To Vilify Obama for his Ability to Inspire is to Ignore the Principal Lesson of the Last Three Decades of American Politics

It's one thing for supporters of Hillary Clinton to make the case that her experience in Washington politics would make her a better president than Barack Obama. But it's quite another to actually vilify Obama's ability to inspire as a "cult of the personality" or "nothing but words."

It is particularly disturbing when serious progressive writers who should know better repeat this attack on Obama's inspirational abilities. It demonstrates a failure to grasp the principal lesson of the last thirty years of American politics.

In fact, it is precisely the absence of inspiration in progressive politics that has kept Progressives on the political defensive for decades.

That's because to inspire people, Progressives have to appeal to something much more important than endless lists of policies and programs. To inspire people, Progressives have to appeal to our values and to our vision for the future.

John Kerry did not lose the presidency because he lacked solid, progressive policies and programs. His campaign rolled out new ten point programs practically every other day. He lost because the Republicans erroneously convinced a significant number of persuadable voters that John Kerry lacked core values -- that he was a flip-flopper.

Right after the last election I struck up a conversation with a New Jersey cab driver. I asked him, "What do you think of Jon Corzine?" "Good guy, tough guy, stands up for what he believes," came the reply. "What do you think of George Bush?" "Good guy, stands up for what he believes," he said. "What do you think of John Kerry?" I asked. "Phoney... a flip-flopper," he responded.

His evaluation of these political leaders had nothing to do with positions or policy papers. The Republicans had convinced him that Kerry didn't have core values.

From 1932 until the mid 1970s -- at least in our domestic politics -- progressive values provided the dominant frame for mainstream political debate. They defined political "common sense." By 1980, the Reagan revolution had changed that -- and rightwing values have framed the American political debate for the thirty years since.

That's largely because Progressives went into a "defensive crouch." Our candidates advocated "Republican-lite" positions. We refused to debate the fundamental differences between the progressive and radical conservative values. Chief among these differences is the central question of whether we're all in this together, or all in this alone.

Often our leaders retreated to the discussion of small, incremental policy initiatives that presumed the right wing's assumptions about the primacy of "private markets" over people, and the innate inferiority of democratically elected governmental institutions compared to corporations that are in fact unaccountable to the public interest.

Beginning in 2005, our successful defense of Social Security, the obvious failure of NeoCon foreign policy, and the spectacle of Katrina -- began to change that. Progressives began to emerge from their defensive crouch and stand up proudly for progressive values once again.

Then came Obama, with his ability to inspire Americans to devote themselves to our values in a way that resonates with average people. His self-confident appeal to hope and possibility -- his "yes we can" -- have captured the imagination of millions of Americans. His ability to inspire has allowed him to simultaneously engage swing "persuadable" voters and the millions of stay-at-home "mobilizable" voters who would support progressive candidates if they could just be motivated to vote.

People want to be inspired. Inspiration is about making people feel empowered to be more than they are. They want to be inspired because they desperately want meaning in their lives. They want to be part of something larger than themselves and they want to feel that they can play a significant part in that larger purpose.

Meaning comes from being devoted to something outside of yourself -- to a cause, to a person, to a religion, to your art.

That's why "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" is so resonant -- so inspirational.

The Right has understood this need for meaning--and has addressed it -- with calls for devotion to the "Conservative Movement," to fundamentalist religion, to xenophobic nationhood.

For three decades, Progressives have often tried to compete by offering the bloodless alternative of a "policy agenda" -- and many times a timid one at that.

For thirty seven years I have devoted much of my professional life to campaigns to implement progressive policy initiatives. So I certainly agree that we need sound, bold policies. Once in office, a new president must in fact deliver on real, concrete policy.

But to change policy in a fundamental way requires more than good programs. It requires a progressive realignment of the American political debate. It requires that we redefine the value frame for American politics. And that requires inspirational leadership that proudly affirms our values.

Just as important, it requires inspirational leadership that can mobilize millions of Americans to demand the enactment of a progressive program once a new president is in place. Frederick Douglass was right. "Power surrenders nothing without a struggle. It never has. It never will." Progressives won't win legislative battles with an insider game.

In 1993 we had a Democratic President and Democratic Congress, but we lost the battle for universal health care. What we needed then, and what we need now, is a massive national mobilization to pass universal health care, change our labor laws, enact campaign finance reform, provide universal access to higher education and preschool, end global warming and change our foreign policy.

