Obama as Told by George Lakoff

Last night's debate really shifted things for me, especially after my talk on Monday with George Lakoff.

First, I'm going to help George and his thinktank, the Rockridge Institute, build their presence in the blogosphere. They're from a different world, they write books, something I'd like to do, but it isn't in my nature. In the same way when they look at communication they think big and longer-term. Instant communication, blogging and podcasting, is not their first impulse. But Lakoff and his associates understand politics in a way that Democrats don't get, but Republicans really do. That is, until Barack Obama. If you really want to understand why the Obama campaign is working and the Clinton campaign is fading, Lakoff understands it, and if you press him, he'll get out of professor mode, and tell you how it works in words anyone with a brain and an education can understand. That's his gift.

Lakoff tells a story about Dick Wirthlin, Reagan's chief strategist, in 1980. Lakoff met him at a conference after he had retired, and the two hit it off. He explained to George that when he started he did a poll, and found out that most people don't agree with Reagan, but they planned to vote for him anyway. I've seen the same thing with Obama. In a comment thread here, Phil Windley, who I like and respect (we have a technology bond) but whose politics and mine couldn't be more opposite, said he might vote for Obama. What! I asked why and he said that Obama seemed to him to have integrity. That's what Wirthlin uncovered. People don't vote on policy, they vote for leaders, for people whose values seem American to them, for people they feel they can trust.

I talked with Lakoff about how the word "liberal" had been destroyed by the right wing, and asked if that was going to be a problem for Obama. He said it wouldn't, because Obama had figured out how to say what many of us believe, that the values people label with the L-word are actually American values. When your neighbor's house is burning down, you don't lecture him on how incompetent he is (though there are Americans who would do that), you get out your fire hose and do everything you can do to help. After you call 911 to get taxpayer-funded fire department to come put out the fire.

We look forward to the coming election believing that this time the "tax and spend" label won't stick for a couple of reasons. Our candidate sees it coming this time, and understands that it's a frame, it's a way that Republicans get you to accept their point of view by letting them frame the discussion in their terms. Do Democrats tax and spend? Sure of course they do. So do Republicans. Nothing wrong with it. Imagine if we all had to hire our own fire departments. Instead we pool our resources and buy fire insurance, in the form of trucks and buildings, and brave men and women who protect our lives and property.

Our government provides the context, the legal system, the services, that make it possible for businesses to flourish. It's naive to think that government doesn't play that role, and the Republicans obviously believe it too. In the seven years Bush has been in office government spending has grown. Have taxes grown too? Maybe not, but borrowing surely has. The money to pay for the war came from somewhere. As it has for many Americans who borrowed against the equity in their homes, there must be a day of reckoning for our economy as a whole. We've been charging our collective lifestyle, this luxury of an occupation of Iraq which is a lousy investment for the American taxpayer (where's the return?) but a great investment for Bush, Cheney and friends in the oil and defense industries. We won't know how much money Bush gets after he leaves office and becomes a private citizen, but I bet he becomes a billionaire from kickbacks he gets from selling us out. This is a tax, and it's our future they have been spending.

While the Republicans have been in office America has become much less competitive in the world economy. Those jobs we lost while Republicans ran the show aren't coming back. And the inefficiency of our health care system, believe it or not, is an important reason industrial jobs are going across the border to Canada, where they have a no nonsense health care system that works like this -- if you get sick you get health care. Geez, does that seem fairly American to you? It does to me. It's kind of like the fire department. We all hope our houses don't catch fire, but when they do, we're damned happy we don't get an argument when we call 911. Why should cancer, diabetes and heart disease be any different? I don't get it.

All of this is part of the story Lakoff tells. You can get a taste of it starting midway through Monday's podcast. Listen to the last half hour if you're short on time. And I'm going to keep pestering him to do more, shorter podcasts with me, responding to current events, as they happen. We'll apply his model to the political system, and watch how Obama openly captures the best of the Republican playbook. It should be something to watch, something marvelous.

