventually discarded.

While it is interesting to read how the candidates of the 2008 election struggled to shape and fortify their brands, nothing was more fascinating to me than how Hilary Clinton had virtually no control over her personal brand way before she even entered the race. Unfortunately, for Clinton she had to manage a professional image that was judged both publicly and by her colleagues in the Senate, where she was branded a “workhorse.”

“Clinton believed that success in the Senate required the sublimation of the ego (or a credible facsimile thereof),” the authors write. “And the advice she offered Obama based on that theory was clear and bullet-point concise: Keep your head down. Avoid the limelight. Get on the right committees. Go to hearings. Do your homework. Build up a substantive portfolio. And never forget the care and feeding of the people who sent you here.”

Keep your head down and avoid the limelight. It is absolutely the worst professional advice anyone could offer, but unfortunately that’s how most women function in corporate America: They work hard; they do their homework and hope that someone will notice so they can get the reward they deserve.

Men in business never think that way—Barack Obama certainly didn’t heed her advice. From the minute he hit the Senate, Obama focused on developing the right relationships, and once he decided to run for office, he courted a more influential and more extensive network. He had key mentors who offered critical advice about this new political culture to which he was now exposed and he routinely tested his speeches in a variety of venues. Obama created an exciting brand, one that he developed and cultivated – one his network willfully embraced and helped extend to their own networks. A workhorse just has no legs.

I always equated Hillary Clinton, one of the strongest and most successful and influential women in politics as one of the “boys.” Her tough as nails exterior, I dare argue, was very much part of her public brand. But like so many other gifted female professionals, she was solely focused on the job and not all the supporting elements that are so important to how the hard work is actually perceived. The only thing that is more important than the brand is how it is managed. You have to work twice as hard as your peers to be considered just as good, is what most women and minorities have been taught. It is true that the measurement by which women and minorities are judged is often more stringent, but what we’ve also learned is that only working hard and working smart yield completely different returns.

Sonia Alleyne is an editorial director of Black Enterprise.

Nancy Pelosi and First Lady Michelle Obama celebrated the legacy of Sojourner Truth at the Capitol today.

Hundreds of people — mostly women, a majority of them African American — packed the Capitol Visitors Center’s Emancipation Hall today to witness the unveiling of a bronze bust of Sojourner Truth, former slave, abolitionist and suffragette.

Participating in the celebration were three of the nation’s most powerful women: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, First Lady Michelle Obama, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, each of whom attributed much of their success to Truth’s courage and determination. Actress Cicely Tyson did a rendition of the famous “Ain’t I a Woman?” speech that Truth gave at a women’s rights convention in Ohio in 1851.

Truth, nee Isabella Baumfree, is the first black woman to be honored with a statue, but won’t be the last. Pelosi announced at the event that a statue of Rosa Parks will soon follow.

“Forever more, in the halls of one of our country’s greatest monuments of liberty and equality, justice and freedom, [Truth’s] story will be told again and again and again,” Obama told the audience, which included some of Truth’s direct descendents. She also said that children such as her own will now be able to see the face of a woman who looks like them and that she hopes Truth would be proud to see she, a descendent of slaves, is the nation’s first lady.

“What a wonderful day, when Sojourner Truth takes her rightful place alongside the heroes who have helped shape America,” said Clinton.  As a senator, she co-authored with Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), the legislation to create the monument.

President George W. Bush signed the legislation in 2006, after a 10-year, hard-fought effort by the National Conference of Black Women, led by its late president C. Delores Tucker, to include a statue of Truth in the Capitol rotunda with white suffragettes Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Lucretia Mott.

The bust will not, however, be placed with her fellow suffragettes, to the great chagrin of many. Instead it will remain on permanent display in Emancipation Hall, which got its name in part because slaves helped build the Capitol.

In a message that aired during the NBA All-Star Game halftime, Obama stressed the importance of community service.

Hillary Clinton launched her first overseas trip as secretary of state with a four-nation visit to Asia. (Photo source: White House)

Davis

Let it never be said that Rep. Artur Davis isn’t up for a challenge. The three-term congressman recently announced plans to run for governor of Alabama, making him the first Democrat to formally throw his hat into the ring for the 2010 election.

If successful, Davis would become the state’s first black governor, but that’s a very big if, given its history of troubled race relations. Alabama may indeed have come a long way since the days when it was ruled by the infamous segregationist Gov. George Wallace, but is it really ready to elect a black governor?