Leadership, more than anything else, is about mobilizing people into action. People take action when they feel empowered -- when they are inspired. They will not take action simply because they are "convinced" we are right. They will take action when they are motivated by inspiration to be a part of an historic endeavor.

Inspiring leadership is not just "another quality" that would be "nice" to have in a president. And it is certainly not to be assailed as a "cult of the personality."

America needs inspiring leadership to re-establish the preeminence of progressive values; to define a progressive vision for its future; to mobilize Americans to enact a progressive agenda -- and most importantly -- to convert this historic opportunity into generational progressive political realignment.

No one knows for sure what either a Clinton or an Obama presidency would mean for America. But I believe that Barack Obama presents us with a candidacy more likely to provide the inspirational leadership that we need, than any politician since Robert Kennedy's quest for the White House ended that June night in 1968.

Comments

[PoliticalJunkessa]

Excellent piece. There's also another element, IMO -- that primal, primitive tug that sometimes lurks in us: the envy that seeks to destroy or minimize that which is extraordinary in another person because we don't possess what they have. Eloquence is being attacked as if it were a deficiency, rather than a gift.

When I boil down Barack's and Hillary's positions and track records, Barack's are actually more substantive and clearer. And his judgment, of course is much more to be trusted than Hillary's. However, the temptation is to minimize Barack's excellence at speaking and draw a false dichotomy of "style vs. substance" as if one person couldn't possess both.

Sometimes, a rare person does possess both -- and that can draw out a sort of sulky, shrively, dark envy straight from our lower selves. So even when a person is continually presented with evidence of Barack's superior organizational ability, wisdom, judgment, legislative accomplishments, etc. -- the old meme reinforced by jealousy and envy doesn't fall easily. It may in part be genetic/biological.

[quantum9leap]

Nonsense:
It is so easy to forget that Robert Kennedy worked for Joe McCarthy and all americans should know what he stood for. If they don't know reexamine the McCarthy years.
I try and I try to listen to Senator Obama's supposed message and find it oh so short on the important needs of our country. Smooth talk,devoid of substance and understanding will not suffice. It will take strength,knowledge,understanding and resolve to handle the overwhelming problems facing our country. I find Senator Obama terribly lacking in those qualities. Smooth,yes but lacking definitely.
Senator Clinton has many of those qualities but the pattern shows that she cannot win in the general election. Nor could Senator Obama and what are we left with? More of the same to our detriment in the next four to eight years.
A Democratic Congress is our real savior. It should be understood that the President proposes and Congress disposes. The Congresses over the last decade have done nothing of the kind with the result that we are in the soup.
Since when do we put a boy in to do a man's work? We would require a certified mechanic for our car and our lawnmower, a bonded roofer for a new roof but a relative neophyte for the presidency of such difficult problems.Never!
Should Senator Obama be the candidate my conscious and principles will not allow me to vote for him. I will support the Democratic ticket and leave the presidential contest blank.I cannot vote for weak candidates again.

[editorjuno]

Abraham Lincoln was also "a relative neophyte" -- and your decision to abdicate your right to vote for the next president borders on non-sentience, since it would directly help the war-mongering hypocrite McCain in bringing us another four years of GOP hell.

[amberglow]

If Obama was inspiring people to do anything other than just vote for him, it might mean something--as it is, he's not. There's no issue or cause that he's inspiring people to fight for or work towards besides "change" and "unity". Not Universal Health Care or Better Public Schools or Better Infrastructure or Better Public Services, etc....

[UrbanInterloper]

Obama's two core causes are:

1) transforming government to be more open and accountable, and less corrupted by corporate money--as a precursor to fixing everything else such as the economy, healthcare, and national security

2) ending the disastrous occupation of Iraq as carefully and responsibly as is possible

It's in there, if you listen more closely. It's in all of his speeches. And he walks the walk. The Coburn-Obama Act created www.usaspending.gov - go check it out and see how your tax dollars are being spent.

I admit we'll probably have to wait until he's president to see him close the Iraq chapter, though.

[pgate127]

As a Progressive Democrat, I agree with the importance of inspirational leadership. However, I am convinced that once again, we are about to shoot ourselves in the foot, via our hearts.

Barack Obama has found a way to make 50% of the Democratic electorate "feel good", a skill not to be minimized or ignored. However, formulating our future isn't just about "feeling good". It's about a social responsibility we hold to make sure that those who come after us have a lifestyle that is as good as, if not better than, our own. It is about our moral responsibility to elect candidates who have the experience, the wisdom, the knowledge of what it takes to get the job done and the guts and determination to do it, based on reality, not just hype.

