The Speech

rimrocker · Dec 6, 2011

Obama gave a speech today. It was a speech that should have been given many times by many Democrats and honest Republicans over the last 30 years.

Obama chose his site carefully. The Kansas town he delivered the speech was where TR delivered his justly famous "New Nationalism" speech. Some of the things Teddy said in 1910:

Our country - this great Republic - means nothing unless it means the triumph of a real democracy, the triumph of popular government, and, in the long run, of an economic system under which each man shall be guaranteed the opportunity to show the best that there is in him.
Click to expand...

After praising the Civil War vets, TR quotes Lincoln...

Of that generation of men to whom we owe so much, the man to whom we owe most is, of course, Lincoln. Part of our debt to him is because he forecast our present struggle and saw the way out. He said:

"I hold that while man exists it is his duty to improve not only his own condition, but to assist in ameliorating mankind."

And again:

"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."

If that remark was original with me, I should be even more strongly denounced as a Communist agitator than I shall be anyhow. It is Lincoln's. I am only quoting it; and that is one side; that is the side the capitalist should hear. Now, let the working man hear his side.

"Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights.... Nor should this lead to a war upon the owners of property. Property is the fruit of labor; . . . property is desirable; is a positive good in the world."

And then comes a thoroughly Lincolnlike sentence:

"Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another, but let him work diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built."

It seems to me that, in these words, Lincoln took substantially the attitude that we ought to take; he showed the proper sense of proportion in his relative estimates of capital and labor, of human rights and property rights. Above all, in this speech, as in many others, he taught a lesson in wise kindliness and charity; an indispensable lesson to us of today. But this wise kindliness and charity never weakened his arm or numbed his heart.
Click to expand...

Here's the heart of TR's message, though the whole speech is still relevent and worth reading:

In every wise struggle for human betterment one of the main objects, and often the only object, has been to achieve in large measure equality of opportunity. In the struggle for this great end, nations rise from barbarism to civilization, and through it people press forward from one stage of enlightenment to the next. One of the chief factors in progress is the destruction of special privilege. The essence of any struggle for healthy liberty has always been, and must always be, to take from some one man or class of men the right to enjoy power, or wealth, or position, or immunity, which has not been earned by service to his or their fellows. That is what you fought for in the Civil War, and that is what we strive for now.

At many stages in the advance of humanity, this conflict between the men who possess more than they have earned and the men who have earned more than they possess is the central condition of progress. In our day it appears as the struggle of freemen to gain and hold the right of self-government as against the special interests, who twist the methods of free government into machinery for defeating the popular will. At every stage, and under all circumstances, the essence of the struggle is to equalize opportunity, destroy privilege, and give to the life and citizenship of every individual the highest possible value both to himself and to the commonwealth.

...

The Constitution guarantees protections to property, and we must make that promise good But it does not give the right of suffrage to any corporation. The true friend of property, the true conservative, is he who insists that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth; who insists that the creature of man's making shall be the servant and not the master of the man who made it. The citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have themselves called into being.

There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains. To put an end to it will be neither a short nor an easy task, but it can be done.

...

No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar received should represent a dollar's worth of service rendered - not gambling in stocks, but service rendered. The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and in another tax which is far more easily collected and far more effective - a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate.

...

The fundamental thing to do for every man is to give him a chance to reach a place in which he will make the greatest possible contribution to the public welfare. Understand what I say there. Give him a chance, not push him up if he will not be pushed. Help any man who stumbles; if he lies down, it is a poor job to try to carry him; but if he is a worthy man, try your best to see that he gets a chance to show the worth that is in him. No man can be a good citizen unless he has a wage more than sufficient to cover the bare cost of living, and hours of labor short enough so that after his day's work is done he will have time and energy to bear his share in the management of the community, to help in carrying the general load. We keep countless men from being good citizens by the conditions of life with which we surround them. We need comprehensive workmen's compensation acts, both State and national laws to regulate child labor and work for women, and, especially, we need in our common schools not merely education in booklearning, but also practical training for daily life and work. We need to enforce better sanitary conditions for our workers and to extend the use of safety appliances for our workers in industry and commerce, both within and between the States.

The American people are right in demanding that New Nationalism, without which we cannot hope to deal with new problems. The New Nationalism puts the national need before sectional or personal advantage. It is impatient of the utter confusion that results from local legislatures attempting to treat national issues as local issues. It is still more impatient of the impotence which springs from overdivision of governmental powers, the impotence which makes it possible for local selfishness or for legal cunning, hired by wealthy special interests, to bring national activities to a deadlock. This New Nationalism regards the executive power as the steward of the public welfare. It demands of the judiciary that it shall be interested primarily in human welfare rather than in property, just as it demands that the representative body shall represent all the people rather than any one class or section of the people.
http://www.theodore-roosevelt.com/images/research/speeches/trnationalismspeech.pdf
Click to expand...

