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

[GinnyinCO]

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you. Absolutely on target.
I have followed presidential campaigns since '64 and think Obama clearly learned from the inability of Democratic candidates to 'connect' with voters. Drew Westin wrote an excellent book about this "The Political Brain" that should have had more attention than Lakof's. People think metaphorically. You reach their thinking by speaking to that part of the mind. Democrats probably have more of the 15% or so that think with facts first, they have to realize that 85% don't and you cant change it.

Obama also realized what it takes to get anything significant done in DC. And that a republic, to be of the people, for the people and by the people; requires more than voting and paying taxes. Especially in the age of communication that we live in.

It has been said that we face a perfect storm of problems to solve. There are so many issues that are critical and so many crises that face us, we will not be able to rely on the past for solutions. We will need all the innovative thinking humanly possible and Obama is pushing this very obviously.

Any plans the candidates have are simply examples to give you an idea of how they think out problems. No presidential campaign plans will ever be fully implemented the way they are presented.

The more Americans are willing to get involved and stay involved in governing, the better we will all succeed.

[Marilyn Ferdinand]

The biggest problem with Obama's inspiration is that it is based on a lie. He wants change, a new way of doing politics and government, but he's campaigning the old-fashioned way--not coming clean about his relationship with Tony Rezko until forced to, finding ways around his no-lobbyist money pledge, backpedaling on his promise to use public funds, cynically using Republican talking points about Hillary against her, pouring large sums of money into the election coffers of super delegates who are also running for public office.

I have accepted the inevitability of Obama's candidacy. Just don't be surprised when the race baiting starts from the Republican­s--they've been hoping to trounce Hillary so they can turn against Obama with a vengeance in this way. He's going to have a tough race, and I guarantee the press will turn on him the way they've turned on Hillary.

[KenTao]

Thank you, Mr. Creamer! You've crystallized into words what I've been feeling intuitively and have been attempting to say aloud. In other words:

Nailed it!

Earthlings Unite!

[JamesofDC]

The Republicans have a perfect storm appearing on the horizon and it is aimed straight at their selfish policies.

The first dark clouds to form: the horrendous job done by Bush—Unnecessary war, corruption, dirty dealing, ineptitude—is a whole cornucopia of stuff to throw at the Republicans. Any Democrat could be elected in ‘08. Cosmic joke: The hard core right loves the man who sent their party down the toilet!

Clouds turn ominously black: the evolution of our species goes in cycles, from progress to reaction to progress to reaction. A new wave of forward movement is now forming.

The downpour begins: the economy sucks, which is usually enough to elect a new governing team all by itself.

Hail, thunder, snow, floods: an inspirational leader has appeared that can put all the Dems' usual opaque wonkery into simple and inspiring words that anyone can understand.

You have to wonder if there will be a Republican party left after the coming washout. Perhaps the name will carry on, but everything else about them will be asleep in the deep.

[Petersworld]

File Under: "Famous Last Words"

[liberalsrheros]

i don't think the guy speaks that well frankly. i listened last night and it was boring. just we need to blah blah but no plan. no urging voting for representives and senators that will work with him to actually "change" things just nebulous we need to change bull s hit. people there in the background were even on there cell phones. weeeeee, therrrrrrre, dragging words out while he tries to string together the next bit of tripe. theeeeeeee­eeeyyyyyyy­yyyy ssssssssss­aaaaaaaaay­yyyyyyyyyy­. put a cork in it, get real, quit speechifying.

[thatvisionthing]

I wasn't bored. Also... wish I could post a photo here that I took of my mom watching Obama's speech. The thing is, she's had a stroke and is very limited cognitively now. She hardly knows what's on TV. But whenever Obama comes on, she pays attention. She watched that whole speech intently and at one point even fiddled with her ear like she was trying to hear better. There's something about Obama.

[Rufusdog]

Seems to me that sometimes it simply boils down to a subjective judgement call. Folks are not always hired simply based on their resume. Sometimes it's based on how the person comes across...a­s much what they don't say as what they say. Sometimes it body language.

With two equally good people running, voters are making a choice and for the majority of Dems (and some thinking Republicans and independents) it's not Hillary.

Her attacks, whining, etc. are like the spoiled kids on American Idol who can't believe that they are being turned down. Perhaps they've never been told no...and it's hard to accept.
Some don't accept constructive criticism well.
I think that Hillary is going to have to get over it and stick with the Senate.

I was volunteering for Edwards when I heard Barack speak. I was drawn to his intelligence, wit, accomplishments, approachable nature, competence, ideas, hopefulness, honesty, etc. At this point in time, many many Americans are longing for these things...n­ot more of the Bush clan or the Clintons.

[fiftyseven]

What those who poo-poo Obama's talent seem to be overlooking is that Americans have spent the past 7 years being mugged. Bush and his meanies have knocked us down, taken our wallet and left us for dead. We cried out last November and nobody showed up. But we're still hoping.

[Star123]

Just so. We don't want a president who works hard, someone said. Guess not. The tipping point may have been reached. Politics is a tough business. Hillary's job was to win. So...we now watch this guy be taken to school in DC. Funny--I was hoping for someone who would work hard and govern, not make people's hearts swell in their chests until they faint. Always good theatre, I guess.