According to longtime University of Alabama political scientist William Stewart, people there now have a more progressive attitude toward race and may even be receptive to Davis, depending on his message. But, Stewart adds, there’s no question he faces an uphill battle with a population that is 75% white.

Davis, however, is optimistic enough about his chances that he’s willing to risk a very safe seat for what some consider to be a rather long shot.

“I recognize that there are some outside and within Alabama who have a certain perception of the state’s racial history, so they believe the campaign is unusually difficult because of that. But I’ve never been one who believes that because something’s not been done before that it can’t be done,” he says. “My state faces some very unique challenges as we try to develop a modern economy, and a first-class public school system, and the governor is going to be the person who drives those decisions and opportunities over the next decade.”

Thanks to investment in the state by major auto manufacturers such as Mercedes, Honda, and Toyota, as well as a steel mill currently under construction that will create thousands of new jobs, the local economy is a little stronger than in some of its neighboring states. Still, unemployment figures have recently doubled, and state lawmakers are being forced to make some tough budget decisions. As a result, voters may be more open-minded, says D’Linell Finley, Auburn University political scientist.

“Because of economic conditions, people will listen to good ideas and not make race their first and foremost priority,” Finley says. “We’re faring a bit better than the rest of the nation, but this is still a conservative anti-tax, anti-government spending state. Davis will have to talk about a vision where the state can care for the needy and provide necessary programs without putting additional tax burdens on voters.”

Davis says that in addition to recruiting industry to the state, the next governor must also diversify the job base. “We have to figure out how to become a leader on the alternative energy front and in areas that right now seem foreign in Alabama, like biomedicine and information technology. That’s going to require a sustained, disciplined strategy,” he says. Davis also wants to ensure that corporations doing business in Alabama begin paying their fair share of taxes. Some corporations have little or no tax burden, an agreement made to lure them to the state.

Natalie Davis, a political scientist at Birmingham-Southern College (and no relation), believes Davis has a “better than even” chance of winning the Democratic nomination, with current Lt. Gov. Jim Folsom as his nearest competitor. She envisions a scenario of divided black support, as was the case during the state’s primary race between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Initially, at least, the more traditional and older leadership in the black community may choose Folsom out of loyalty and because they think he has a better chance to win, while younger, more affluent and better educated blacks will likely support Davis.

Putting race aside, Davis says, it will be difficult for a Democrat to beat a Republican statewide. A Democrat would have to capture all of the black vote and approximately 40% of the white vote. By her tally, to eke out a win Davis would have to more than double the number of white votes Obama got there during the presidential election.  “That would be a major change in the way people vote. I think Davis wants to make history and this would be making history,” she says.

President Barack Obama signs an executive order related to the closing of Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, during a ceremony in the Oval Office. (Source: Getty Images)

“The message that we are sending the world is that the United States intends to prosecute the ongoing struggle against violence and terrorism, and we are going to do so vigilantly and we are going to do so effectively and we are going to do so in a manner that is consistent with our values and our ideals,” the president said, as he flanked by Vice President Joe Biden and numerous retired military officers.

The first executive order mandates the closing of Guantanamo by Jan. 22, 2010. The order also established a review process with the goal of transferring the detainees before closing the facility. It also requires a review to determine whether it is possible to transfer the detainees to other countries, and if transfer isn’t approved, a second review will determine whether prosecution is possible and in what forum.

He signed the document in a blue folder to applause, adding, “There we go.”

The next order revokes Executive Order 13440, signed by former President George W. Bush in July 2007, that allowed the use of interrogation techniques blocked by the Geneva Convention. Obama’s order requires that all interrogations of detainees in armed conflict, by any government agency, follow the Army Field Manual interrogation guidelines.

The order is intended, he said, to improve intelligence gathering “as well as promote safe and humane treatment of individuals in U.S. custody.” He said it “assures compliance with treaty obligations of the U.S., including the Geneva Conventions.” He said it “effectively insures that anybody detained by the U.S.,” will be interrogated abiding by the Army Field Manual. “We can abide by a rule that says ‘We don’t torture,’ ” he said. He added that doing so follows a campaign promise but also “an understanding that dates back to our Founding Fathers that we are willing to observe…standards of conduct not just when it is easy but also when it’s hard.”