With that as a backdrop, here are the highlights of Obama's speech as I see them.

After praising the Greatest Generation and recounting the causes of the economic meltdown...

Ever since, there has been a raging debate over the best way to restore growth and prosperity; balance and fairness. Throughout the country, it has sparked protests and political movements – from the Tea Party to the people who have been occupying the streets of New York and other cities. It’s left Washington in a near-constant state of gridlock. And it’s been the topic of heated and sometimes colorful discussion among the men and women who are running for president.

But this isn’t just another political debate. This is the defining issue of our time. This is a make or break moment for the middle class, and all those who are fighting to get into the middle class. At stake is whether this will be a country where working people can earn enough to raise a family, build a modest savings, own a home, and secure their retirement.

Now, in the midst of this debate, there are some who seem to be suffering from a kind of collective amnesia. After all that’s happened, after the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, they want to return to the same practices that got us into this mess. In fact, they want to go back to the same policies that have stacked the deck against middle-class Americans for too many years. Their philosophy is simple: we are better off when everyone is left to fend for themselves and play by their own rules.

Well, I’m here to say they are wrong. I’m here to reaffirm my deep conviction that we are greater together than we are on our own. I believe that this country succeeds when everyone gets a fair shot, when everyone does their fair share, and when everyone plays by the same rules. Those aren’t Democratic or Republican values; 1% values or 99% values. They’re American values, and we have to reclaim them.
Click to expand...

He brings up TR's speech...

He was the Republican son of a wealthy family. He praised what the titans of industry had done to create jobs and grow the economy. He believed then what we know is true today: that the free market is the greatest force for economic progress in human history. It’s led to a prosperity and standard of living unmatched by the rest of the world.

But Roosevelt also knew that the free market has never been a free license to take whatever you want from whoever you can. It only works when there are rules of the road to ensure that competition is fair, open, and honest. And so he busted up monopolies, forcing those companies to compete for customers with better services and better prices. And today, they still must. He fought to make sure businesses couldn’t profit by exploiting children, or selling food or medicine that wasn’t safe. And today, they still can’t.

In 1910, Teddy Roosevelt came here, to Osawatomie, and laid out his vision for what he called a New Nationalism. “Our country,” he said, “…means nothing unless it means the triumph of a real democracy…of an economic system under which each man shall be guaranteed the opportunity to show the best that there is in him.”

For this, Roosevelt was called a radical, a socialist, even a communist. But today, we are a richer nation and a stronger democracy because of what he fought for in his last campaign: an eight hour work day and a minimum wage for women; insurance for the unemployed, the elderly, and those with disabilities; political reform and a progressive income tax.
Click to expand...

...

Now, just as there was in Teddy Roosevelt’s time, there’s been a certain crowd in Washington for the last few decades who respond to this economic challenge with the same old tune. “The market will take care of everything,” they tell us. If only we cut more regulations and cut more taxes – especially for the wealthy – our economy will grow stronger. Sure, there will be winners and losers. But if the winners do really well, jobs and prosperity will eventually trickle down to everyone else. And even if prosperity doesn’t trickle down, they argue, that’s the price of liberty.

It’s a simple theory – one that speaks to our rugged individualism and healthy skepticism of too much government. It fits well on a bumper sticker. Here’s the problem: It doesn’t work. It’s never worked. It didn’t work when it was tried in the decade before the Great Depression. It’s not what led to the incredible post-war boom of the 50s and 60s. And it didn’t work when we tried it during the last decade.

...

We simply cannot return to this brand of you're-on-your-own economics if we’re serious about rebuilding the middle class in this country. We know that it doesn’t result in a strong economy. It results in an economy that invests too little in its people and its future. It doesn’t result in a prosperity that trickles down. It results in a prosperity that’s enjoyed by fewer and fewer of our citizens.

...

This kind of inequality – a level we haven’t seen since the Great Depression – hurts us all. When middle-class families can no longer afford to buy the goods and services that businesses are selling, it drags down the entire economy, from top to bottom. America was built on the idea of broad-based prosperity – that’s why a CEO like Henry Ford made it his mission to pay his workers enough so that they could buy the cars they made. It’s also why a recent study showed that countries with less inequality tend to have stronger and steadier economic growth over the long run.

Inequality also distorts our democracy. It gives an outsized voice to the few who can afford high-priced lobbyists and unlimited campaign contributions, and runs the risk of selling out our democracy to the highest bidder. And it leaves everyone else rightly suspicious that the system in Washington is rigged against them – that our elected representatives aren’t looking out for the interests of most Americans.

More fundamentally, this kind of gaping inequality gives lie to the promise at the very heart of America: that this is the place where you can make it if you try. We tell people that in this country, even if you’re born with nothing, hard work can get you into the middle class; and that your children will have the chance to do even better than you. That’s why immigrants from around the world flocked to our shores.

