What Obama should have said about small town Pennyslvanians
April 12th, 2008 at 11:03pm Chuck Sweeny
Barack Obama has this habit of confronting realities in ways that , while true, hit people in the solar plexus. His speech on race was one example.
And last Sunday in San Francisco, speaking to a relatively small group of, well, San Franciscans, Obama said he’s observed that people in small town Pennsylvania are frustrated and strained by the lack of jobs, which have been disappearing for 25 years. He said such people often “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them” because they’ve lost their sense of well-being from an earlier time when a stable economy ensured peace of mind.
Well, Hillary Clinton pounced on that statement, and I hear that small town Pennsylvanians may be in a media-induced tither.
However, while Obama’s choice of words was clumsy, there is truth in what he said. The floor has been cut out of the economy in much of what once was middle class America. The uneasiness is palpable. People cling to those things that are more fundamental. For some, it’s their faith, for others its guns, for some, the only way to explain what went wrong is the influx of illegal immigrants — it’s their fault.
If I had written Obama’s speech, I would have said it this way:
“As I’ve crisscrossed Pennsylvania, and many other states, I’ve noticed something disturbing. Through no fault of their own, the people who make this country run are being put upon at every level. Their jobs have been sent offshore. And the replacement jobs? If you can find one it doesn’t pay the cost of gas to get to work. Their health insurance plan is cutting back on the care they get while raising the price of premiums they and their employers pay. They wonder what they did to get in this mess. The truth is, they did nothing wrong. They were sold out by their own government, which created the policies that reward companies to send jobs overseas and let foreign companies dump cheap products here, while we can’t export our goods to them..
This can make you bitter. And I’ve seen it on the campaign trail. People cling to the things that don’t change, chief among them, their faith in God, which historially has sustained people in times both good and bad. But sometimes cling to other things, such as guns to make them feel secure, or they try to explain what’s happening to them by blaming illegal immigrants. And this didn’t have to happen. This country had plenty of jobs and prosperity to go around, jobs that create economic well being among families, communities, states, and the nation. And that’s what we’ve got to rebuild — a stable economy built on jobs that you can raise a family on.”
Obama didn’t say that. But I think that’s what he meant.
Entry Filed under: Barack Obama
14 Comments Add your own
1. Menlo Bob | April 13th, 2008 at 2:53 am
What you forgot to correct is telling. Senator Obama has vigorously attacked NAFTA, but in his San Francisco moment he asserted that free trade was one of the bugaboos of midwestern yahoos! Anyone care to guess what Obama really thinks? Mr. Sweeney seems to be somewhat of an Obama mindreader. When his advisor Austun Goolsby was summoned by the Canadians he claimed Obama was merely feeding red meat to the rubes. Perhaps Mr. Sweeney can clear things up by asserting that which is unknowable. Care to speculate on when real newsmen will ask Obama tough questions? I’m not holding my breath.
2. Edward | April 13th, 2008 at 8:16 am
Obama is an Idiot plan and simple. Just like his wife being proud of America for the first time in her life. Mr and Mrs looser
3. Boudy | April 13th, 2008 at 9:02 am
Chuck,
Check out a 2004 video from the Charlie Rose show. Obama did essentially say that, except with his usual calm eloquence and clarity. He also derided the Democrats for appearing condescending towards the values and customs with which rural and small town America identify. And he explained why it was important NOT to appear condescending in a time of economic crisis for those citizens when they had lost faith that politicians and government were going to do anything positive regarding employment.
the video is posted at http://www.TalkingPointsMemo.com
4. George Washington | April 13th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Hi Chuck,
It may be true it was inartfully phrased. The problem is, when you’re president, and dealing with foreign governments, an inartful phrase can lead to a catastrophe. I am not suggesting this is a recurring problem for Obama; just that it is overly simplistic to dismiss it by simply saying “oh, that’s not what he meant.”
5. Chuck Sweeny | April 13th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Menlo Bob, please spell my name correctly.
.