Like 50% of the Democratic electorate, I don't need Obama to make me feel good. I've felt good every time I've left a polling place, whether it's been for an election for dogcatcher or president. I've felt lucky to have the opportunity to direct the course of history.

But now, when Progressives have the opportunity to make history, I feel NOT so good, because I am once again watching the pretty boy with the nice words run right over the better candidate. This isn’t change; this is the same old popularity contest.

You want change? Then stop sitting in front of your Facebook, Wii, American Idol and cellphone screens. Go DO something. Put your time, your reputation, your experience and your abilities on the line. Stop slinging mud at those who have dedicated their lives to doing the things you have yet to commit to. Whether you agree with them or not, they've been there, they've done that, and they deserve to be treated with respect.

I hope this race goes right up to the convention, and that Democrats will finally push through the Progressive agenda. But we must realize that it isn't only about inspiration; it's about perspiration, and the skills, abilities and experience to GET IT DONE.

Vote Hillary Clinton, 2008.

[ohnonotagain]

Some things are better left unsaid. Know what I mean.

How can you stand behind anyone that can not even balance, manage their campaign budget? Underestimate their opponent, but she will be a strong leader, with all that experience she fail miserably, IMO. As well, Mitt Romney, John Mccain, Rudy Guilani, all these folks have experience is managing/balancing a budget correct?
ROTFLMAO!!

[Petersworld]

Spoken like a kid who lives with Mom and Dad! What a poor showing next to her post. But I did laugh at you, so thanks!

[MoMule]

Thanks for this post. I keep reading pieces similar to this one and then I read the comments. I'm sorry but I am not inspired by the Obama supporters. They seem self centered and mean spirited. They are so willing to use Republican smears on Hillary. I wonder how many of them could define the progressive movement? I can't see them sticking when the going gets rough let alone filling the ranks of boomers retiring from public service jobs.They seem to be all about themselves, I can't remember a comment that has sounded informed by progressive values coming from an Obamphile. They are into the "fierce urgency of now" true change takes struggling and hard work and perserverence.

[Petersworld]

I have to say that, though I almost certainly would differ with you politically, that was VERY well done. I will send it to my Democrat friends many of whom see it your way but some of whom don't.

[dartagnan]

"Barack Obama has found a way to make 50% of the Democratic electorate "feel good", a skill not to be minimized or ignored. However, formulating our future isn't just about "feeling good". It's about a social responsibility we hold to make sure that those who come after us have a lifestyle that is as good as, if not better than, our own."

Fine words, but I think you miss the point of this piece. We need policy wonks to work out the details of change, but we need inspirational leaders to persuade people that change is possible and motivate them to get behind it. Neither type of leadership alone will get the job done.

I think Hillary Clinton, the policy wonk's policy wonk -- and I mean that in a good way -- would make a fine secretary of Health and Human Services and would be very happy if President Obama appointed her to that post.

[foolchild0]

Once again, Camp Hillary attempts to paint the majority of Democratic voters as delusional. How condescending and smug, but those have been Clinton's defining characteristics this whole race.

[avajackson]

I know many people say the election is not about style and speeches, and maybe it shouldn't be, but the reality of politics is that style and speeches are exactly what sways voters one way or the other. You can have all the right answers and the best solutions and still lose if you fail to inspire people.

[StillAmused]

Dr. Phil, too.

[Alessan]

I don't think Obama has been vilified by non-supporters for being inspiring, but his supporters are voting on being inspired instead of substance, that's just a fact for the most part, I am sure others think he'll be great and has some ideas, however there are lot of people who think differently. It's the american way everyone is entitled to their opinions. Many people also think GW Bush is doing and did a good job as President of the US, however his actions have proved otherwise, and a future with an Obama doesn't look much better.

[shano]

You are wrong in your OPINION that Obama has no substance, and all are voting for him because of inspiration.

He marched with me, and 15 million others, against the start of the Iraq war showing great leadership at a time when it was dangerous to do so.

He supported women when SD pushed a draconian abortion law. The only senator to do so.

He has a long list of legislative accomplishments, including working on issues of nuclear proliferation at a time when Clinton was working on the flag burning amendment.

He TAUGHT Constitutional Law, which I think is a great qualification after all this country has been through.

I could go on, but people like you are so lazy, you have opinions and babble on without checking to see if your opinions have any basis in fact. As you say, it is the American way and you are proof of that. Have you at least gone to the Obama web site to see his policy positions and his legislative accomplishments? Yes or no?

That is the main thing wrong with America right now, ignorant people who will opine on anything, whether or not they understand any of the real facts about the matter.

If you want Bush, then vote for McCain, Alessan. Obama is the only true progressive left in the '08 presidential race.

[la2008]

"Yes, we can.","We are the ones we've been waiting for", "WE are the CHANGE that we SEEK". "Hope is coming back" These convoluted and empty slogans maybe refreshing to many Obama followers. But after a while, they will become tedious and annoying to all. P.S.Can somebody name any Obama's legislative accomplishments?

[RevStrickler]

Just my humble opinion and view: From a religous standpoint, the universe and humanity was not created out of HOPE. Therefore, to support the type of dialetic opiate and semantics of the purely genious and insidious marketing maneuver that 'hope' appears to be used, is First of all Arrogance (not Audacity) and secondly, is nothing more than giving far to much credit to gall, idiocy and bloviate errors in some of St. Paul's commentaries, along with a blaspheme of Truth as to how we and the universe came into being: G_d sure as hell didn't use hope.

From a historical point of view I see nothing more than the tactics of a Protagoras or Gorgias line of Sophistry that effortlessy and convincingly manipulated those in fear toward grasping the sensual universe and even create a religous experience for them through elegant use of words and convert them into a bestialzed version of humanity and the parastical adherence to Eros instead of the discovery Agape and the aspiration it can produce.

Obama is a nice man and there is much about him I can hold in respect and regard even at my current level of ignorance, with what I have researched about his life and views. Too bad I cannot vote for him even out of principle. Marketing that assuages fear in an age of consumerism does not win my vote for it represent nothing more to me than a manipulation of that fear. Nor will I tolerate any abuse of the Gospel or the facts of creation by some flagrant misuse of HOPE for some genre that seeks gain. Not by my reading of the Four Gospels.

I was created in an image and likeness of G_d, no hope required. St Paul can take a hike.
.

[RevStrickler]

Pardon my mispellings, not a good post-stroke day for me

[avajackson]

So who are you voting for, Huckabee??

[ohnonotagain]

This is soooooooo funny. Makes me immedialely think of Charles Barkley. You know that remark he made about "fake Christians"....I would say that is what you are!! Did you read your comments after typing them? lol

The way you started your comment.....in my humble opinion.....from a religious viewpoint. OMGooodness.....You are going to get struck down by lightning...what about the "judge not lest you be judged", seems like you people get religious when it suits your purpose. Nice try, but not working.....

"along with a blaspheme of Truth as to how we and the universe came into being: G_d sure as hell didn't use hope"

P.S. Do not think my GOD would co-sign this, you know using his name in vain and all.
ROTFLMAO!!

[arielwire]

Yes- he helped pass one of the most important ethics reform legislation in Congress, for starters. He wanted to go further with it, and set up an independent ethics committee, as well, but that got voted down. Clinton voted No on this, btw.

I find it sad and pathetic that the Clintonistas have taken up this idea of 'cult' because Barack is so well liked. They can't really find any other ways to go after him. True, America is used to voting for the lesser of two evils, so it is difficult to grasp actually liking a candidate.

It's simple enough to go to the Library of Congress and look up both of their voting records. Anyone who blithely comments on those voting for Obama are voting for style, rather than substance haven't done their own homework.
Find out for yourself, rather than believing the spin and media nonsense.

[amberglow]

that ethics reform is a joke--lobbyists can still everything they did before--except now they can't spend money on Congresspeople who sit down. It's a crock--and the explosive growth in lobbyists shows it. They ensured it had no teeth.

[shm259]

He reformed the Death Penalty System in Illinois- and more recently passed the largest ethics reform legislation in our country's history. If you go to the library of congress they provide hundreds of bills that Obama has authored/cosponsored while in elected office. The slogans aren't empty, and they are far more then just words-
Words do matter for this reason- Words can inspire people to do things that they might otherwise reject, words may inspire republicans to cross over to our side, words HAVE inspired young people to get involved. http://www.burntorangereport.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=5040
Over 2000 young people in Texas walked 7.3 miles to cast their early votes- the article doesn't directly say who these young people voted for- but in the words of Hillary Clinton "lets get real"- I think it's safe to make that assumption

[AxelDC]

Republicans can belittle Obama for his oratory, but look at them swoon when you mention Reagan.

What did Reagan do besides give pretty speeches?

[isis]

Reagan vilified the poor and raised my payroll taxes.

