Big Contradiction from the Denver Dems

Thu, 08/28/2008 - 10:48am
By: Ruth Kimble

The Big Contardiction from the Denver Dems
by Michael Medved
Thursday, August 28, 2008
(Copyright Townhall.com)

(excerpted)

“Is the United States a land of limitless horizons, where hard work and big dreams enable people of humble background to scale dizzying heights of privilege and power?
Or is this a society of slammed doors and blocked opportunities, of a trapped middle class and shattered hope, where ordinary people can only provide a better life for their children with the help of an activist government and dramatic new policies?
The Denver Democrats insist that both descriptions are true, and they fail to acknowledge the obvious contradiction in the two primary messages of their convention.
On the one hand, they want Americans to believe that we live in a dark, destitute moment in our history, with no chance for prosperity or progress unless a Democrat captures the White House.
On the other hand, they celebrate dozens of inspiring rags-to-riches stories (like those of the party’s sweethearts, Barack and Michelle Obama) proving that traditional American values still bring spectacular and gratifying results.
First, they suggest that ordinary Americans can’t possibly achieve their dreams without government help.
But then, sometimes in the very same speeches, they brag about their own classic American stories in which family and faith conquer every obstacle.
Consider the way the convention celebrated Michelle Obama’s story on its opening night. Her brother, Craig Robinson, emphasized the way their parents’ values brought about their success, saying “I can see how the person she is today, was formed in the experiences we shared growing up: working hard, studying hard, having parents who wanted more for us than what they had. And always being reminded that in this country of all countries—those things are possible.”
Michelle herself similarly emphasized her father’s contribution to her success: “He and my mom poured everything they had into me and Craig. It was the greatest gift a child can receive: never doubting for a single minute that you’re loved, and cherished, and have a place in this world. And thanks to their faith and hard work, we were both able to go to college.” She never mentioned that for both herself and her big brother, that college happened to be Princeton. “So I know firsthand,” she declared to the convention, “from their lives – and mine – that the American Dream endures.”
She made similar observations about her husband, the presidential candidate: “His family was so much like mine. He was raised by grandparents who were working class folks just like my parents, and by a single mother who struggled to pay the bills just like we did. Like my family, they scrimped and saved so that he could have opportunities they never had themselves.”
Just a few minutes later, after celebrating their dual climb from penury to prominence, from want to wealth (the Obamas reported more than $4 million in income last year), she went back to talking about hardship and injustice and misery in America, recalling her husband’s distinction between “the world as it is” and “the world as it should be.” She cited his lament that “all too often we accept the distance between the two, and settle for the world as it is –even when it doesn’t reflect our values and aspirations. But he reminded us that we know what our world should look like. We know what fairness and justice and opportunity look like.”
Don’t “fairness and justice and opportunity” actually look a lot like the story of these Obamas themselves?
If the Democrats celebrate the fact that “in this country – of all countries- those things are possible,” if they proclaim that parental “faith and hard work” can still deliver the American Dream, then isn’t it contradictory to decry “the world as it is”?
Many other speakers at the convention similarly tried to have it both ways --- praising the nation for its social and economic mobility, while suggesting that this openness and opportunity ended with their own families’ successes. . .
. . . Deval Patrick, Governor of Massachusetts, recalled his tenement childhood in which he and his sister and their single mom lived with only two beds for the three of them, so they took turns sleeping on the floor – before Patrick went off to Harvard, Harvard Law. . .
. . . Virginia Governor Mark Warner noted that he became the first-ever member of his family to graduate from college – before his own career at Harvard Law, and as a cell phone entrepreneur earning literally hundreds of millions of dollars.
Unfortunately, none of these convention speakers took the opportunity to remind their national TV audience that middle class and working class Americans could still replicate such impressive achievements – even after eight years of Bush.
Rather than encouraging the public to pursue timely dreams and apply timeless values with full confidence of success, the Denver Dems seemed to say that we made it, but you can’t --- unless you elect us and we provide government help.
Amazingly enough, in recounting their own stories of advancement and achievement, none of the speakers cited bureaucratic intervention or federal assistance as an element of success. Instead, they repeatedly invoked strong personal values – strong families, self-discipline, tireless effort, sacrifice – as the sole key to economic and educational progress.
If those values worked for the top Democrats themselves, why can’t they work for Americans everywhere?
By implication, these smug and preening politicians suggested that we’re brilliant and strong and special enough to make it to the top without government help, but most of the mere mortals who are watching us on TV will get nowhere at all unless we somehow use taxpayer money to assist them.
As to the claim that recent Republican misrule somehow put an end to the opportunities that middle-aged politicians enjoyed during the golden “Camelot” era of their youth, it’s worth remembering that the GOP has controlled the White House for 36 of the last 48 years. Michelle Obama, for instance, has lived the greater part of her 44 years on planet earth under Republican Presidents and, even more disproportionately, under Republican Governors of Illinois (30 out of 44).
The contradictions emanating from the Democratic convention—praising individual stories of opportunity and upward mobility, while decrying the general disappearance of opportunity and mobility-- actually mirror the most puzzling anomaly of recent public opinion polling. By overwhelming majorities, Americans describe the state of the country as dire and desperate, while similarly lopsided majorities rate their own status as successful, satisfying and optimistic.
Most citizens feel fortunate and confident and pleased with their lives, even while media alarmists and complaints from politicians have convinced them that the nation at large teeters on the verge of collapse and destruction. In other words, most of us know from our own experience that we’re doing well and moving ahead, but we’re illogically convinced that we’re exceptional in that regard. . .
. . . In fact, the paragons on parade in the Pepsi Center – very much including both Obama and Biden—are, presumably, so unique in their history of unassisted self-improvement that we’re meant to conclude that they’re the only ones in the country ultimately fit to lead.”