There was a grand moment in last night's debate; they played a clip of Hillary Clinton's sarcastic speech about the light shining down, the heavens opening, angels singing, etc. The camera goes to Obama -- he's beaming. He says it sounds pretty good. And it does. America works when we work together. Being American is simple, but people like Bush and Rove and Cheney made it complicated. Americans get shit done, and Americans don't argue when their neighbor's house is on fire. We roll up our sleeves and we can do great things. For better or worse now we need to do some great things. We're lucky that now we have the leadership we need to get started.

And there was the shift in thinking that came from last night's debate. We already have more leadership from this man who hasn't even won the Democratic nomination yet than we have from the actual President of the United States. Further, in the last two campaigns, I have exhorted the candidates to use the money they raise to solve important problems, and realize that Obama had done exactly that. He's uniting us as a country. There's nothing more important, once we remember that we're all Americans and that that means something, we can do so much more than when we're divided by the "wedge issues" of cynical political hacks. We always have had the option to take back our country, now we seem to be doing that.

When we put aside our differences, and I'm not talking about the heads of companies and lobbyists and government officials, but the people, they really can't stop us. We have the means to pass laws that they have to obey and we have police and military to enforce those laws. The founders of our country believed in this, and believed in us, we're not fools to agree with them, we're just using our power.

Comments

[Merin]

George Lakoff is something of a hero to me. Glad to see him getting some recognition.

If Senator Obama isn't studying the writings of George Lakoff then Barack simply has a natural gift for framing and speaking in ways that stir people and hit them where they care.

[Idiocracy]

The powers that be are scrambling... Obama has a grib on the people and theres no greater power than the general majority.

I smell great change in the air... It wont be easy, but change is a comin..

UNITED WE STAND
DIVIDED WE FALL

[Karenina44]

Dr. Lakoff has a tremendously insightful thesis. I hope the Obama campaign is paying attention to what he says. It will be interesting to see how the conservatives continue to frame Obama as he glides into the nomination.

[S1m0n]

Great post!

That's what I see as most radical about Obama: he's utterly rejecting the conservative Big Lie that people are powerless. That's the message at the core of the entire reagan revolution: the government is a 'they', and they are the problem. That's not the truth. In Obama's worldview, the government is WE not THEY, and it's how WE, the powerful we, get together and solve problems as a group. Hell no, we're not powerless! WE--we the people--have the power and the numbers, so don't you dare tell us we're the enemy or the problem; we got some problems we're going to fix, and we're starting with that crappy attitude of learned helplessness the right is trying to instill.

[dmthurman]

"Americans get shit done".....Now that is something republicans and Democrats can agree with.....

[ChimpmasterDJ]

"And there was the shift in thinking that came from last night's debate. We already have more leadership from this man who hasn't even won the Democratic nomination yet than we have from the actual President of the United States."

Absolutely and undeniably true. Not that it's a very high bar to leap. I'd prefer to say he's already shown a better quality of leadership than our last 3 Presidents.

[LDW]

Unfortunately for the Democratic Party, who seems gung-ho to nominate Obama, the only idealism Obama has exists for the shining moment of his speeches. Then's it's back to business for Obama, and that business is not quite so pretty. Like all hypocrites, Obama is possessed of a convenient conscience. He is being two-faced to the gay community, to Ohio about NAFTA, about his stance on the Iraq war, about his non-service as head of the sub-committee on foreign relations, and in the lies he feeds to the media.

