Over the last week or so, I have heard a large number of progressives cite "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" as their ideal political movie. Ya know, cuz they wish President Obama was more like Jimmy Stewart’s character, Jefferson Smith.
As an old movie buff, I love this film. I love watching almost everything Frank Capra ever did. But the progressives who "wish Obama was like him" miss the point of the film. If you think the film is about an idealistic individual who rises up and upsets the corrupt old guard, Frank Capra is up there looking down on you and wishes he could slap you, because you're way off. Senator Smith didn’t win by himself. In fact, when he was taking the corruption on by himself, he was losing, and losing badly. For some reason, some people think the ending has him “winning” the filibuster by making his opposition crack.
Um, not quite.
If you’ll recall, as he’s filibustering, he's becoming weaker and weaker. Finally, his friend calls back to his home state and the Boy Rangers rally their forces. They print up newspapers and were apparently able to give one to every single human being in Smith's home state within a matter of hours. It was their SUPPORT that built a groundswell., and that support is what caused Senator Paine to take to the floor of the Senate and, wracked with guilt, finally admit that HE was the corrupt one.
That’s not to say Senator Smith isn’t a hero, because he was. But a politician doesn’t just “become” a hero on his own. What makes a politician a hero -- what creates in a politician the boldness to do things that are beyond the pale -- is a high level of support and trust. Yes, I said “trust.” It's called "the public trust" for a reason, kiddies.
If you want President Obama to be more of a leader, SUPPORT him.
Yes, I know Jefferson Smith is a fictional character, but we have a lot of real life examples to choose from. If you’re a progressive, you have to love Congresspersons like Anthony Weiner and Maxine Waters. That Bernie Sanders always speaks the truth, doesn’t he? My old Congressperson was Elijah Cummings, who is incredibly eloquent and effective. My Senators, Mikulski and Cardin, are also very progressive and very effective. The governor of Maryland, Martin O'Malley, realized he had to raise taxes and did it, even during a recession, and even though he was running for reelection. My old district in Tucson is represented by Raul Grijalva, who is one of the most eloquent Congresspersons in the country.
They are all awesome, aren’t they? They say exactly what needs to be said and they do what needs to be done. Why can’t ALL Democrats be like them, right? I know that’s what you’re thinking.
The answer is deceptively simple, except that it would require some progressives to do things differently.
If you want politicians to do the right thing, support them and trust them. If you want President Obama to go out on a limb for you, you have to demonstrate to him that he won't fall out of the tree and die in the attempt. Instead, he climbs onto the branch, and progressives get out the chainsaw.
Anthony Weiner, Maxine Waters and the others can be the way they are because they have tons of support from their constituents. There is little chance they will lose election for saying the things they do, so they speak their mind. The reason FDR was able to act so boldly back in 1933 was because everyone but the far right loved him. I'm talking about LOVE, folks. They didn't just think he was a nice guy; they believed in him and trusted him.
Contrast them with poor Alan Grayson, the very progressive and very outspoken Congressperson from Florida, who is now an ex-Congressperson, and forced to comment from the sidelines, in part because progressives turned on Democrats in 2009 and helped the right wing in their efforts to depress turnout in 2010. Alan Grayson spoke up and developed a huge fan club; one that I am definitely part of. But he also represented a relatively conservative district, so guess what? He’s now unable to influence the debate in Congress at all. Why? In part, it’s because progressives stopped supporting Obama and the Democrats almost from the get-go.
Obama and the Democrats in Congress have largely been on their own, even as progressives were calling themselves the "democratic base," despite reality. Let me disabuse you of something, far left progressives. In order to be part of a political “base,” the politicians in question must be able to count on your support and trust no matter what. I’ve seen no evidence of that from a large portion of the progressive side of the debate. Even before Obama had a chance to screw up, some people were jumping down his throat. When he told us to “hold his feet to the fire,” he didn't mean bitch about every goddamn thing. He didn’t mean we were supposed to start a forest fire, throw him in and then dare him to come out. The way you evaluate a politician is not to micromanage your support based on every individual decision he makes; no one could hold up under that kind of scrutiny. He's not a deity, he's human.
If you want to know why Obama seems weak at times, it’s because he’s a politician, and politicians are necessarily forced to go where the support is. He couldn’t be as bold as he liked on banking reform, because he and Chris Dodd had no support from the left side of the aisle. If you want to know why the health insurance bill started with a strong public option, an insurance exchange and strong consumer and price controls, it’s because progressives didn’t offer their support for it. There is a small but loud segment of the progressive movement that is very vocal about their opinion, and quite obnoxious with their constant judgment, but who offer no support for anything that they don't perceive as "pure." I've actually seen the word "DINO" used by some progressives who have NEVER supported the Democrats. Where does a far-left progressive get off deciding who is and isn't a good Democrat, anyway? Brown, black and working class people are overwhelmingly Democratic, they don't agree with the far left on a lot of things, and they are perfectly happy with moving slowly in the right direction, as long as it's the right direction. After 30 years of moving backward, it's a refreshing change, after all. Now, what right to white, puffy, far-left progressive purists to tell these people, who put their heart and soul into the Democratic Party, that they're not "good Democrats" or "DINOs"???
“I’m not going to support it unless it contains x, y and z” is not a show of support.
“I’ve got your back no matter what you do, because I trust you” IS a show of support.
That’s the problem. I support Obama because I trust him to do the right thing, and so far, he hasn't let me down. Do I agree with every single thing he does? Don't be absurd; he's human. But I happen to think he’s the best president we’ve had in a generation, because I look at his overall record. If you say he's anything like Bush, you're either really stupid, or you're being dishonest. And if more white, puffy progressives would get off their asses and support him for a while, they would be shocked at how much more he could do. As it is, he has to run for reelection, and he has to go where the votes are. And when you poison the debate with cries of "Obama's just like Bush!" you force him to go after votes from people who are less dishonest.