And yet, over the last few decades, the rungs on the ladder of opportunity have grown farther and farther apart, and the middle class has shrunk. A few years after World War II, a child who was born into poverty had a slightly better than 50-50 chance of becoming middle class as an adult. By 1980, that chance fell to around 40%. And if the trend of rising inequality over the last few decades continues, it’s estimated that a child born today will only have a 1 in 3 chance of making it to the middle class.

It’s heartbreaking enough that there are millions of working families in this country who are now forced to take their children to food banks for a decent meal. But the idea that those children might not have a chance to climb out of that situation and back into the middle class, no matter how hard they work? That’s inexcusable. It’s wrong. It flies in the face of everything we stand for.

...

The truth is, we’ll never be able to compete with other countries when it comes to who’s best at letting their businesses pay the lowest wages or pollute as much as they want. That’s a race to the bottom that we can’t win – and shouldn’t want to win. Those countries don’t have a strong middle-class. They don’t have our standard of living.

The race we want to win – the race we can win – is a race to the top; the race for good jobs that pay well and offer middle-class security. Businesses will create those jobs in countries with the highest-skilled, highest-educated workers; the most advanced transportation and communication; the strongest commitment to research and technology.

...

We have to ask ourselves: Do we want to make the investments we need in things like education, and research, and high-tech manufacturing? Or do we want to keep in place the tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans in our country? Because we can’t afford to do both. That’s not politics. That’s just math.

...

Under President Clinton, the top rate was only about 39%. Today, thanks to loopholes and shelters, a quarter of all millionaires now pay lower tax rates than millions of middle-class households. Some billionaires have a tax rate as low as 1%. One percent.

This is the height of unfairness. It is wrong that in the United States of America, a teacher or a nurse or a construction worker who earns $50,000 should pay a higher tax rate than somebody pulling in $50 million.

...

This isn’t about class warfare. This is about the nation’s welfare. It’s about making choices that benefit not just the people who’ve done fantastically well over the last few decades, but that benefits the middle class, and those fighting to get to the middle class, and the economy as a whole.

Finally, a strong middle class can only exist in an economy where everyone plays by the same rules, from Wall Street to Main Street. As infuriating as it was for all of us, we rescued our major banks from collapse, not only because a full blown financial meltdown would have sent us into a second Depression, but because we need a strong, healthy financial sector in this country.

But part of the deal was that we would not go back to business as usual. That’s why last year we put in place new rules of the road that refocus the financial sector on this core purpose: getting capital to the entrepreneurs with the best ideas, and financing to millions of families who want to buy a home or send their kids to college. We’re not all the way there yet, and the banks are fighting us every inch of the way. But already, some of these reforms are being implemented.

...

The fact is, this crisis has left a deficit of trust between Main Street and Wall Street. And major banks that were rescued by the taxpayers have an obligation to go the extra mile in helping to close that deficit.

...

Our success has never just been about survival of the fittest. It’s been about building a nation where we’re all better off. We pull together, we pitch in, and we do our part, believing that hard work will pay off; that responsibility will be rewarded; and that our children will inherit a nation where those values live on.

...

Well into our third century as a nation, we have grown and changed in many ways since Roosevelt’s time. The world is faster. The playing field is larger. The challenges are more complex.

But what hasn’t changed – what can never change – are the values that got us this far. We still have a stake in each other’s success. We still believe that this should be a place where you can make it if you try.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/07/us/politics/text-obamas-speech-in-kansas.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
Click to expand...

Good spech. Probably better in person than it reads. By most accounts, Obama wrote it himself. He's not quite Teddy, but what he said needed to be said... particularly the part about Republican economics being an absolute failure.

Hightop · Dec 6, 2011

The best part was his talk about his assassination 16 year old US citizens and his continuing raids of medical mar1juana facilities. It sent a shrill up my leg. Dumbasses.

mc mark · Dec 6, 2011

The Roosevelt connection was brilliant!

great post rim

B-Bob · Dec 6, 2011

Thanks, rimrocker. I had missed that, and I doubt the media will give it the time of day, unless a bird pooped on him or something.

TR was a phenomenal president. The more I read about him, the more I can't believe he actually existed.

Where will the next TR come from? I wish I could see it happening in my lifetime.

Major · Dec 6, 2011

This should be the theme of his 2012 campaign.

mc mark · Dec 6, 2011

Probably is major

rimrocker · Dec 6, 2011

Hightop said: ↑

It sent a shrill up my leg. Dumbasses.
Click to expand...

I don't think that word means what you think it means. However, I'm pretty sure the meaning of your last sentence is unintentional irony.

basso · Dec 6, 2011

Major said: ↑

This should be the theme of his 2012 campaign.
Click to expand...

it will be.

and he will lose.

