ShareThis Page
News Columnists

Rallying support by staying on point

| Sunday, March 1, 2009

Speechmaking always has been good for Barack Obama.

In 2004, as a 42-year-old state legislator, he vaulted to national stature with a brilliant speech to the Democratic National Convention in Boston.

In 2007, he won the hearts of Iowa Democrats with a rip-roaring Jefferson-Jackson Day talk.

In 2008, after losing the New Hampshire primary, he rallied his flagging presidential campaign with one of the greatest concession statements ever made.

And he saved his candidacy later that spring with his Philadelphia address on race relations.

This is a man who knows the power of oratory. And it's a good thing he does: We needed some.

The new president had three goals in his first address to both houses of Congress on Tuesday night.

He needed to spell out and defend his plan for stimulating the economy, which his administration sometimes has stumbled in explaining. He wanted to rally support for the rest of his ambitious domestic program, including expensive investments in health care, energy and education. And he sought to lift the mood of the nation by promising that better times lie ahead.

The least concrete of those goals, lifting the nation's mood, was actually the most important -- because it will be difficult for Obama to implement any of his plans if Americans lose hope.

That's why the first lines from the speech were these: "While our economy may be weakened and our confidence shaken, though we are living through difficult and uncertain times, tonight I want every American to know this: We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before."

The obvious comparison is to Franklin D. Roosevelt, who rallied Americans during the Great Depression with his fireside chats, broadcast on the still-new medium of radio.

"There is an element in the readjustment of our financial system more important than currency, more important than gold, and that is the confidence of the people," Roosevelt said in his first radio speech to the nation in 1933.

But FDR enjoyed a massive, obedient majority in Congress that passed his banking bill in a single day with a minimum of dissent. (As Will Rogers quipped at the time, "Congress doesn't pass legislation any more. They just wave at the bills as they go by.")

With that kind of support, Roosevelt had an easier job and could aim his speech mostly at persuading citizens to be patient and avoid the urge to withdraw their money from the banks.

Obama, in contrast, is asking the public for help in putting pressure on his opponents in Congress.

That's why the best analogy may not be to Roosevelt but to Ronald Reagan, who turned his presidency into a permanent campaign to rally public support to his side, even when Congress was skeptical.

On Thursday, Obama delivered his first budget and his proposals for health care, energy and education will require spending above and beyond the $787 billion stimulus bill. He said in his speech that he is likely to seek more funds to bail out the nation's banks.

"I know how unpopular it is to be seen as helping banks right now," Obama said. "I get it." But, he added, "We cannot afford to govern out of anger. ... Our job is to solve the problem."

In effect, Obama was appealing to his majority, the roughly 60 percent of voters who support him, to back him in his coming battles with Congress -- even when he asks for more money for the banks.

He'll need the help. In the stimulus battle, Republicans once again cast themselves as the anti-spending party and they show no sign of abandoning that stance. They already have served notice that they plan to fight Obama's health-care proposals just as they fought Bill Clinton's in 1993.

As Reagan did before him, Obama understands the importance of dramatizing his message in a television-friendly way. He has taken his ideas on the road, visiting a highway construction site in Virginia, a Caterpillar factory in Illinois and a high school gymnasium in Arizona.

And in case there was anyone who still hadn't gotten the point, he capped off his road show with a four-hour "fiscal summit" in the White House.

There was no "news" in Tuesday night's speech; it was essentially an hourlong elaboration of the themes Obama introduced in his campaign and returned to in his inaugural address.

But consistency can be a virtue, especially during uncertain times. And as both candidate and president, Obama has delivered a clear and consistent message.

Any president whose speeches summon comparisons to Roosevelt and Reagan isn't doing too badly.

Doyle McManus is a columnist for the Los Angeles Times.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me