Obama: 'Democrats have to say, Even though I'm a progressive, I believe in being practical'

[bigtree]

April 3, 2008 | PHILADELPHIA -- "I've been running now for 15 months," Barack Obama would announce with a whiff of weary wonder in his voice at virtually every stop on his just-completed six-day Pennsylvania bus trip. Then the Democratic front-runner would add the punch line that underscored the absurdity of this presidential marathon: "Which means that there are babies that have been born and now are walking and talking."

Pennsylvania provides something of a laboratory for Obama. The Illinois senator can use the April 22 primary as an opportunity to quiet doubters by increasing his vote share among blue-collar Democrats, while simultaneously beginning to test-market themes designed to sway swing voters in the fall election. At a Tuesday town meeting in Scranton both sides of the equation came together when a man with a booming voice asked Obama how he could reach out to Republicans while remaining true to his political values.

Obama's answer offered a glimpse of how the candidate has clearly thought about retooling his rhetoric to highlight centrist themes. After first deriding George W. Bush for nearly doubling the national debt, Obama declared, "The Republicans are susceptible to a message that says, 'We're going to restore a sense of fiscal responsibility and a sense of modesty in our foreign policy ...' And Democrats have to say, 'Even though I'm a progressive, I believe in being practical.'"

Speaking to a state AFL-CIO convention Wednesday morning, Obama momentarily silenced the made-in-America union movement with the declaration, "If we're completely honest with ourselves, we have to acknowledge that we cannot completely stop globalization." But Obama also tried to add a populist edge to his speech with the frequent use of the verb "rigged." Harking back to his days as a community organizer in Chicago, Obama said, "The reason that I am standing here out in front of you is because I don't want to wake up one morning six years from now and discover that the system is still rigged against America's families."




Obama, who is campaigning in Pennsylvania, spoke to the state’s AFL-CIO and criticized the Bush administration for not helping regular citizens.

The front-runner for the Democratic nomination said the view in Washington and on Wall Street is that “we can somehow thrive as a nation when those at the very top are doing better than ever, while ordinary Americans are struggling to get by.”

Obama told the union crowd that the Bush administration “serves the interests of the wealthy and the well-connected, no matter what the cost to working families, and to our economy.

“It’s an administration that didn’t lift a finger while our economy rolled toward recession until the pain folks were feeling on Main Street trickled up to their friends on Wall Street,” he stated.

“Like George Bush, Sen. McCain is committed to more tax cuts for the rich, and more trade agreements that fail to protect American workers,” the senator said. “His response to the housing crisis amounts to little more than watching millions of Americans face foreclosure.”




Barack Obama made a direct appeal for the support of organized labor, telling hundreds of union activists today that he's "ready to go on the offense" for them.

"It's time we have a president who doesn't choke saying the word union," Obama, the junior United State senator from Illinois told members of the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO who gathered here this week for their 38th annual constitutional convention.

"It's time we have a Democratic nominee who doesn't just talk about unions during a primary. It's time for we have a president who knows it's the Department of Labor, not the Department of Management," he said.

Of the two candidates, Clinton has a larger number of unions on her side: 12 AFL-CIO member unions, including the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the American Federation of Teachers, the International Association of Machinists and the United Farm Workers.

Obama has the support of Change to Win's Teamsters, SEIU, UNITE HERE and the United Food and Commercial Workers, as well as the Change to Win organization and five smaller AFL-CIO unions. Obama picked up the endorsement Tuesday from the 10,000-member Laborers District Council of Metro Philadelphia





Obama, asked if he is “tough enough’’ to take the heat of the right-wing when (or perhaps if) he starts pulling troops out of Iraq as president, said: “I come from Chicago.’’ (http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/04/obama_tough_i_come_from_chicag.html)

The question was posed on the Hardball Campus Tour, with host Chris Matthews of MSNBC asking if Obama is as tough as Vice President Dick Cheney when it comes to ignoring public opinion about the war – Matthews’ phrase, please.

“You don’t ignore public opinion,’’ Obama replied. “You try to shape public opinion.

“In terms of my toughness, look, first of all, I come from Chicago,’’ the Illinois senator said. “And you know, politics in Chicago, as it was once said, is not tiddlywinks. It's not beanbag. You know, it's a tough town.

“ But what I've been able to do is to rise politically without compromising my ethics, without compromising my principles,’’ Obama said. “I think during the course of this campaign, we're going up against a pretty tough political operation with the Clintons. Nobody's ever accused them of being -- being soft. And so far, we're doing pretty well.''

