I am admittedly a little late to the game for commenting on this
post by Senator Barrak Obama as it occurred some 10 days ago now. However, I think it's significance warrants another look. I believe this for several reasons. First, I am greatly impressed that an elected official would have the courage to be so open and direct about his thoughts on the future of his party. Secondly, to make the posting in the often hostile environment of DailyKos is very impressive given that there is a history of
attack on those who do not tow the line (see the comments to both the Senator's post for good examples of attack). Lastly, I think it impressive whenever a politician goes on record with written word. Doing so shows thoughtfulness in his or her words because each can be chosen deliberately and because I believe that in this lightening fast cable news world, the sound bites and on air interviews are easily lost. However, the Senator's post can be easily and readily recalled to be analyzed for eternity. I think the Senator's post was right on the mark on nearly every single point.
I would also like to add a person note. I have thus far been cautious about Sen. Obama. His convention speech seemed to me to be all steak and no sizzle, he had all the right applause lines but I felt like it lacked substance, his post however, was pure red meat and I am now an enthusiastic convert to the Obama bandwagon!
One very important point made by the Senator, one that I think is missed in our Party's posturing on the two Bush judicial nominations, is that if we want judicial nominees that are "sensative to issues of social justice" our best strategy is NOT to hope that we can convince President Bush to put some centrists up, but rather to take back majorities in our Congressional chambers. Obviously we do not have such majorities now and therefore must posture and strategize on how to handle the current nominess, but we must keep in mind that what we do now directly correlates to how the American public perceives this party and therefore directly correlates to how we will fare in the next elections. The rhetoric we use now in opposing the Bush agenda is the rhetoric on which we will be judged in the coming midterm elections.
This then brings us to Senator Obama's central argument. If the rhetoric we use now is the rhetoric upon which we will be judged, we, as a party, would be wise to analyze this tone. As our rhetoric currently stands, I agree with Senator Obama's assessment that it is an "impediment to creating a workable progressive majority in this country."
The reason I believe our rhetoric is an impediment is that it has become "Bush-lite." I am not suggesting that our Party's platform or the values and ideas of our Party are in ANY way similar to the Republican Party's. What I am suggesting is that the manner in which our Party is engaging the Republicans is very Bush-lite. The Democrats are becoming too mean-spirited. Instead of finding the right policy, we are increasingly looking for any policy that Bush doesn't want.
Example: Social Security. Bush's Social Security plan was a FIASCO! I am proud that the Democrats effectively killed the plan; many kudos to them. However, we didn't kill the plan because we offered a more comprehensive, solid alternative plan that our neighbors clamored for. No, we killed the plan by basically demonstrating that the Bush plan was expensive, moronic, and didn't really address the necessary reform that is desprately needed for Social Security. But we must ask ourselves, did the Dems offer a plan that addressed anything either? My answer would be no, and therefore we seemed a little Bush-lite because the plan, or lack thereof, looked exactly like Bush's for it addressed NOTHING that needs fixing in Social Security.
Another reason our rhetoric has become an impediment is that we have taken "too many pages." Several years ago the Democratic party, as well as progressives, liberals, and the whole big tent, realized that rise of the Republican Party in 1980's wasn't a fad but rather a systemic growth occuring in nearly every corner of the United States, most rapidly in the South, Southwest, and West (this is demographically frightening because these are also the areas in which the United States is fastest growing!). The climax of this growth was of course the 1994 "take over" by Newt and the gang. Since that climactic event we have studied the Republicans a bit further and now can see the enormous network they have created. In hoping to match their power, the Democrats have decided to take a few pages from the playbook and we now are starting to see the creation of liberal, progressive, and Democratic institutions whose purpose it is to create our own echo chamber as well as churn out pundits and politicians using the same talking points and reading the same studies and policy analyses.
However, I think we have taken too many pages. While the substance is dramatically different, the message of the Democrats is the same winner take all, no compromise rhetoric of the Republicans. Yet another way we are becoming a bit too Bush-lite for my liking. I should add another personal note here. Until I read Senator Obama's piece I think I was a strong advocate of the no compromise position. He artfully argues that this is the problem because in refusing to compromise we miss the positions that are winners and therefore continue to be losers. There are plenty of moderate Republicans offering ideas and plans that with a little Democratic tweeking, can bring a lot of America into the Democratic camp; we could be returned to the majority if we just listened. Instead of being the party that wants to find the solutions to what ails America, we have become the party that just wants to make sure the Republicans don't have another victory to chalk up.
The clear consequence of our take no prisoners rhetoric is that we force fellow progressives and Dems "into the box." If an elected official (think Senator Obama) dares seek compromise, he or she is barred from any meaningful contribution on the direction of our Party and country. We point to the current lock step of the Republican Party as foolish and chide them for a lack of independence. We point out that such lock stepping and group think are the cause of slow responses by our government (think Hurrican Katrina). Why are tolerating demands for our own Party to walk in lock-step? What is needed more now than ever before is a Party that doesn't address out-of-the-box problems with in-the-box thinking. We can't fight a war on terror with tanks and soldiers because the other side isn't using those conventional arms. They are using our planes and their bodies. We need to listen to every idea we can to combat these issues. Compromise on values and principles is NEVER acceptable, but we must accept compromise on how we can best implement and acheive those valuses and principles.
Senator Obama only states half the solution, however, by citing faith in the American people's ability to hear authentic debate. The other half is that American people's faith in government. The government is the only place where the Amican people come together to set the course for our future and make the tough choices on how we move toward that future. America is foundering today for many reasons but that most crucial of them is that we no longer believe in government. If we no longer believe in government then we no longer believe in ourselves to tackle the big problems of today and tomorrow. After all, this is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. For a generation now we have been told that big government is bad. Intrusive, invasive government is bad, yes, but government itself, a government large enough so that every single person has a voice, is not only not bad, it is the precisely the key to our exit from the morass we currently find ourselves in. It is only through our faith in our ability to hear authentic debate and then to engage ourselves in our government that we can secure a better future. Let's be the party that leads America to do both.