Us and Them (or, Why Democrats Often Come Off As Unclear, Unfocused and Scattered)

On July 21, 2006 Bill Clinton spoke at a fundraiser for Jim McDermott (the Representative sued by Ohio Rep. John Boehner over his release to the public of tapes incriminating Newt Gingrich and others in ethics violations). The event was friendly and laid-back. The audio of the event can be found here (mp3 link). The full transcription of Clinton's speech in DOC format is here.

Among other points the 42nd President made was a primer on the differences between Republicans and Democrats. I have always felt that Clinton was a well-read, well-thought fellow and his breakdown of this subject was quite enlightening. It led me to notice several other things lately that have really clarified the differences for me and, I believe, actually helped me understand the Republican view on things better. I almost hate to edit any of this for length. Be sure to check out the full transcript. Following are excerpts from Clinton's speech...

"...there really is a huge sort of philosophical difference between the two parties, deeply held, that has policy and political implications and produces very different results for the American people. They honestly believe the source of America’s greatness is in its big companies, and wealthy elite, and we believe the source of America’s greatness is in its middle class and the promise that everybody who works can be rewarded for it... therefore their primary goal when they get political power is to literally to concentrate wealth and power and that’s what they believe they should do."

Clinton goes on to explain how this "concentration" method affects all decisions Republicans make. He further asserts that Republican thinking is "ideological" rather than "philosophical". The difference being that, with a philosophy there is room for debate and exploration. With an ideology, the result is pre-determined and the facts must be contorted to fit the already-held belief. The difference that this makes in governing style is astounding.

I think this goes a long way toward explaining why Republicans have succeeded in convincing people that they have the answers. They have long preached the notion that they have "principles" and stand by them, come what may. They portray variance and willingness to look at things from the other fellow's point of view as "flip-flopping" and "lacking conviction". They follow the plan of picking one spot, gathering a core group around you, then never budging from that spot- even if all evidence points to something contrary. Pick a mantra and repeat it, repeat it, repeat it. Do any of these sound familiar?

• We had to fight the terrorists in Iraq so we didn't have to fight them here at home.
• Saddam Hussein wanted to acquire weapons of mass destruction, whether there were any to be found or not. He was a bad man and we did the right thing by removing him.
• Those who oppose warrantless wire-tapping are trying to take away the tools we need to protect us from another 9/11.
• We didn't want to come out and say this, but 9/11 was really Bill Clinton's fault.
• In the eight months between GW Bush's inauguration and 9/11, we did all we could to track down Osama bin Laden. We got bad intelligence.
• The democrats want to cut and run. We want to stay and give the Iraqis a chance at freedom.
• The Iraqis will welcome us as liberators.
• Mission Accomplished!
• We don't torture people. We aggressively question terrorists who want to kill Americans .Thus we prevent another 9/11.
• The terrorists hate us for our freedom.

These points are well-thought-out and remarkably effective. Karl Rove is a Blofeldian genius with a propaganda apparatus he should rightly be proud of.

So, how do Dems come off looking like pussies? Well, the Democratic party is, by its very nature, inclusive. There is room for a lot of different views and opinions. It is not diametrically the opposite of the Republican. Republicans are red apples. Dems are not green apples. They are grapes. A gathering of many who hope to progress forward under their common banners. But, in times of trouble, people look for someone who will stand fast, look focused and resolute- even if that person is somewhat questionable in methodology. This is exactly what happened to Germany under Hitler. And it is what happened to the United States under George W Bush.

Clinton knows that the Dems strength (their inclusiveness of many reasonable points of view) can be painted as a weakness by those who want to mischaracterize it. So, he has been preaching a lot lately about the need for clarity, the need to think and the willingness to fight back.

"...if somebody asks you when you leave here, and tomorrow or the next day or sometime between now and November, they say, 'I don’t know what the Democrats stand for', you say 'yes, I do! The Republicans believe in concentrating wealth and power because they think that American’s greatness resides in its wealthy elites. The Democrats agree in empowering all of us because they think that America’s greatness resides in its ordinary citizens and their ability to raise their children with the American Dream.'

And you can say the Democrats are for a clean energy future, they are for health care reform.... They are for raising the minimum wage and they don’t think Congress ought to get a pay raise until they raise the minimum wage for ordinary people. They’re for restoring the cuts in the college loan program and the 300,000 kids that were kicked out of after school programs to pay for [Bush's] tax cut. And they’re for a security policy that fights terror and but also seeks to build a world with more partners and fewer terrorists."

Concentration vs. diversity. Sounds a lot clearer than the simplistic "strength vs weakness", "resolve vs indecision" that we get fed by Fox News, huh?