“I am very confident that when it comes to issues like Iraq,’’ Obama added, “a war that I stood up against at a time when it would have been politically convenient to be for it, or at least to be silent, when it comes to tough issues like talking to leaders we don't like, something that defies some of the conventional wisdom in Washington but I feel very strongly about, then I'm going to stick to my guns and try to persuade the American people that we need to go in a new direction and fundamentally break with the failed policies of the past seven-and-a-half years.’’





Video from Barack's Speech to the AFL-CIO Convention in Philadelphia
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/caitlinharvey/gGBtyr

Video of Barack on the College Hardball Tour
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gGBXV5

[slinkerwink]

1. thank you for a great post!

[islandmkl]

2. the more he talks, the more people who hear him...

the better he sounds...

forget the pundits, forget the RW asstalkers, forget the desperate claims of opponents in our own party...

when you see and hear the man, when you listen to 'just words'...

you see the next President...

[indimuse]

3. ..

:puke:

[NEOhiodemocrat]

4. I enjoyed your post

Thank You, so tired of anti--- anyone posts. Lets get to the issues.

[bigtree]

6. I agree. It's a good opportunity in these working class regions, to focus on the issues

. . . and the concerns that voters care about.

It doesn't hurt to hear the details of what these candidates are proposing, outside of the sensationalism and the scandal chases. After all, one of them will advance to the presidency, with our help.

thanks for looking in :hi:

[jobycom]

5. But isn't that what Clinton has done all along, and isn't that what Obama supporters hate?

I honestly don't get it. He says stuff, and people swoon and fan their faces and say "Wow!" but all I hear are platitiudes, contradictory statements, and a lack of any real understanding of things. I expect him to wake up one morning and declare to the world that the reason it gets light is because of that big round thing going around the Earth, and all of his supporters going "Wow!" and declaring he's discovered the secret of daytime.

Every time he speaks I think of Bob Roberts.

[bigtree]

9. I see it a bit differently

I'll admit that I hear his recitation of history and circumstances and wonder if he's just discovered these things. But, I also know that many of the things he speaks about ARE new to many of the voters who have been drawn to his campaign. I'm going to assume he's sincere about what he's proposing.

And, the candidates do have similar appeals. But, there are differences in their plans which intend to make good on their promises. I favor Sen. Clinton's comprehensive approach to jobs, trade, and the overall economy. I think she's put a great deal of thought and consideration behind her proposals, and, a great deal of her perspective on the economy comes from her experience as First Lady, promoting the economic policies of her husband, the president, which helped facilitate that era's economic boom.

[jobycom]

14. I guess what's frustrating is when his supporters feel he's saying something new and use it

to say he is a better candidate than the more experienced person who's been saying it all along.

And it does go against what his supporters have been claiming they like about him. That word "practical" (and it's twin, "pragmatic") has been used with scorn around here about any Democrat who tries to work out real solutions instead of petulantly shouting "I won't do it! I won't do it!"

Obama's been pretending all along he wouldn't be practical, and now he's saying he will be, and judging from this thread, his supporters are saying "Wow! Why don't other candidates say that?"

BTW, your post is excellent, insightful, and well-phrased. :thumbsup:

[sandnsea]

31. Here's the difference

Hillary will sell us out, just like Bill did. Obama won't. The system won't be rigged against us like it has since 1980.

I lived in Arkansas under Bill Clinton as governor. Arkansas was the first stop to the busting of unions and jobs going out of the country.

[EFerrari]

10. He has different modalities. Last night when asked about policy

on Hardball, he answered in concrete terms on many topics. His answers weren't fluff, either. Gay marriage, the economy, education, early child development. I've had the same reaction that you do listening to speeches -- Michele's as well. But, when his sits to talk about policy, he can pull out detailed program proposals without batting an eye.

[jobycom]

15. I don't know, I've watched him a lot, and every time I see him go into details

the details are just what other candidates have been saying. But he acts like he's the first and only one to say them, too.

I know it didn't bother many people here, but I keep thinking about his "words" speech, where he quoted famous people to prove that words have an impact, and then it turned out they weren't even his words in the first place. And anyway, it wasn't the words of MLK that made his speeches so powerful, it was the experience he put behind those words--the lifetime of tactical genius, of physical risk and suffering, of sacrifice, that made his speech so powerful. If I had said "I have a dream" people would have yawned and said "So?" But when Martin Luther King said it, one had to marvel that a man who had been so beaten, so abused, so reviled by so many of his enemies, could be so optimistic, so patient, so beautifully visionary after all he had witnessed and been through. If Martin Luther King could rise above his own experiences and still feel the hope he felt, then who could deny that hope? That dream?

It was never the words. It was always the experience.

And Obama doesn't seem to get that. He sees words as shortcuts to change, or maybe even as reality itself. And that's not going to work as president, where words are meaningless.

That's how I've seen him all along--he says what others have been saying, and acts like he thought of it. A friend at work first got hooked on Obama when Obama said, early in the campaign, that all Americans should have the same health care package that Congress has. That's such a platitude and has been said for decades so often that I shook my head at that banality of the cliche, but my friend, because of his lack of political exposure, thought it was original and brilliant.

When he's actually the president, words won't count, and the illusion of original ideas won't help. And he's standing in the way of someone with the same visions, but with the experience to make those visions a reality. If he wins, what has he cheated us of? He offers a dream, but without the experience to make it a reality. And every time I hear him speak, I feel more like that.

[EFerrari]

20. Martin was only 39 when he was murdered. n/t

[jobycom]

22. Not sure I see your point.

:shrug: Aside from that he died too young. He achieved and experienced more in those 39 years than most ever do, no matter their lifespan. He certainly achieved a level that Obama has never come close to experiencing. Obama did some community activist work and was a local politician, as well as a law professor, but that's not on a league with King. King by the age of 39 had changed national policy, orchestrated national protests, argued with and beaten presidents (JFK opposed a lot of what he did, at first), and even campaigned for his issues on a global level.

While Obama was trying to get a city council or a state legislature to make changes, King was successfully overturning the entrenched social structures of the nation. Obama's never done anything at that level. (Although if he wins the election, he'll have plenty of opportunity to try. :) )

[ginnyinWI]

23. well here's one thing I'm seeing

Obama is trying to sell himself primarily, and his policies second. By that I mean, he's trying to express to people his philosophy of government, his vision, if you will. And since this is different from the usual way Democratic candidates campaign, people sometimes think he's talking about nothing or speaking in platitudes. He's got the policy wonk stuff down, too, but doesn't feel that it should be used as his main calling card. Because any Democrat will come out with the same or a very similar laundry list of issues.

What he seeks to do is impress the listener with his ability to carry them out effectively. That's why he talks about "judgement" rather than "experience". He's talking about governing style and qualities he feels he possesses that make him uniquely qualified. He's selling his intellectual ability, his character, and his heart.

I find this really refreshing. When other candidates, even ones I've supported, have gotten up on stage and just hammered away, listing out issues that need change, I would get really impatient. I want to pick someone that I trust to be the best person to solve whatever comes up, not just someone who knows about or cares about what is wrong. Because we know that they all care.

This is what the Republicans have done in the past, and it helped them win. Sell the person.

[jobycom]

34. That's a good argument that I don't completely agree with

:) When he does talk about the issues, he always seems naive to me about how to get them passed. All Democrats talk about their vision and philosophy--remember Bush mocking the Dems for "the vision thing?" AND they talk about the issues. Obama doesn't strike me as different, only one sided--he only talks about himself, only tries to make people like him.

I'm hardwired to not trust people like that. And even more, he attacks too often. He tries to act like he doesn't, but he says stuff like "I don't take oil money, I didn't vote for the war." He's attacking, and dishonestly, but he makes it sound like he's talking only about himself. Like Michelle's "How can you run the White House if you can't run your own house?" That was obviously a dig at Clinton, and a criticism of her for being cheated on, but Michelle of course said "Oh I didn't mean her, I just meant, you know, whatever..."

He may win that way, but he turns me the wrong way. If he could convince me he does understand the issues--and not just how to list them and claim they have to be fixed, because anyone can do that--and that he's got a more complex understanding of what it takes to get stuff done in DC, I'd like him better. But all I hear are the kinds of comments he makes above--contradictory, empty.

I mean, I don't doubt his intelligence, and he obviously has the charisma of a leader. But that's about a tenth of what he needs. And he doesn't seem to know that.

Sorry, I've drifted from the original post a bit. It ties in, because that's how I see comments like he made in the OP. He tries to say the right words and phrases, but I don't see anything behind them. And I have heard him try to be a wonk, but he doesn't sound knowledgeable to me. You say every Democrat agrees on the major issues, and that's fair. But then he should talk about how to get things done, and not just who he is. I don't care who he is, I care whether he can get anything done.