Edward, I think you mean loser, not looser.
Boudy, Thanks for the Talking Points video I watched it and I think Obama should have given the 2004 explanation last week in SF. He could have avoided a lot of sniper fire from Mrs. Bill Clinton.
6. Menlo Bob | April 14th, 2008 at 12:11 am
Mr. Sweeny,
Why don’t YOU correct my spelling—you have no problem rewriting Barack Obama’s speeches.
7. Chuck Sweeny | April 14th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Menlo Bob, you’ve already corrected the spelling of my name, so I don’t have to do it!
“George Washington:” A lot of folks thought Ronald Reagan’s supposedly off-air (but not really) comment about the USSR — “the bombing begins in 5 minutes” — was provocative and dangerous.
He was also accused of provocation when he called the USSR an evil empire, and when he stood on the Berlin Wall (remember that?) and said, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.”
Today we remember Reagan as the winner of the Cold War, and we remember the USSR, or CCCP if you wish, as a t-shirt.
8. George Washington | April 14th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Chuckles,
I think perhaps the difference is people knew Reagan wanted to dismantle communism and hated the Soviet Union. So, what he said (reckless as it was) fit with who he was — or at least the image he wanted to convey. Sen. Obama’s remark seems at odds with the message of his campaign. I think that is also the reason why the comments of his wife and pastor have also gained so much attention.
Admittedly, it is unreasonable to expect every word a president utters to be perfect. I am just suggesting that it’s a piece of the puzzle and the “he didn’t mean it” defense can only be used so many times.
9. John Quincy Adams | April 14th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
I agree with George, Chuckles. You are too easy on Obama. Don’t give him a free pass on everything. I am neither an Obama supporter or detractor…just someone interested in seeing everyone treated fairly.
10. Chuck Sweeny | April 14th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
My hunch is that none of you would vote for Obama regardless of anything he said or did not say. All three of the main candidates have said ridiculous things. Heck, we’ve had a president who’s been saying ridiculous things for 7 years, and had ridiculous policies to boot. Even started a ridiculous war his dad’s advisers waned him against.
11. John Quincy Adams | April 15th, 2008 at 6:59 am
Chuckles, if Obama is the Democratic nominee, I will vote for him.
Great analysis on your part. He or she did it, so I can do it. Last time I heard that, my mom said something along the lines of, “If he jumped off a bridge, woudl you jump off a bridge?”
12. Menlo Park | April 15th, 2008 at 8:49 am
Hey Chuckles, I am not sure if I’m reading your comment correctly or not (#10) but one possible interpretation is you are invoking the “race card.” If so, I think you are doing George Washington a disservice. His issue is not so much with what Sen. Obama said, but with your analysis….that somehow, since (according to you) he meant something different than what he said, it makes it OK. Your take could easily have been lifted directly from the script of the Saturday Night Live debate skit a few weeks back…you know, the one where Obama got asked “can we get you a pillow” while Hillary got all the zingers.
13. Menlo Bob | April 17th, 2008 at 8:57 am
Chuck, I’m re-reading your rephrasing of Obama’s off the cuff remarks that got him some bad press and it would seem to have a distorted vision of the problems of rural workers. All one has to do is look at where the jobs in Rockford have gone. For the most part they’ve been lured away to other states with more favorable tax policies–not to other countries. Obama’s tax policies, if anything, don’t encourage competition for jobs. As for the inability to export products all you have to look at is Obama’s statements opposing trade agreements to know where he stands. Even the recently rejected Columbian agreement that had broad bi-partisan support, but not from the petit Marxist. On balance trade has been very good for this country. Much as the decline of the dollar as been derided in the press and the senator, a weaker dollar allows for more US exports. Obama likes to describe the situation without providing solutions.
14. George Washington | April 17th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Menlo Bob, excellent analysis! [Though methinks you slightly underestimate the impact of the global economy.] Chuckles, any thoughts? Or is Menlo Bob just another close minded guy from the red states?
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed