Memo to Obama: You Can't Represent the Uprising While Undermining It

I'm in New York City for tonight's annual gala for the Progressive States Network. In researching my newspaper column that comes out later this week, I caught two stories on the wire that suggest Barack Obama thinks its possible to both represent the populist uprising that I describe in my book, while also undermining that uprising.

Here's the first story, from the Associated Press about the Obama campaign trying to court labor unions.

Yet, as Obama courts organized labor, we get this from Fortune magazine:

Obama: NAFTA not so bad after all The general campaign is on, independent voters up for grabs, and Barack Obama is toning down his populist rhetoric - at least when it comes to free trade. In an interview with Fortune to be featured in the magazine's upcoming issue, the presumptive Democratic nominee suggests he doesn't want to unilaterally blow up NAFTA after all. "Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified," he conceded, after I reminded him that he had called NAFTA "devastating" and "a big mistake."

Clearly, Fortune breathlessly overstates what's going on here (which is typical of "journalist" Nina Easton), and I think Obama could be solid on trade. However, I'd still say this really shows the persistent power of Big Money over Obama and the Democratic Party. Here you have a policy - NAFTA - that is among the most unpopular policies of the last generation, according to polls. This is a policy that is one of the key catalysts in today's populist uprising on both the Right and Left. Here you have a candidate who campaigned against it in the primary. And within weeks of getting the general election, here you have that same candidate running to Corporate America's magazine of record to vaguely reassure Wall Street about that same policy.

This is precisely what the populist uprising that I describe in my new book is all about - a backlash to this kind of politics.

Obama is trying to find a "third way" on a binary issue. He's trying to make everyone happy - and he seems to think you can simultaneously appease Corporate America and American workers on trade rules that inherently force politicians to take one side or the other. You either have trade rules that are aimed at helping ordinary workers, or trade rules that are aimed at padding corporate profits and enriching a transnational elite. The idea that you can have both - or worse, that the NAFTA model does both - is absurd.

But this is Obama's M.O. - he wants to please everyone. The problem for him is that the public - based on polls - knows that these policies are binary and are screwing them. If he talks out of both sides of his mouth on this issue, he will fail to represent the uprising and take advantage of this populist moment - and he will likely lose the election. That would be a huge tragedy.

This is an ongoing series from the national tour for THE UPRISING. You can order The Uprising at Amazon.com or through your local independent bookstore.

Comments

[DWSUWF]

"Memo to Obama: You Can't Represent the Uprising While Undermining It" - DS

Memo to David Sirota : Yes He Can! Yes He Can! Yes He Can!

[alireiner]

I urge all to read the Naomi Klein piece in the Nation on page 9. Then consider doing what I will do, no MONEY to wall-mart supporters, we need a progressive house and senate to counter the anti worker sentiment of Obama. I donated once. Until he rids his campaign of Wall-Mart lackeys like Jason Furman I will give no money to him. At least I now know why he only mentioned Hilliary's involvement once. He has joined the team, a team that locks it's doors to keep workers in, a team that demanded Lakewood Colorado pave a lake to allow them to put in extra parking, a company that sells tobacco, encourages gambling with machines in their lobbies, Censors music and books, and lastly contributes money to many right wing causes.

[tyrdofwaitin]

I think you'd better find your candidate for president in heaven. In the meantime, make the best of McCain.

[waarpe]

"Obama is trying to find a "third way" on a binary issue....You either have trade rules that are aimed at helping ordinary workers, or trade rules that are aimed at padding corporate profits and enriching a transnational elite. The idea that you can have both - or worse, that the NAFTA model does both - is absurd."


The only thing that's absurd as your premise that this is a binary issue. It ain't.

[iamamerican2]

How is he undermining it? By doing what all politicians do, appeal to the most and try not to offend the least. That's the problem with his whole rorschach appeal people get angry because they assume he's for this or that and then say he's abandoning the progressive movement! lol Or selling out, this won't be a problem for him now but when he's president everyones gonna want him to pay up. Anyway primaries are
made for pandering or maybe david didn't get the memo.