For a small example of his Modus operandi, you might be interested in this article which somehow hasn"t made it to HuffingtonPost yet:
"Race Man - How Barack Obama played the race card and blamed Hillary Clinton" by Sean Wilentz "After several weeks of swooning, news reports are finally being filed about the gap between Senator Barack Obama's promises of a pure, soul-cleansing "new" politics and the calculated, deeply dishonest conduct of his actually-existing campaign. But it remains to be seen whether the latest ploy by the Obama camp--over allegations about the circulation of a photograph of Obama in ceremonial Somali dress--will be exposed by the press as the manipulative illusion that it is.... . A review of what actually happened shows that the charges that the Clintons played the "race card" were not simply false; they were deliberately manufactured by the Obama camp and trumpeted by a credulous and/or compliant press corps in order to strip away her once formidable majority among black voters and to outrage affluent, college-educated white liberals as well as college students"

Full text:
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=aa0cd21b-0ff2-4329-88a1-69c6c268b304

[BTJ]

Glad to see that you are up on the latest talking points from the Clinton campaign LDW. Of course they are absurd and desperate.
The latest about not holding hearings in the senate amounts to a charge that Obama is spending time campaigning for president. Horrors! What has Senator Clinton done in the senate recently? Both candidates have to set clear priorities. What is most important at this time is that we elect a candidate for president that can bring about the fundamental change in direction that we need.
And the charge about the 'race card' is similarly disingenuous. Certainly the Clinton campaign recognized that Bill's 'contributions' in New Hampshire and South Carolina were offensive enough to send him only to speak at half full venues well off the media coverage of the campaign. And, after some waffling, disowning the clearly racist comments of an elderly Hispanic Texan supporter. If the Obama campaign had not responded to such crap, we can be assured that we would be dealing with more of the 'black man can't be elected' garbage as well as the old 'you need to be a fighter' routine.
Very tiresome and disappointing. It's time to turn the page.

[AGPolitics]

Read these articles:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/26/go-hard-or-go-home-the-m_n_88491.html

and

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=aa0cd21b-0ff2-4329-88a1-69c6c268b304

[Karenina44]

Egads, AGPolitics... The New Republic is fodder put out by the DLC and the Clintonites. And, like Hillary referring to SNL, it is equally as bad as Tucker Carlson trying to blame Jon Stewart for doing fake news. AND, if Obama was the one who had lost 11 in a row, had a campaign team crumbling, and having to fuel his campaign with his personal money, what do you think the media would be doing now? Get a clue, dude.

[greejambri]

EXACTLY!

[IdahoBert]

Obama is redefining the the model American as a "citizen" instead of as a "tax-payer." He is giving new meaning to values like "fairness" and "equality" by nesting them within this larger concept of "citizenship." Obama has the potential to be for Democrats what Reagan was for Republicans.

Republicans skillfully changed accepted frames of political reference and consensus by investing commonly held values with far right content. They cunningly harnessed various forms of societal discontent and channeled them into their project.

Obama is doing the same thing and this is why he sees Reagan as a model leader, not because he admires Reagan's policies or views, but because he admires the way that Reagan and the conservative movement were able alter the political discourse.

[57andfemale]

Excellent observation: we have been treated like consumers, and as if the amount of our consumption was the measure of us. The citizenship message is what's working, I think. Our leadership asks what he/she expects from us: Obama expects us to reclaim our commitment as citizens. George Bush told us to go shopping.

It's sad that Hillary & Co. call citizenship the "cult of personality". If she really believes that, then she is definitely the wrong person to lead this county.

[Chris Weigant - Huffpost Blogger]

IdahoBert -

I apologize in advance for the blatant blog plug, but I totally agree with you about Reagan/Obama. As I wrote last week:

http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2008/02/21/the-next-reagan/

-CW

[amberglow]

Obama continually uses and reinforces GOP framing on everything--from SS to Reagan to Iraq to School Vouchers to his Harry & Louise rerun attacking universal healthcare.

[EvoMan]

He wasn't attacking universal healthcare. He was criticizing Senator Clinton's healthcare plan.

Anyone who wants healthcare will be able to get it under Senator Obama's plan.

[BadChristian]

I will just give this a try.
Since you're talking about framing, think about the "culture war," and how it has been framed... Then think about the places in America that look like battlefields.