Major · Dec 6, 2011

basso said: ↑

it will be.

and he will lose.
Click to expand...

Like he did PA and VA in 2008.

mc mark · Dec 6, 2011

basso said: ↑

it will be.

and he will lose.
Click to expand...

let's keep it on the speech shall we?

rockbox · Dec 6, 2011

He gave a great speech about nationalism and what's on the front page of MSNBC is Alec Baldwin being kicked off a plane. This country is ****ed.

basso · Dec 6, 2011

Major said: ↑

Like he did PA and VA in 2008.
Click to expand...

worse.

but you keep ****ing that chicken.

Major · Dec 6, 2011

mc mark said: ↑

Probably is major
Click to expand...

I've been curious what he'd pivot to. He can't run the 2008 campaign again, and he really can't run with "Republicans suck" as President. He has to present an alternative vision, and it seems like he found one. I hope he pounds this theme over and over and over again. It has the potential to be a truly powerful message - and one that speaks to a lot of the anger of both OWS people and Tea Partiers (though they won't for him anyway). It's just a message that has a powerful ability to resonate. And maybe more importantly, it's a hard theme for the GOPer to argue *against*.

If Europe collapses, it likely doesn't matter. But if it doesn't, and the race is competitive, I love the way he's positioning himself.

basso · Dec 6, 2011

Major said: ↑

I hope he pounds this theme over and over and over again...I love the way he's positioning himself.
Click to expand...

auch ich.

rimrocker · Dec 6, 2011

B-Bob said: ↑

TR was a phenomenal president. The more I read about him, the more I can't believe he actually existed.

Where will the next TR come from? I wish I could see it happening in my lifetime.
Click to expand...

Well, he's not coming from the Republican Party anytime soon.

rimrocker · Dec 6, 2011

basso said: ↑

auch ich.
Click to expand...

I believe I speak for all others in this thread when I say that even though it might be temporarily satisfying, the best thing to do is to not scratch it.

Dairy Ashford · Dec 6, 2011

Too much specific policy that too closely allies with one party over another for me, personally, to consider it an objectively great speech. I feel that a great speech needs to transcend ideology and/or somehow bookmark an historical event or era. If this ends up spurring tax policies that end up balancing the budget, reducing debt, raising the standard of living such that both sides end up agreeing with or appreciating the policies, over time, then I would change my opinion of the speech.

For some reason I felt his nomination speech, especially the "ownership society/on your own" stuff, was a little more compelling speech. And then McCain's concession speech, just because of the TR/Booker T. Washington reference.

basso · Dec 6, 2011

pouhe said: ↑

If this ends up spurring tax policies that end up balancing the budget, reducing debt, raising the standard of living...
Click to expand...

with present deficits, there's no such thing.

SamFisher · Dec 6, 2011

pouhe said: ↑

Too much specific policy that too closely allies with one party over another for me, personally, to consider it an objectively great speech.
Click to expand...

That's a function of one party basically losing its bearings and cynically selling out as openly and obviously as possible to an idea - more power to the powerful - that just doesn't have a whole lot of benefits.

basso · Dec 6, 2011

SamFisher said: ↑

That's a function of one party basically losing its bearings and cynically selling out as openly and obviously as possible to an idea - more power to the powerful - that just doesn't have a whole lot of benefits.
Click to expand...

Troo.

Forums

The Speech

rimrocker Contributing Member

Hightop Member

mc mark Contributing Member

B-Bob "94-year-old self-described dreamer"

Major Member

mc mark Contributing Member

rimrocker Contributing Member

basso Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Major Member

mc mark Contributing Member

rockbox Around before clutchcity.com

basso Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Major Member

basso Contributing Member
Supporting Member

rimrocker Contributing Member

rimrocker Contributing Member

Dairy Ashford Member

basso Contributing Member
Supporting Member

SamFisher Contributing Member

basso Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Share This Page

About ClutchFans

Rockets Content

Support ClutchFans!

The Speech

rimrocker Contributing Member

Hightop Member

mc mark Contributing Member

B-Bob "94-year-old self-described dreamer"

Major Member

mc mark Contributing Member

rimrocker Contributing Member

basso Contributing Member Supporting Member

Major Member

mc mark Contributing Member

rockbox Around before clutchcity.com

basso Contributing Member Supporting Member

Major Member

basso Contributing Member Supporting Member

rimrocker Contributing Member

rimrocker Contributing Member

Dairy Ashford Member

basso Contributing Member Supporting Member

SamFisher Contributing Member

basso Contributing Member Supporting Member

Share This Page

basso Contributing Member
Supporting Member

basso Contributing Member
Supporting Member

basso Contributing Member
Supporting Member

basso Contributing Member
Supporting Member

basso Contributing Member
Supporting Member