[oafishcad]

Obama is far too conservative on many issues for my tastes. Whenever someone says he's a liberal or progressive, one has to realize that that's relative to the hard right direction that the USA has taken since Reagan. Obama is too conservative, but he's the right choice of the two choices that we have. McCain heads the USA down the wrong path. Obama heads us down the right one. He isn't the goal that I want, he's merely a step in the right direction.

[RedDogBear]

Look people its time to be realistic about Obama. He is the best candidate for president we've had in decades and he is unquestionably better than Clinton much less McCain but he is not a progressive and certainly no revolutionary. He actually reminds me of FDR, he still represents the corporate class but he realizes that if we don't start doing some basic things to support the middle and lower classes in this country then the whole thing is in danger of falling apart. Which is all fine with me. The fact is that given the brainwashing corporate media and the corupt and broken voting system it would be impossible for a true progressive to be elected president right now. Obama is our best shot and will be a major step in the right direction but we will still need to put a lot of pressure on him and especially on the democratic party to keep pushing it to the left. He represents the beggining of an uprising but there is still a long way to go.

[BADEN]

"He's trying to make everyone happy - and he seems to think you can simultaneously appease Corporate America and American workers on trade rules that inherently force politicians to take one side or the other. You either have trade rules that are aimed at helping ordinary workers, or trade rules that are aimed at padding corporate profits and enriching a transnational elite. The idea that you can have both - or worse, that the NAFTA model does both - is absurd."

THANK YOU.

He best make the decision to ELIMINATE THE INFLUENCE OF THE DEMOCRATIC 'LEADERSHIP' COUNCIL that has gotten this country INTO the mess it is today by ENABLING REPUBLICAN ECONOMICS.

Disband the DLC, Mr. Obama.
If you DO - you will be following the DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL view (most of US)

If you DON'T - you just might as well hand the whole party apparatus back over to Ms and Mr. NAFTA/CAFTA 'WE FEEL YER PAIN, BUT QUIT SQUEALING - MATER/PATER KNOWS BEST", formerly known as the Past POTUS AND SPOUSE.

Your donors didn't do so to have a return of CLINTONIAN ECONOMICS.

[ProudLiberalDan]

No one is more opposed to the DLC than me. However, you cannot disband a group of freely associated people.

He can seek to minimize their influence.

In fact, with Howard Dean as head of the DNC and Obama as the nominee, it is pretty safe to say the DLC is on the ropes, which is good news for the Democratic Party and for America and the broader progressive movement.

[harriscrl3]

Here's something people dont GET about Nafta and free trade agreements. If its abolished who do you think it hurts the Most Businesses? NOT really it hurts POOR PEOPLE. Its been benefiical to poor people who shop at walmart. Obama has tried to strike a balance. HE has stated clearly he is not oppose to free trade he just wants to negotiate better deals for American labor. Yes he has to tone down his rhetoric as far as free trade we are in the general election now. Contrary to what some think we NEED Free trade or some of us wont be able to afford sneakers on our children's feet. Obama is not flip flopping on anything people need to pay attention to nuances when he speaks because that is what makes him different. In the primary he emphasize the problems of Nafta in the general election he is emphasizing the positives about Nafta whether some of us like it or not they are some positives.

Carol

[GinnyinCO]

One of the essentials of the transformation (turning, uprising) is that we need to get away from our right/wrong, two sided thinking and the adversarial communication that is it's foundation. I happen to like "Society's Breakthrough", mainly because it's one I've read. Rosenberg's "Nonviolent Communication" is also a part of this.

It's pretty hard for someone who thinks like this to communicate to a world so focused on the binary approaches to problems. I once found out some people decided I was 'talking out of two sides of my mouth' because I had given different people different reasons for an event we were planning. Actually, they had each asked a different question, and there were several reasons for what we were doing. I just hadn't gone into all of them every time someone asked because it was taking a lot of time at work.

There is also the 'Hamlet way' (method) of talking about something. Which Obama could also be using.

I certainly expect that we will need to convince him we want to go further than he is attempting in some areas. I also feel quite confident he is very open to that kind of input/feedback.

First we need to get him elected. Let's save any of this for the transition phase and after.

