At Least Talk The Talk
by digby
So Chuck Todd, subbing for Matthews, was just discussing the notorious Politico article from yesterday with Jonathan Alter and Katrina VandenHeuval and commented that he read in it or "somewhere" that one difference between Obama and Clinton was that Clinton used populist language even if he was a centrist pushing centrist policies. (This is the only piece I know of in which anyone made that observation, but perhaps I'm wrong about that.)
Anyway, Jonathan Alter scoffed at that and said Clinton didn't speak in populist terms, he just sounded "folksy."
Really?
Mrs. Yandle, I never had a better introduction. Before we thank anyone else, I think all of us should acknowledge that it was America's families who have beaten the gridlock in Washington to pass family leave, people like this fine woman all over America who talked to Members of Congress, both Democrat and Republican, who laid their plight out, who asked that their voices be heard. When Senator Gore and I ran in the election last year, we published a book called "Putting People First." I'm very proud that the first bill I am to sign as President truly puts people first.
I do want to thank the United States Congress for moving expeditiously on this matter and for doing it before their first recess so that every Member of Congress who voted for this bill can go home and say, "We are up there working on your problems and your promise, trying to make a better future for you." This sends a clearer signal than any words any of us could utter, that we have tried to give this Government back to the American people. And I am very appreciative that the Congress has moved so rapidly on this bill...
Family medical leave has always had the support of a majority of Americans, from every part of the country, from every walk of life, from both political parties. But some people opposed it. And they were powerful, and it took 8 years and two vetoes to make this legislation the law of the land. Now millions of our people will no longer have to choose between their jobs and their families.
The law guarantees the right of up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave per year when it's urgently needed at home to care for a newborn child or an ill family member. This bill will strengthen our families, and I believe it will strengthen our businesses and our economy as well.
I have spent an enormous amount of time in the last 12 years in the factories and businesses of this country talking to employers and employees, watching the way people work, often working with them. And I know that men and women are more productive when they are sure they won't lose their jobs because they're trying to be good parents, good children. Our businesses should not lose the services of these dedicated Americans. And over the long run, the lessons of the most productive companies in the world, here at home and around the world, are that those who put their people first are those who will triumph in the global economy. The business leaders who have already instituted family and medical leave understand this, and I'm very proud of some of the business leaders who are here today who represent not only themselves but others all across America who were ahead of all of us who make laws in doing what is right by our families.
Family and medical leave is a matter of pure common sense and a matter of common decency. It will provide Americans what they need most: peace of mind. Never again will parents have to fear losing their jobs because of their families.
Just a week ago, I spoke to 10 people in families who had experienced the kinds of problems Mrs. Yandle has talked about today. Vice President Gore and I talked to people all across America who moved us deeply. We were saddened to hear their stories, but today all of us can be happy to think of their future...
Again, I'm not saying that Clinton didn't put forth plenty of centrist, business friendly legislation. He passed NAFTA against his own party's will, after all, one of the most destructive anti-populist measures ever signed into law by a modern Democratic president. And that message above is full of DLC policy, so I'm not endorsing it. But the values that he tied all that to were the traditional American values of community and common good and the constant refrain was about putting the public interest over the private interest, the needs of the people over the powerful, and the idea that he was there to work for "those who work hard and play by the rules." It's not everything, obviously, but rhetorically emphasizing those values at least kept them on the menu and drew a contrast between the Democratic and Republican ideologies during a time when the Republicans were competing with culture war cant. The phrase "the people hired me to get up every morning and go to work for them" was his trademark and it got him a lot of good will when he came under siege by snooty villagers who never accepted him as a member of their club.
Obviously, Obama is a different kind of speaker and nobody is suggesting that he adopt Clinton's rhetoric. That would be silly -- and he's a fine orator anyway. But if he can't find a way to actually pass legislation that is self-evidently beneficial for the people over the powerful, then it would be really helpful if he at least paid some lip service to traditional Democratic Party values so they don't disappear altogether.
Failing to clearly make the case is creating a huge problem:
When asked "Generally speaking, do you think the steps taken by the president and Congress on the economy over the past 18 months have helped the national economy and made it stronger," or have "hurt the national economy and made it weaker," 48 percent answered "made it weaker," while 43 percent chose "stronger." When asked which approach to strengthening the economy they preferred, 54 percent of respondents chose "cutting taxes for business to help jump-start private-sector job creation and economic growth." Just 32 percent said "making new government investments to help jump-start private-sector job creation and economic growth," essentially favoring a more Republican-oriented message by 22 points.
When asked whether they would prefer a candidate who "will stick with President Barack Obama" economic policies," or "one who will start from scratch with new ideas to shrink government, cut taxes, and grow the economy," 64 percent preferred starting from scratch, compared with just 30 percent who would stick with the Obama policies. Populists won't particularly care for the finding that 55 percent agreed with the statement "American companies are the backbone of the U.S. economy and we need to help them grow, whether they are large or small." Just 37 percent said, "Large companies have too much power, hurt the middle class, and government needs to keep them in check."
The Republicans are actually running on a platform that says the unemployed are lazy, that we must place a moratorium on all new regulation and that we need to cut the taxes of the wealthy even more. They are doing this at a time when we have nearly 10% protracted unemployment, housing foreclosures are still going up, Wall Street nearly destroyed the global financial system and the worst man made ecological disaster in our history is happening right before our eyes. And yet large numbers of people think they should be put back in charge of the government and that the answer to our problems is for government to shrink.
Something's not getting through and the reason isn't that liberal bloggers are failing to clap loud enough. People just don't have anything other than this conservative mantra to work with.
.