[ginnyinWI]

35. I have a different take, and I just realized why.

My first introduction to Obama, before all the speeches and everything started, was when I read his second book, The Audacity of Hope. In it he outlines his thinking on a whole range of issues, and I got a really good idea of where he is coming from politically. I guess that was the the beginning of trusting that he would be a capable president. At that time I didn't know if he could win enough popular support, especially because Sen. Clinton was expected to do very well. She had all the funds and mojo back then.

Now I see that he can win popular support, and raise funds, and am enthusiastic about him going all the way to the White House and putting some of those good ideas to work. I think one of his strengths is that he can pull people together who otherwise wouldn't come together, and hammer out practical solutions to the country's problems. His background as an organizer is perfect for this. He wants to get transparency back in government and wrest power out of the hands of the powerful--and this will not be easy. If he can only do this partially it will really be something. He'll rely heavily on experts in many fields, and won't insist doing something for ideological reasons. In other words, the exact opposite of the guy who's there now!

[joshcryer]

30. Obama supporters tell me that Clinton's Health Care and Economic Policies are not "practical."

That they could never get passed because they have lots of progressive ideas like subsidies and mandates. :shrug:

Let's be honest here, Obama is selling to the centrist crowd whereas Clinton's ideas are far more progressive.

[jobycom]

32. Preaching to the choir. nt

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

7. Are progressive and practical mutually exclusive?

:shrug:

[slinkerwink]

8. they're both inclusive

but there is a tendency for progressives to want the government to be the be-all and end-all to problems.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

11. Then you aren't a progressive, if that's your definition.

I don't know any progressives who hold that view. None.

[UALRBSofL]

12. This is what people have been saying all along that he is not a progressive

He is much more a centrist democrat. Now Barney Franks would be what I call a progressive. Also, DU being a progressive site, I am shocked so many people supported Obama over Kucinich.

[SwampG8r]

13. yeah

thats called fascism not progression

[Bluenorthwest]

16. Did you learn about Progressives

from Rush or from Hannity?

[msongs]

17. imperialist obama votes to fund and support the iraqi occupation nt

[thevoiceofreason]

18. BigTree, I've gotten to the point where I seek out your posts.

Very informative, on both sides. Thanks

[Catherina]

19. K&R this great post! n/t

[shugah]

21. k&r

thanks bigtree!

[Neshanic]

24. Mr. Moderate. Oh he will end the war alrighty. Not.

[bigtree]

26. I think either candidate will end the occupation

. . . as promised :kick:

[Neshanic]

28. I will not hold my breath for that, as there are people here that would like me gone.

[susankh4]

25. Wow! He sounds more like a REAL Democrat every day....

More like Hillary, that is.

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

[Bake]

27. "Dems must be practical ..."

Sounds like (a) backpedaling, or (b) triangulation.

New kind of politics, indeed. Edwards would've been far better.

Bake

[NJSecularist]

29. Democrats aren't winning any election without appealing to the moderate wing of the party

That's the truth. As much as we hate to hear it.

[Bake]

33. That's going to be very disappointing to his idealistic young supporters.

Especially those who think he's the Progressive Messiah.

Bake

[TheDoorbellRang]

37. If practical means an ability to reframe dichotomous issues

so that a solution can be agreed upon, then yes. Obama is practical. To me, what the Dems have done is cede to Repugs on major differences so they could be seen as "bipartisan" or so they could get some crumbs tossed their way.

I had a lot more of a problem with Hillary supporting the flag burning amendment than I did with her war vote. Seemed like gratuitous pandering to me. OTOH, I see Obama come up with an ethics reform package he's worked on with RW wacko Coburn, and as he pointed out in the last debate -- how is that liberal? Ethics reform is a core value that all Americans support. His whole modus operandi is one of the major reasons I support him. He's got a whole different approach to getting stuff done. Obama and Clinton agree on most issues, but whereas Hillary will fight tooth and nail to get stuff done; Obama will reframe the whole dilemma and get conservatives to go along.

[Writer]

36. Of course he's practical. He's a Gen X'er.

:P

X'ers have to clean up the Boomers' mess so it'll be ready for the Millennials to fuck up.

:rofl:

((Okay, torch me now.))

;)

[bigtree]

38. I'm a year older than Obama

and my 20 something sons really don't think of me as an X'er.