The Reality
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Obama, RFK and Edwards: My Talk with Moyers
I had a really interesting conversation with Bill Moyers at the Riverside Church's Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial where John Edwards was the keynote speaker.
We debated the comparison of Edwards' early positioning so far to Bobby Kennedy's spring '68 badass tranformational campaign - working with Cesear Chavez, walking picket lines and the rest.
Moyers said that in some ways, Obama has the Bobby Kennedy aura better, but in a fundamental way isn't "there" yet -- and while Edwards' positioning is on track to hit the same notes RFK hit, he has extra work to do to make the case that he can carry RFK's image and MLK's anti-povery crusade to victory -- extra work that Obama doesn't have to do. The result is that Moyers fears that Edwards won't be able to make it work.
Firstly, Moyers stressed that RFK was a product of his times. That he grew organically out of the context of the late sixies. The country was racked with social revolution - that winter students across America were taking over administration buildings. He also stressed that the whole nation understood him to be a changed man after his big brother was gunned down in public. At the '64 Convention, RFK received a 22 minute ovation. Kennedy became in his own words "essentially a Catholic radical."
Moyers told the story of how when he travelled with Bobby down to King's funeral in Atlanta, Kennedy was clearly a hardened man, scarred, weathered, angry but unwilling to cave to violent conservatives. It was clear to him that the plight of the urban poor was his duty then to carry. He dedicated the rest of his campaign to that. He focused on universities, migrant workers, urban poor, rural poor - political calculus that made him anything but a favorite. What it made him was an embodiment of another "new generation" as JFK said in his inaugural address. He was change.
Moyers feels that Obama automatically fills the aura of "new generation" by his racial makeup and age. He also automatically fits the image of fighting for urban poor because of these same qualities.
I pointed out that while he may fit the requisite aura of RFK's '68 run, the evidence suggests that he'll run more of a Humphrey '68 campaign.
Moyers suggested that the "extra work" Edwards has to do is twofold: compensate for the fact that the traditional media does not understand that because 2.5 million Americans have signed up for the One Campaign to end poverty, that there 10 million signatures on several petitions to end genocide, that social awareness and volunteerism among young Americans is as high as it has been since the late sixties, that the generation under 30 represents a voting block more engaged and more left-leaning than any American generation since FDR... all means that there is already evidence of a new movement afoot. Using the internet to make these points and engage this movement is the right thing to do, Moyers noted, suggesting Josh Marshall and MyDD have some of the sharpest perceptions of young politics and movement politics around. (I recommended FutureMajority as well). If Edwards peppers his speeches with notations of how many millions of young people are calling for what exactly he's talking about, then he'll seem more of an organic product of what WE understand to be a generational movement. Maybe it might even educate the punditry about the actual state of affairs... dare to dream.
Moyers' second point was that Edwards also has to make the case that he is a changed man from his '04 version. That Edwards 2.0 is a fighter, unwilling to compromise with evil. Once, informed that an opponent called him ruthless, Bobby Kennedy half-joked to the reporter, "If I find out who called me ruthless I will destroy him." Kennedy openly confessed to possessing a bad temper which required self-control: "I think we all feel that when a witness comes before the United States Senate he has an obligation to speak frankly and tell the truth. To see people sit in front of us and lie and evade makes me boil inside. But you can't lose your temper - if you do, the witness has gotten the best of you."
Kennedy's policy objectives during his anti-povery anti-war campaign did not sit well with the business world, in which he was viewed as something of a fiscal liability, given that the tax increases necessary to fund such programs of social improvement would be a threat. When verbally attacked at a speech he gave during his tour of universities he was asked, "And who's going to pay for all this, senator?" to which Kennedy replied with typical candor, "You are." It was this intense and frank mode of dialogue with which Bobby Kennedy was to continue to engage those whom he viewed as not being traditional allies of Democrat ideals or initiatives. Certainly Edwards' policies will produce similar attacks - which should be countered similarly.
Edwards is unwilling to use his family's travails to make the case that he is changed, nor should he. He has a better opportunity using his experience with the Iraq Quagmire. His emotional trajectory from support, to frustration, to bewilderment, to outrage, peppered at times with moments of hope matches that of the majority of Americans. He could make the case that being misled as he was 'makes him boil inside' and that the whole experience makes him fight even harder for what he believes should be our national priorities. Also, that we simply cannot trust the sabre-rattling republicans because their priorities are produce horrific results that undermine our security and our very way of life. They must be opposed because they are wrong.
John Edwards needs to read this book (introduction by Bill Moyers) called "Cold Anger" from a phase coined by Gandhi to describe what drove many of his followers - 'a boiling anger, properly channeled, driving the engine that fuels our fight against injustice.' When anger is hot, it is violent. When it is cold, it can be controlled.
¶ 12:45 AM
We debated the comparison of Edwards' early positioning so far to Bobby Kennedy's spring '68 badass tranformational campaign - working with Cesear Chavez, walking picket lines and the rest.
Moyers said that in some ways, Obama has the Bobby Kennedy aura better, but in a fundamental way isn't "there" yet -- and while Edwards' positioning is on track to hit the same notes RFK hit, he has extra work to do to make the case that he can carry RFK's image and MLK's anti-povery crusade to victory -- extra work that Obama doesn't have to do. The result is that Moyers fears that Edwards won't be able to make it work.
Firstly, Moyers stressed that RFK was a product of his times. That he grew organically out of the context of the late sixies. The country was racked with social revolution - that winter students across America were taking over administration buildings. He also stressed that the whole nation understood him to be a changed man after his big brother was gunned down in public. At the '64 Convention, RFK received a 22 minute ovation. Kennedy became in his own words "essentially a Catholic radical."
Moyers told the story of how when he travelled with Bobby down to King's funeral in Atlanta, Kennedy was clearly a hardened man, scarred, weathered, angry but unwilling to cave to violent conservatives. It was clear to him that the plight of the urban poor was his duty then to carry. He dedicated the rest of his campaign to that. He focused on universities, migrant workers, urban poor, rural poor - political calculus that made him anything but a favorite. What it made him was an embodiment of another "new generation" as JFK said in his inaugural address. He was change.
Moyers feels that Obama automatically fills the aura of "new generation" by his racial makeup and age. He also automatically fits the image of fighting for urban poor because of these same qualities.
I pointed out that while he may fit the requisite aura of RFK's '68 run, the evidence suggests that he'll run more of a Humphrey '68 campaign.
Moyers suggested that the "extra work" Edwards has to do is twofold: compensate for the fact that the traditional media does not understand that because 2.5 million Americans have signed up for the One Campaign to end poverty, that there 10 million signatures on several petitions to end genocide, that social awareness and volunteerism among young Americans is as high as it has been since the late sixties, that the generation under 30 represents a voting block more engaged and more left-leaning than any American generation since FDR... all means that there is already evidence of a new movement afoot. Using the internet to make these points and engage this movement is the right thing to do, Moyers noted, suggesting Josh Marshall and MyDD have some of the sharpest perceptions of young politics and movement politics around. (I recommended FutureMajority as well). If Edwards peppers his speeches with notations of how many millions of young people are calling for what exactly he's talking about, then he'll seem more of an organic product of what WE understand to be a generational movement. Maybe it might even educate the punditry about the actual state of affairs... dare to dream.
Moyers' second point was that Edwards also has to make the case that he is a changed man from his '04 version. That Edwards 2.0 is a fighter, unwilling to compromise with evil. Once, informed that an opponent called him ruthless, Bobby Kennedy half-joked to the reporter, "If I find out who called me ruthless I will destroy him." Kennedy openly confessed to possessing a bad temper which required self-control: "I think we all feel that when a witness comes before the United States Senate he has an obligation to speak frankly and tell the truth. To see people sit in front of us and lie and evade makes me boil inside. But you can't lose your temper - if you do, the witness has gotten the best of you."
Kennedy's policy objectives during his anti-povery anti-war campaign did not sit well with the business world, in which he was viewed as something of a fiscal liability, given that the tax increases necessary to fund such programs of social improvement would be a threat. When verbally attacked at a speech he gave during his tour of universities he was asked, "And who's going to pay for all this, senator?" to which Kennedy replied with typical candor, "You are." It was this intense and frank mode of dialogue with which Bobby Kennedy was to continue to engage those whom he viewed as not being traditional allies of Democrat ideals or initiatives. Certainly Edwards' policies will produce similar attacks - which should be countered similarly.
Edwards is unwilling to use his family's travails to make the case that he is changed, nor should he. He has a better opportunity using his experience with the Iraq Quagmire. His emotional trajectory from support, to frustration, to bewilderment, to outrage, peppered at times with moments of hope matches that of the majority of Americans. He could make the case that being misled as he was 'makes him boil inside' and that the whole experience makes him fight even harder for what he believes should be our national priorities. Also, that we simply cannot trust the sabre-rattling republicans because their priorities are produce horrific results that undermine our security and our very way of life. They must be opposed because they are wrong.
John Edwards needs to read this book (introduction by Bill Moyers) called "Cold Anger" from a phase coined by Gandhi to describe what drove many of his followers - 'a boiling anger, properly channeled, driving the engine that fuels our fight against injustice.' When anger is hot, it is violent. When it is cold, it can be controlled.
¶ 12:45 AM
Comments:
<< Home
Good points by Moyers. I think the first part will happen if the JRE campaign doesn't make any huge mistakes.
The second part, showing the cold anger and ruthlessness, is Johnny Sunshine's biggest hurdle, IMHO. He's still in the shadow of that debate with Cheney, who more or less completely owned him.
The second part, showing the cold anger and ruthlessness, is Johnny Sunshine's biggest hurdle, IMHO. He's still in the shadow of that debate with Cheney, who more or less completely owned him.
I like the idea that one of the big things that gets Edwards mad is the experience of sitting across from that human grumble and then having Cheney lie directly into Edwards' face in front of all the world.
-- that Cheney had never met Senator Edwards was a flat out shameless lie.
It taught Edwards a valuable lesson, if they are willing to lie about war and peace, they will lie about everything. He learned alright, and he is furious.
Post a Comment
-- that Cheney had never met Senator Edwards was a flat out shameless lie.
It taught Edwards a valuable lesson, if they are willing to lie about war and peace, they will lie about everything. He learned alright, and he is furious.
# posted by 
: 9:14 PM
: 9:14 PM<< Home