Seriously, I’m getting sick of this shit. I’m sick of white, educated (but not very smart) progressives standing on the sidelines and thinking that politicians are there to accede to their every demand. I’m sorry, but the numbers of good progressives in politics has been shrinking over the past 40 years, to the point that they’re practically an endangered species. Yet, no matter how long we go without power, and no matter how far right we watch the country move, the same progressives stand by and wonder what happened.
President Obama is a moderate because moderation gets the most votes, and votes are what keeps politicians alive. Votes are their stock in trade. If you want a progressive country, you're never going to get it by wishing for it. You're never going to get it if you wait for a politician who does whatever you, personally, think is right, regardless of the consequences, because he won't be in office long enough to do any of it.
If you want to be part of the political system, you have to play politics. That's always true in a democratic system. In our unique "checks and balances" system in which 2/3 of the government is elected by the majority and the other third is chosen by those we elect, every politician who doesn't plan to get 50% of the vote plus one, is yanking your chain. If you vote for someone like that, you're wasting your vote. And if you claim "principle" when you vote for someone who can't win an election, you're deluded. The only people who get to make policy in this system are those who get the most votes. A vote for someone who will never be in the position to do what he or she promises is absolutely wasted.
Our political system is simple. You put all your support behind a candidate. If that candidate loses, you pick up your ball and either try again, or find another candidate to support. But always remember; if your candidate wins, that does NOT constitute the END of your support for that candidate; it’s actually THE BEGINNING. You have to keep campaigning, and keep pushing and keep supporting that candidate, and letting that candidate know he or she is supported and trusted. And yes, that means supporting them even when they have to do something you don't like. The time to reevaluate that politician is when the next election cycle comes along. If the overall record of that candidate shows low performance, find another candidate.
Look at what some (again, mostly white, puffy) progressives did to Obama. They got all excited, they pumped him up, and they imbued him with all sorts of magical skills he didn't have. They basically made shit up; they claim he promised to do things he never promised to do. When he was elected, they were ecstatic. They were giddy when he was inaugurated. But on January 21, it was over, because he nominated a few people from Wall Street to head Treasury and his economic team in the middle of a recession. Because he didn’t immediately end two wars and bring all of the troops home, progressives began to turn on him, despite the fact that he never said he’d do that during the campaign. Less than a year into a four-year term, a large group of progressives completely withdrew support, and essentially joined the right wing in trashing him and all Democrats. The phrase "spineless Democrats" caught on, and let me assure you, that one came from the left, not the right. And the right was absolutely giddy.
The result? The vast majority of the American public, who are too busy at a job and/or trying to keep the foreclosure monster at bay to sit and watch news 24/7, hear from the right, “Democrats suck, Democrats are weak, Democrats have no spines.” They hear from the left, “Democrats suck, Democrats are weak, Democrats have no spines.” Since they don’t care for the right wing, and they don’t care to vote for Democrats, since “Democrats suck, Democrats are weak, Democrats have no spines,” they stayed home, and the far right wins the 2010 elections almost entirely by default.'
If we're going to move this country to the left, we have to realize several things.
We have to understand that the middle 51% of the country will always decide who gets to run it, and we will never have a 100%, or even a three-fifth progressive majority in the government.
We have to get that, if we want to move the country's politics left, we have to move the electorate left. That means making our case to the average voter, and realizing that we have to get at least 50% of them to see things our way.
We have to figure out that the fact that we have a two-party system in a winner-take-all system is a minor miracle. You can dream of a perfect "third party" that does everything you want it to, but the reality is, you simply cannot win anything but a fluke election without aligning with one of the two major parties. Since the people we most relate to are Democrats, joining with the Democrats makes the most sense.
We have to realize that you attract more flies with honey than with vinegar. And like I said; the goal of politics is to attract the most flies. People don't like progressives very much, mostly because the loudest of us are incessantly negative. We have to start sending a positive message, and stop poisoning debate with nothing but unpleasantness.
And finally, we have to understand that no one in their right mind acts in a positive way to threats. When you say, "if that politician wants my vote, he's going to have to do x, y and z," you are being more like a petulant child than a thinking adult. No one reacts well to that sort of thing. Think about your own life; who are you more likely to listen to; someone who explains something to you calmly and rationally, or someone who calls you a moron because you don't see things their way? Who is more likely to influence you in your life; someone who kicks you in the ass when you do something wrong, or someone who praises you when you do something right? If you're always kicking someone in the ass for doing something wrong, and never praise them when they do the right thing, the natural tendency is for that person to do nothing, in order to avoid the ass kicking. Get it?
Go back and watch Jefferson Smith again, and this time open your mind, and get the right message from it. That's how all Capra films are. Think about another Capra film, "It’s a Wonderful Life." The hero, George Bailey, doesn’t win because he does the right thing. In fact, when he's acting on his own, he loses big time. What gets him through in the end is the support of all the people around him. Support makes the difference.
Getting back to real life, FDR is every progressives hero. But what made FDR's heroism was the adulation most of the electorate gave him. They had every right to complain, you know; he didn't reduce unemployment to below 15% until his THIRD TERM. But he was able to do a lot of radical, revolutionary things, because he knew people had his back.
That’s what every great president has always had; the support of the people who put him there. Until now. The complete lack of support for President Obama from some quarters is absolutely shameful. His second term – the one without the need to run for reelection, could be a great one; one of the greatest in history. But only if everyone who wants him to do the right thing supports him in that endeavor.
Everyone. That means you, progressives. Great politicians aren't born, they're made.