[ADVOCATE4ZPG]

He ran up the national debt and entangled the U.S. in a scandalous mess in Central American: "arms for hostages." He inspired subsequent leaders to be very licentious in the use of armed force. Finally, he stoked the apocryphal notion that he "ended the Cold War" by sundering Soviet Communism....

If he wasn't part of the "American myth," at least, he proved capable of extending it....!

[dartagnan]

Reagan told people what they wanted to hear, which is the secret of all great salesmen. But he did it by pandering to our baser natures. He told us that selfishness was generosity, that ignorance was wisdom and that jingoism and bigotry were patriotism. One could say that Obama also tells people what they want to hear, but he appeals to our better natures -- to compassion and a spirit of cooperation, to the idea that we're all in this together.

[UrbanInterloper]

"To Vilify Obama for his Ability to Inspire is to Ignore the Principal Lesson of the Last Three Decades of American Politics"

It's also despicably shallow.

[PJay]

Excellent piece, Mr. Creamer.

Jim Hendrix's quote comes to mind:

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Too bad the clintons are power hungry to the point of desperation. How sad.

I heard a historian saying the other day (forgot his name) that great speakers become great presidents.

Why and how someone would attack another for having the gift of oratory is just beyond me.

[ADVOCATE4ZPG]

Accordingly, M. Huckabee is above reproach....? He's, at least, as good as Obama, but his ideas have not EVOLVED into 20-21st Century needs....

Plainly, PJay doesn't recall also Mussolini's considerable abilities as a speaker. In fact, he had little else.....

[Dragon5616]

Very well expressed, Mr. Creamer. I was intrigued when I heard Sen. Obama at the '04 convention. I became convinced when I read "The Audacity of Hope" over a year ago. I have been following politics for 44 years and I have every reason to be cynical, but I haven't this excited about a candidate since RFK. So far, Sen. Obama has exceeded expectations. I know there are disappointments ahead, but I truly believe he is sincere and smart. That's enough for me.

[ADVOCATE4ZPG]

Stalin was also "sincere and smart"; somehow(???) that wasn't enough.... More sentient heads require some reference, allusion, peek at INTENT, i.e., what a speaker/politician will do....

George H. W. Bush seemed merely to enjoy BEING President--not intending to change much--and wait for SOMETHING TO REACT TO....

[BeyondGoodAndEvil]

Terrific post! I was initially an Edwards supporter and was disappointed when his populist message did not get traction, but there was always a nagging doubt in my mind that Edward's actual votes in the Senate, did not exactly affirm his platform and policies.

After Edwards left the race, and I took a closer look at Obama. I watched him speak and felt moved. I read about him and was surprised that he has had the same conciliatory message and demeanor since he was at Harvard Law. I looked carefully at his voting record and ascertained he is authentic and truthful.

I have to confess I feel inspired and hopeful and motivated to action by Obama, for the first time in my life. I truly believe Obama is more than just words. He speaks to the heart and core of Americans who have become disillusioned with our voting process. So often we elect our Senators, Congress and President, and they let us down. Obama is more than just a great orator, because it's obvious he truly believes every word he speaks. Obama has real vision for America and enough creativity and wisdom to move us in a totally different direction. His voting record and his life path are proof that his speeches are not mere words, but evidence that if you are authentic, truthful and passionate, voters will reward you with their trust, push aside their crusty cynicism, and discard the seemingly safer choice for Democratic candidate - HRC.

I feel very upset that Clinton supporters have dismissed those of us who took a good look at each candidate's voting record, past, decisions, judgment, passion, integrity, and have come to the conclusion that Obama is far more desirable as a potential President than Clinton.

Watching HRC's campaign and her surrogates, and having examined her words, against her voting record, I know that there is no comparison of these two candidates, so I am hoping Obama will not only be the Democratic nominee, but our next President.

[AnotherDayInParadise]

Excellent article.

Where Obama inspires and mobilizes 'We The People' to take back our government with transparency, accountability, open dialogue, public hearings on C-Span, and interactive government via the web...

Hillary offers more of the same bi-partisan omission commissions and closed door power play secret meetings. She's not even willing to disclose her finances/taxes nor all the FBI files she's accumulated. Obviously, she is beholden to her corporate owners and lobbyists.

That is not a representative Republic nor a Democracy, by, for, or of the people. It's time to end the corruption. It's time to end the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton crime family dynasty.

The choice is clear.
Obama'08

[Citizenofreality]

If all he has done is inspired apathetic Americans to get off of their duffs and participate in the democratic process then he has accomplished more than most. I doubt that is all he will do and I make no apologies to anyone for supporting him.