[evekendall]

I agree. Personally, I prefer hopelessness and a really dull, uninspiring speech.

[JohnEugene]

Hillary and McCain can be the "No We Can't" Candidates as long as they want to be. But the cat is out of the bag. The American Public now knows that "YES WE CAN!!!"

[seawolf77]

You Obama supporters are like that commercial with the lemming. I'm a leader. I'm a leader. Then he drops the lemming and all the people get on all 4's and follow it. What has he done. Nothing. Who has he fought for. Slumlords. Yes we can, lose again to another crappy Republican.

[MikeDu]

I'm supporting Obama, and I'll vote for Obama but I admit I get the uneasy impression that his 'inspiration' rings hollow. Its inspiration for the sake of being inspired. I feel a kind of self-congratuatory attitude on the part of his supporters, like readers of those ego-supporting self-help books that Oprah pushes. It has the sound of a hollow drum to it. I would really really REALLY like to see more meat to Obama's airy oratory. That being said I'd take a 'hollow vessel' Obama to a dangerous crackpot McCain any day.

[jazmatician]

He practically put the nation to bed with his policy speech last night. So which is it?

Obama has lots of legislative accomplishments that point toward an extremely successful first term.

[thatvisionthing]

What I LIKE about the "hollow vessel" Obama, and why I'm fine with a limited legislative resume, is that what's important to me is that my next president be OPEN. Open to my ideas, open to your, his and her ideas. Open to input and expecting us all to plug in. We will be involved, we can exceed expectations. Like, he gets the first thing. Hillary doesn't. She already thinks she knows what's best for us, and I don't think she intends to ask or listen to me.

[generaldelivery]

When Barack Obama said that Ronald Reagan was a better president than Bill Clinton, he 'inspired' me to vote for Hillary.

[stoprollingover]

He DID NOT say that Ronald Reagan was a better president than Bill Clinton. Look up the quote, and if you don't understand what he said, then I would recommend a course in logic and rational thinking.

[buske]

While people are celebrating Obama's latest victories, the financial elite of this country is preparing for a Bloomberg presidency.

Why?

Because it is absolutely necessary for them. They already have all the dirt they need on Obama to bring him down. They also have all the media machinery in place to swiftboat him. He will not stand a chance against the combined forces of the lying corporate media, the swiftboaters, the voting fraud, etc.

The financial elite is waiting with launching their attacks until after the Texas and Ohio primaries because they are hoping to get Hillary out of the way first.

[cameltrax]

Interesting forecast, and I can't deny the validity of it. But isn't it possible that after such mounting momentum (Obamamentum) when the rank and file are clearly being mobilized, the financial elite (powerful, but no less a minority) will be shouted down? Isn't it possible that with such a phenomenon (Obamenon) that is electrifying the voters into a bona fide grass-roots movement will resist such media attacks rendering such swiftboating tactics ineffectual? I suppose what I'm asking is whether this feeling of inspiration I have is real or a passing fancy. But I believe it's real, and it's reality is fed daily in the belief that whatever I heard from leaders like Martin Luther King are not merely dreams, but a recreated reality that is life changing and verified in Obama rallies like those in Minnesota and Texas. With diligence, this feeling, this belief won't fade in the face of any rumours of sex, or scandal or whatever Bloomberg, or the Fox people have to pander.

[hopeless277]

Hillary votes like a Republican. Just like her husband. As for her experience, I view union busting as not the kind of experience I want in a president.

[ariadne1]

well... this is lovely. wonder who was/is behind this...

bloomberg declares fraud in election count.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02192008/news/regionalnews/mike_bloomberg_claims_vote_fraud__98367.ht

[skycontrol]

The Hillary & “Bill in a China Shop” show is in freefall.
There are two stages before political irrelevancy.
First the politician becomes the object of derision and then they become the object of pity. That is where HRC finds herself.
Hey, call me silly, but doesn’t her campaign remind you of the war in Iraq.
Bush was fixated on winning Baghdad, thinking that constituted victory and gave little thought to the aftermath.
HRC was fixated on winning Super Tuesday, feeling confident that she would have it wrapped up by then, so why bother with the caucus states.
Bush thought that the Iraqi people wanted democracy but what they really wanted was security.
HRC thought the American people wanted experience, but what they really wanted was change.
Bush thought that since he had the support of the Chalabis the support of the Iraqi people would follow.
HRC thought that if she had the support of the Rangels and Youngs, she would have the support of a core constituency.
Both Bush and HRC can be faulted for hiring people based on loyalty and a distant, secondarily, competence.
Neither Bush nor HRC can be accused of admitting to error.
Neither can be accused of humility.
Both feel that if you are not with them, you are against them.
Bush calls his enemies evil.
HRC threatens to “demonize” those who question her wisdom.
All of this is so old school!
Well a political Tsunami is sweeping across this land and I am reminded of a Dylan line, “Something is happening here and you don’t know what it is, do you Mr. Jones!”

Skycontrol 02/20/08