Then think about the old conflict of Urban Vs. rural, and the rise of the suburbs as Americas swing vote.
Then think about Katrina.
Think about urban infra-structure.
Think about the presentation of "Nappy headed hoes." "Ghetto languages." Think about how Urban America has been "Framed" in the Corporate media, where the liberal strength has always been, and Roves number one rule (attack their strength) and how we are suffering for it.
Try NOT framing it as black and white, but urban and rural, with the suburbs rising in the middle. We know the cowboy and "God" and "Good Christians" are supposedly the ones being attacked... But flip that, and see it is the urban resident who is watching their communities foreclosed and imprisoned.
Here's a riddle.
What do you call an urban male with a risk taking personality?

A:
an inmate.

[dtd]

Obama's critics are right in one respect...he is like an evangelical preacher, but he's not inspiring us to surrender ourselves to the glory of Jesus Christ, but the glory of America. This country has been so divided for so long that we truly have lost any meaning of what it means to be an American and what sets us apart from the rest of the world. Obama not only wants to restore the greatness of America, but fulfill the promise that we have never realized: a truly united America. What's wrong with that? I just don't understand this knee jerk reaction to piss on that. What bothers me most is the ridicule and dismisiveness coming from the Clinton Campaign and its supporters, especially the falsehood that African Americans are only supporting Senator Obama because he's Black. If that were the case, Al Sharpton would have gotten our votes in 2004. I wish the lazy media would take the time to actually interview African Americans of all walks of life and what they will find is this growing belief that America isn't the racist country it had been widely perceived. The day after Senator Obama won the IA primary, caller after caller to prominaet urban radio stations echoed the same theme, "I feel like a real American today." There was NO talke of a desire to achieve racial superiority or get back at Whitey, so to speak, but a real feeling of inclusion and pride in America. Win after win, the anger, resentment and distrust that was so palpable among African Americans has been dissipating. It may sound crazy, but it's true. I've even shocked myself at how optimistic I feel now about the future of this country. Before this election season, there was NOTHING that could be said or done to convince me that most White folks didn't harbor some racial bias. Now I'm asking God to forgive my narrow-minded thinking. I'll be honest, I started out with the wish of electing an African American President, but that's not the case anymore. All I can think about is the possibility of America coming together...the next generation living in country not defined by superficial differences like race. Yeah, it may sound corny as hell, but it's true. No matter how this campaign turns out, I thank Senator Obama for giving me the gift of being able to see myself as an American, not just a minority in America.

[Desiderata]

It does my soul good to read your comments, dtd. I've been too long sick of this stupid skin color thing getting in the way of our nation being all that America can be.

Still, I am haunted by the (deliberate?) lax Secret Service security for Obama. We, the people, whether for him or for Clinton or for McCain, must demand air tight security.

Should tragedy come to this good man, the country will be ripped apart, giving Bush an excuse to declare martial law and suspend the general election.

I risk rebuke as an alarmist and conspiracy nut, but I must come to terms with the kind of man who sits in the Oval Office now. I cannot erase from my mind that a plan could very well be in play to strike Obama down to cause the crisis that would keep Bush and his thugs in power and end our democracy once and for all.

[TommyMcCarthy]

O.K....Consider yourself rebuked.

[Jeffomil]

And Michelle Obama echoed this feeling in her comments which were pounced upon by those who see any criticism of America as UN American. Shame on them! If Obama is elected, this will be the first time in MY lifetime (61 years) that this WHITE man will actually be proud to call himself an American!

[Citizenofreality]

I didn't find anything you said corny dtd. I found it inspiring and I am hopeful that this campaign will help unite us and that together we will clean up the mess that has been made of this country.

[Rachiavelli]

Me too. It took me until the SC speech, though, and the feeling was so unfamiliar it took me about an hour to figure out that it was patriotism.

