|
A few observations from hearing Edwards speak the other night that may be of interest and value for other Edwards supporters:
The "bully pulpit"
I was very glad to hear Edwards talk about the power of the bully pulpit, as we have a had a string of party leaders over the last 20 years who have not used it effectively. FDR was a master at this, as was John Kennedy. I notice that critics of Edwards are smearing him by saying "oh sure he talks but that doesn't mean he will do anything." Talking about the right things IS doing something. "We have nothing to fear but fear itself" - empty words?
So many times with both Clinton and Carter immense political gain could have been achieved, and terrible political problems avoided, if they would just open their mouths state in strong terms their visions for the country. All through the energy crisis of the 70's Carter refused to state the case for public transportation. That would have been immensely valuable. Clinton allowing the right wingers to dominate the debate was the biggest cause of his political troubles. "None of your business" would have worked fine in regards to his personal life, for example. Words spoken by a president are very powerful. The most successful leaders have always been those who have used the bully pulpit effectively.
Don't let Edwards critics say "oh that is just words" without challenging them on that.
Contrast what Edwards is saying to the words from the Congressional leadership, from whom we get no call to arms, no compelling statement of purpose, no passionate defense of universal ideals and principles or shared goals. Where are we going, why are we going there? You can't do anything in politics without public support, and you will never get public support if you do not open your mouth and make strong statements. To say "we do not have public support so we will play it safe" is a recipe for disaster.
The "buffer zone"
Edwards was talking about the need to have the wealthy pay their fair share of the burden and rolling back the Bush tax breaks for the privileged few, and made a very interesting and powerful comment. He said there should be a "buffer zone" - that people with household incomes between $90,000 and $250,000 should not be taxed at the same rates as the super-wealthy. I cannot praise the political wisdom of this enough. I will explain.
The income of 90% of the households is down under this $90,000 figure, and alarmingly an increasing number of those households is bunched down under $30,000 a year. Among the 10% above that level, most are between $90,000 and $250,000. They are not in the same category as the upper 1% that controls most of the wealth and income in the country. Those people in that range are the successful small businesspeople and professionals, often with two people in the household working full time, and punishing them for their success makes no sense politically.
But here is the most important thing about this - even though only a small percentage of the population enjoys an income of $90-250,000 per year, millions aspire to that level and work hard every day to achieve it, honestly and fairly. Most will not reach those levels, but we don't want to steal their dreams, nor invalidate their hard work and commitment to achievement and success.
"We are better than this"
This is a very powerful statement. He is not saying "I" he is saying "we." It is not merely an empty campaign slogan, either, because it is consistent with everything else he says - in casual conversation and spontaneous replies Edwards also says "we" automatically without thinking about it, and by "we" he clearly means all of us, and he obviously sees himself as one of us. Listen to the other candidates, and you can see that they betray a different perspective without realizing they are. They see themselves as a leadership elite, and their followers as the special ones admitted as junior members to the exclusive club.
Another important thing about this statement is that he says we "are" better. Too many Democrats say we can become better, and the public hears this - accurately - as elitist. "Become like us, the beautiful, enlightened, intelligent liberals." The general public deeply resents the implicit message of superiority and the veiled attack on the average person.
When people criticize Edwards for not being perfect, the powerful response is to say that he isn’t claiming to be, nor is the perfection of any candidate anything we should worry about. He is saying that we are better, not that he is better. There is an implicit call to arms in this, as well, and Edwards is very clear about another important point - we are going to be in for a fight. This is what Lincoln called us to, what FDR and JFK and RFK called us to, and it is the strength and the power of the Democratic party. We are in this together, we are better than this, and we can accomplish much together. Very powerful. This allows us to take the high road, the tried and true road when we support Edwards. No need to get down in the gutter with the supporters of the other candidates. No need to argue which candidate is “better.” We can be the better supporters, and that will draw more and more people to us.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