Another order sets up a special interagency task force on detainees made up of the attorney general, secretaries of defense, state, and homeland security, the director of national intelligence, the director of the CIA and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

“They are going to provide me with information in terms of how we are able to deal with the disposition of some of the detainees that may be currently at Guantanamo that we cannot transfer to other countries, who impose a serious danger…but who we cannot try because of various problems related to evidence in an Article III court.”

The president sought verification of this interpretation of the document from White House Counsel Gregory B. Craig, who added that the task force’s recommendations would also provide “clear guidance” to the military.

The final order deals with the pending Supreme Court case of U.S. legal resident and detainee Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri. It delays the proceedings until the Obama administration can “properly review” the case.

Later today, President Obama and Vice President Biden are scheduled to meet with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, National Security Adviser James Jones, and Deputy National Security Adviser Tom Donilon.

Barack Hussein Obama takes the oath of office. (Source: Getty Images)

Barack Hussein Obama Jr. was sworn into office as the 44th president of the United States and the first African American president.

Just after noon, under cloudy skies with his family near, the former senator from Illinois placed his hand on President Abraham Lincoln’s bible – which was held by Michelle Obama — and took the 35-word oath of office, administered by Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.

“I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors,” he said in his inaugural address.

Obama’s speech focused on the economy, citizenship, and the U.S.’s relationships with the rest of the world.

“Today I say to you that 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,” he said to the more than one million people assembled on the National Mall. “But know this, America — they will be met. “On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord. On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.”

Obama immediately addressed the economy and his goal to fix the damaged economy left behind by former President George W. Bush.

“That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood.  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 each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.”

The dawn of the new Democratic era — with Obama allies in charge of both houses of Congress – ends eight years of Republican control of the White House by Bush, who leaves Washington as one of the nation’s most unpopular and divisive presidents, the architect of two unfinished wars and the man in charge at a time of economic calamity that swept away many Americans’ jobs, savings and homes, writes the Associated Press.

With Obama in office, the country’s foreign and domestic policies are expected to change – as is criticsm of said policies. “To the Muslim world,” Obama said, “we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.”

And he sought rapprochement with nations and cultures that have been viewed as enemies of the U.S. for the past eight years. “To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing 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 your fist.”
The facial expressions of those on the National Mall indicated that people understood the gravity of Obama’s message. “Yes,” they cried as he spoke. “Amen,” they yelled.

His message was also of inclusion and respect for all peoples – and of peace.

“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 dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall 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.

“For Walter and Lela Morris, a couple from California in their 80s, the pilgramage to bear witness to history was a moment they will never forget. “We are exhilarated and celebratory,” said Walter Morris. “We are seeing today the dream come true.”

Two years after beginning his quest for the White House as a first-term senator from Illinois, Obama moves into the Oval Office.

As the thousands upon thousands of wildly enthusiastic Washingtonians and out-of-town visitors witnessed the 56th inauguration, they couldn’t help but wonder, “Who would have thunk it?” of the historic event.

The U.S. Marine Band, the U.S. Navy Band, the girls and boys choirs of San Francisco, and Aretha Franklin performed musical selections throughout the ceremony. Violinist Itzhak Perlman, cellist Yo-Yo Ma, and clarinetist Anthony McGill, conducted by composer/arranger John Williams, also performed.

Following the call to order and opening remarks by California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Dr. Rick Warren delivered the invocation before Vice President-elect Joe Biden was sworn into office by the Supreme Court Associate Justice John Paul Stevens.

After giving his inaugural speech, Obama escorted former President Bush to Executive One helicopter so he and wife Laura could go to Andrews Air Force Base and then fly to Texas to begin their lives as private citizens.

The Obamas and Vice President Joe Biden and his wife Jill are attending a luncheon with their families and other dignitaries in the Capitol’s Statutory Hall. After lunch, the Obamas and Bidens will make their way down Pennsylvania Avenue to their parade review stand in front of the White House. From there, they’ll watch more than 13,000 parade participants march, drum, boogie, and in a few cases – mow– along the 1.7-mile parade route.

Tonight, Obama will be host the first-ever Neighborhood Ball with a line-up of talent, including Beyonce, Mary J. Blige, Mariah Carey, Faith Hill, Jay-Z, Alicia Keys, Shakira, Stevie Wonder and Nick Cannon as DJ.

Even later, the Obamas will attend the Home States (Illinois and Hawaii) Ball at the Washington Convention Center. They are reportedly going to do their first dance to Etta James’s “At Last,” sung
by Beyonce.