It felt really, really good. I could get used to it.

[Advocate123]

Glad to see a liberal on this blog whose arguments were so well-written that I could actually respond to specifics.

Lakoff's argument is founded on one main fallacy: Everyone benefits from the government taxing, spending, subsidizing, etc., but Republicans just use this power to help the rich, while Democrats use this power to help the majority.

The truth is that taxing and spending overall hurts everyone in the long-run, regardless of who the special interests are.

The truth of the matter is that the "Base" of the Republican Party is furious with the Republican "establishment" for doing just that.

We take an intellectually honest position of saying, no subsidies for anyone, rich or poor, corporate or small business. Reduce taxes to allow people to create jobs here at home.

There is a third alternative to Lakoff: The government's role is to use Military to protect us from outside threats, police to protect people from physical force b/w citizens, and courts to enforce the laws. Competition works to lower prices for the poor, and bring better prices with all other services. (Please Don't respond by saying "What about health insurance? because Our system is a subsidized tax-incentivized system that is nothing like the free market).

Advocate123
http://copiousdissent.blogspot.com

[oldpotsmuggler]

Another free ride conservative. "I like and benefit from the highways, the airways, the airwaves, the education system. I just don't want to have to help pay for it so I make up a fairy tale about supply and demand being supreme, thus giving me the cover of saying I'm not cheap and selfish, I'm principled."

Unbridled competition produces monoploies and higher prices as easily as it brings prices down.

[57andfemale]

...and the safety of our food supply and the safety of the drugs we take.

We're getting the Supreme Court now that will back up this guy's ridiculous assumptions: if the pacemakers we use are approved by the FDA, we have no recourse to sue if they are defective. They are now trying to extend that to the drugs we take.

That's the great win of the supply and demand mantra, isn't it? Because you as a consumer will have the time and the know-how to research your pacemaker, won't you? Or the tests for drugs? Or the side effects that show up later?

It's a ridiculous argument. It has never worked -- business, in a Republican-led government, has no incentive to do what's right for the commons -- it buys itself legislators and presidents and cabinet posts to protect themselves from any consequences.

How does that compare to Reagan's fictional "welfare queen"?

The American people are better than that. We are poised to finally walk that walk.

[JerryJef]

You live in a fairytale world wherein all the abodes are built of half-baked gingerbread dreams.
Competition is the proper solution to all problems and the correct answer to all questions. Competition between equals can, sometimes, produce beneficial results. Put the New England Patriots on a field witht the New York Giants and you get a pretty good football game.
In business, unlike football, competition between equals rarely exists. And when it does, it is quickly extinguished. The deadliest enemy to free market competition is business itself. Name any industry and the result is the same over the last twenty-five years: merge binges that have reduced competion and reduced both services and quality of service. In no case can prices be shown to have declined without a corresponding decline in service.
Competition among the basic economic factors has never been equal. The basic factors are not guided by the invisible hand, but by the Golden Rule: He who has the money makes the rules. Labor invariably gets the short end because it is the weakest factor. Thus, American business is, in the spirit of competion, moving jobs overseas to lower cost labor markets. American business is the reason for illegal immigration. Intimidated, terrified illegals are a lot cheaper than union members. While competition will not always produce lower prices in a pure market, it will always lower wages.
Pure, unfettered, beneficient competion exists only in economic theories and in your imagination. It does not exist in the real business world.
I notice you recognize the military, the central violence power, and the judiciary as necessary government endeavors. All three, as you say, are designed to protect your sorry hide and your property.

[frustratedinohio]

Obama has now only about half of voting democrats. How is that uniting anybody. You make it sound like we are overwhelmingly voting for Obama and we are not. He'll win by a small margin and there won't be much he can do to unite democrats. So how in the hell do you think he'll win over conservatives?

[jimpharo]

How do you get only half the Democrats? If we re-ran NY and California today do you doubt that the result would be different?