[Schrodingerscat]

There is a difference between providing different reasons for a position to different people and giving different positions to different people.

Your argument is also predicated on the assumption that Obama has a better solution that can satisfy both sides. Obama, with his vaunted oratorical prowess should be able to articulate such a position. If not, it's more likely that he's just pandering, which is definitely not hope and change from tired politics.

[jwws007]

Obama is flip flopping on trade, and this issue alone could cost him the election. it sounds like the big money guys have gotten to him.

[ProudLiberalDan]

Well, his health care plan was the weakest of all the Democrats. Perhaps being the most "liberal" Senator and being the most progressive are not the same thing.

[tyrdofwaitin]

Dear David: Since when is Fortune Magazine your source of choice?

Progressives --- let's get real. Obama is the best thing that's happened to the United States since FDR, nearly 80 years ago. The left-leaning progressives can't rely on worn ideology that lost "a classless society" to capitalist thugs in Europe.

What we have in Obama as a human being with values, integrity and vision. Let's not hold him to a standard that no mortal could achieve. Yes, we have to be vigilant and insistant to make real progress a reality; but this is NOt about some "progressive orthodoxy"; let's not slice and dice Obama everytime he seemingly veers off course --- because that is a recipe for disaster. Obama will have to deal with overwhelming pressures in the White House (as did FDR --- the wealthy and powerful hated FDR!) What progressives don't want to become is friendly-enemies. If we believe Obama is veering too far from his vision, GENTLY, BUT INSISTENTLY get him back on course. FDR suceeded because he had the people behind him and Obama will do the same.

Let us not become unwitting allies of the right wing! 2008 is not about orthodoxy, it's about change, one step at a time, one day at a time, one victory at a time. It's evolutionary struggle that can save our country and the planet for future generations.

Sincerely,
A Red Diaper Who's Learned A Lot About Progress Over the Years.

[Inaru]

Oh, David, why are you buying an out-of-context semi-quoted statement from Fortune Magazine and not checking it out yourself? What did Obama say in the primary, remember?
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/Cmzm
It's also time to look to the future and figure out how to make trade work for American workers. I won't stand here and tell you that we can " or should " stop free trade. We can't stop every job from going overseas. But I also won't stand here and accept an America where we do nothing to help American workers who have lost jobs and opportunities because of these trade agreements. And that's a position of mine that doesn't change based on who I'm talking to or the election I'm running in.

I don't know about a time-out, but I do know this " when I am President, I will not sign another trade agreement unless it has protections for our environment and protections for American workers. And I'll pass the Patriot Employer Act that I've been fighting for ever since I ran for the Senate " we will end the tax breaks for companies who ship our jobs overseas, and we will give those breaks to companies who create good jobs with decent wages right here in America. - Obama, WI, 2/13/08

[Elliott32]

Uprising? Can you blame Obama from distancing himself from an "Uprising"? NAFTA isn't all bad, look at Europe. Trading among neighbors should benefit all within a region. My only problem with NAFTA per se, is the lack of health and safety standards, i.e., Mexican truckers on US roads without background checks and proper insurance. The US shouldn't lower standards from trade. On the contrary, trade should raise standards for all. NAFTA just needs some tweaking.

[brakmaster]

During the debates Obama said that he would give Mexico/Canada a time period to renegotiate NAFTA. The question is: What will he do if negotiations with Mexico/Canada fail? Will he strike it down? Or will he just give up and keep it going?

I suspect that NAFTA will remain unchanged during Obama's administration. Mexico and Canada are both petroleum exporters to the US, and that really gives them the upper hand in negotiations. I will be surprised if he can actually get them to formally participate in a new trade treaty. They have us bent over a barrel....

I should admit that I always thought he rhetoric on NAFTA was merely playing to the locals. Check how he played the issue to the crowds in Texas and Ohio. He spoke negatively of NAFTA to crowds of people that blame the trade policy for the loss of jobs. He did not speak the same way to crowds that believe NAFTA is positive. He'll play both sides of the issue until it is displaced by another hot topic. Politics as usual. Sausage-making at its finest.

[KMKY]

"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."--Abraham Lincoln