Michael Medved, nationally syndicated talk radio host, is author of 10 non-fiction books, including The Shadow Presidents and Right Turns.

login to post comments | previous forum topic | next forum topic

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by Davids mom on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 7:56am.

Most citizens feel fortunate and confident and pleased with their lives, even while media alarmists and complaints from politicians have convinced them that the nation at large teeters on the verge of collapse and destruction. In other words, most of us know from our own experience that we’re doing well and moving ahead, but we’re illogically convinced that we’re exceptional in that regard.

As we see the unemployment line growing, those citizens (I include myself) who feel fortunate are declining. I'm thankful to be retired and comfortable. I see young people where I was 30 years ago receiving 'pink' slips, losing benefits, losing investments, losing value in their home equity - and I don't think that quote 'most of us' is accurate. No where have I read that we’re on the verge of collapse – but not to acknowledge that there are fellow citizens who are hurting is shallow.

JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 11:47am.

Medved has manufactured the contradiction out of thin air then argues against it. Classic. He writes “…where ordinary people can only provide a better life for their children with the help of an activist government and dramatic new policies?” No one ever has claimed this, which is unfortunate for Medved because then he wouldn’t have to make it up.

He then goes on to recount the Democrats telling story after story disproving the straw man argument that he has made up.

“First, they suggest that ordinary Americans can’t possibly achieve their dreams without government help.” Can anybody anywhere show me where “they” have actually said this? Nope.

The national Republican Party is completely out of touch with the average American. I’ve blogged here after a couple of writers brought up the recent minuscule growth in median income and thought it was a wonderful argument in spite of the fact the median income is still below where it was when Bush came into office and all of the gain (about $700 increase in income after 6 years) went to people making over $75K. To them it proved what a wonderful economy the Bush administration had produced.

They just don’t have a clue. For Medved it becomes “the most puzzling anomaly”. It’s not an anomaly to me. On the other hand, I don’t make (quite (LOL)) $5 million a year and I know how many houses I own so I may not be qualified to judge a Republican economy.


JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 1:34pm.

As you may imagine, I do not typically listen to medved. However, since I had written about his column earlier, when he came on the radio today as I was driving around I listened to him. He was talking about David Gergen's reaction to Obama's speech and how Gergen was gay for Obama and he was waiting for Gergen to start commenting about how muscular Obama looked in his suit and how creamy smooth his skin was and how he had such pretty teeth. I wondered if medved knew Gregen worked for Nixon, Ford and Reagan. Then he started talking about how Chris Matthews and Kieth Olbermann were gay for Obama and how if he ever met Olbermann he was going to ask him to tell the truth, if Keith was on a deserted island with Pamela Anderson and Obama and nobody would ever know, where would Keith want to put it.

Such a class act.


Submitted by Davids mom on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 5:17pm.

Medved. Is he trying for 'satire'? Sad.

Submitted by bowser on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 7:09am.

We can all supply plenty of polemics from our personal internet echo chambers. But in my view, Peggy Noonan in the Wall Street Journal wrote far more eloquently -- and much more even-handedly -- on this very topic:

"Democrats in the end speak most of, and seem to hold the most sympathy for, the beset-upon single mother without medical coverage for her children, and the soldier back from the war who needs more help with post-traumatic stress disorder. They express the most sympathy for the needy, the yearning, the marginalized and unwell. For those, in short, who need more help from the government, meaning from the government's treasury, meaning the money got from taxpayers.

"Who happen, also, to be a generally beset-upon group.

"Democrats show little expressed sympathy for those who work to make the money the government taxes to help the beset-upon mother and the soldier and the kids. They express little sympathy for the middle-aged woman who owns a small dry cleaner and employs six people and is, actually, day to day, stressed and depressed from the burden of state, local and federal taxes, and regulations, and lawsuits, and meetings with the accountant, and complaints as to insufficient or incorrect efforts to meet guidelines regarding various employee/employer rules and regulations.

"At Republican conventions they express sympathy for this woman, as they do for those who are entrepreneurial, who start businesses and create jobs and build things. Republicans have, that is, sympathy for taxpayers. But they don't dwell all that much, or show much expressed sympathy for, the sick mother with the uninsured kids, and the soldier with the shot nerves.

"Neither party ever gets it quite right, the balance between the taxed and the needy, the suffering of one sort and the suffering of another. You might say that in this both parties are equally cold and equally warm, only to two different classes of citizens."

Noonan is right -- both parties are tone deaf and insensitive in their own ways. That is why the pendulum always swings, and why it must.

Submitted by Davids mom on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 8:09am.

That is why the pendulum always swings, and why it must.

Many agree.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.