That's why he's leading in the national polls of Democrats. He has a substantial majority, and if you think Democrats won't unite behind him as HRC's chances diminish I wonder if you're paying attention...

[Karenina44]

Dear Frustrated --

I completely empathize with not having your preferred candidate winning. At the end of the day, this is our chance to take back America... whether it be Hillary or Barack at the helm. Policy-wise they are very similar, they just each have a different way to get that policy, and each has a different personality. If we continue to let things divide us, then Rove and Repubs have already won the white house in November. Please don't roll over and play dead, i.e.,vote McCain or Nader. Either way, Hillary or Barack will have a tangled mess and will need all of our support.

[MacD2B]

You are correct frustrated...the hillary folks WILL NOT support obama and we will lose to McCain....

just my two cents

[ChimpmasterDJ]

Hillary folk shoould forget for just one moment that "she's the one with the ovaries" and consider this:

Hillary's vote on the Iraq War was NOT a question of "bad judgment". It was far worse than that. It was a cynically amoral career-oriented calculation that ended up being a grievous miscalculation.

She says "Bush fooled her" by rushing to war before letting the inspectors do their jobs, but everyone at the time knew that he might very well do just that. All the signs were in the air. That is why the Levin Amendment was proposed, to close that loop-hole that Clinton claims she never imagined. The problem is that she PRAISED the Levin Amendment. Then she turned right around and voted against it.

When she FINALLY reluctantly answered the question of why she voted against it, she LIED (either that, or she has insufficient reading comprehension to become POTUS) and claimed she "couldn't vote for it, because it would create a precedent diminishing the power of the POTUS, by subjugating it to the power of the UN". Of course, the Levin Amendment said NOTHING OF THE SORT. Anyone who can get through "My Pet Goat" without consulting a dictionary, can clearly understand the Levin Amendment merely required the POTUS to return to Congress (the proper Constitutional Authority to declare war), should he fail to obtain UN Security Council backing for the war.

Add to that all her other critical neo-con supporting votes, and you might well understand why some of us "reject and denounce" her candidacy.

[greejambri]

Then this country will get another four years of Neocon hell. I believe in the end the Democrats will unite around Obama. If they don't they will lose. Simple enough. This is an intense, hard-hitting campaign. People feel passionately about their candidate on both sides. I hope that Clinton will follow the advice of the party leaders, and concede on March 5 so that the party can start the process of preparing for the GE. Anyone that can't see the handwriting on the wall that Obama will be the nominee isn't paying attention.

[57andfemale]

"Half" of more democrats who have ever voted. How do you not factor that in? Voting in huge numbers when they usually don't vote at all.

If her name wasn't Clinton, she wouldn't still be standing, after 11 losses by huge margins.

If you embrace the divisiveness, good for you. It's Hillary who loses to McCain. He pulls all the independents, neither one of them inspires anyone to be good citizens so turnout is low. They both appeal to our baser instincts; because Hillary tells us all she has to do is work hard and we don't have to do anything. Then she'll do what she has done her entire "career": immerse herself in details and then be shocked -- just shocked -- that we are so stupid as to not see that her way is the only, right way. McCain does the same thing: don't think about anything. I'll keep you "safe", as we grow more terrorists by the minute, and our only answer is to bomb, probably with the cluster bombs Hillary and McCain supported.

I have no illusions Obama is perfect -- but he brings something better out of all of us. It's the America I learned to love as a kid and I want it back. And I'll do my part.

[geg6]

Thank you for one of the best and most well written blog posts I've ever, ever read here at Huffpost. Excellent stuff.

[MPeter]

Beautifully done. Yes, OProf. Lakoff gets it. I read his book "Whose Freedom?" and found it very enlightening. He talks about the framing of political discourse that the Republicans like Rove have successfully done. Yep, Obama gets it and he has 'rinsed' the word Liberal. Thank you for a great piece of writing.