Saturday, August 29, 2009

 

"A Full And Complete Life"

In the days approaching Saturday's funeral mass for Sen. Ted Kennedy, there was much discussion as to how much actual politics would be in evidence. In particular, there was the question as to how much contemporary politics would intrude -- and whether President Obama's eulogy in particular would touch upon today's raging health care debate.

In the end, the contemporary was put aside in favor of values and lessons more enduring. And while politics made up a fair portion of the funeral service, it was a genuflection towards a certain kind of politics.

It's only appropriate considering who was being remembered: After all, even as a memorial service is, by definition, a personal event. when the departed is arguably the most significant legislator of his time and towering patriarch of the nation's preeminent political family, how could politics be completely ignored? Coming through in the words this day was a very strong message: Politics can be lived with both a lower-case and a capital "P." Ted Kennedy was a practicioner and participant of the capital-P sort of politics: One had to be to get elected and often to survive the rough and tumble of the ongoing electoral and legislative process.

But it was in lower-case "P" politics that Kennedy became a master. The two forms are inextricably linked. But the small-P variety is that which requires the soft-touch, the ability to see beyond partisanship, beyond one's own personal principles and into a broader humanity that can help accomplish things -- help make over 300 pieces of legislation become law. That was evident and most strongly emphasized in several eulogies tonight. Perhaps it was the saddest responsibility that fell to Kennedy -- to be so often the Official Eulogizer of the Kennedy Clan -- that forced him to embrace skills appropriate to master the small-P politics. Indeed, President Obama seemed to link those two aspects of Kennedy's life:

This spirit of resilience and good humor would see Ted Kennedy through more pain and tragedy than most of us will ever know. He lost two siblings by the age of sixteen. He saw two more taken violently from the country that loved them. He said goodbye to his beloved sister, Eunice, in the final days of his own life. He narrowly survived a plane crash, watched two children struggle with cancer, buried three nephews, and experienced personal failings and setbacks in the most public way possible.

It is a string of events that would have broken a lesser man. And it would have been easy for Teddy to let himself become bitter and hardened; to surrender to self-pity and regret; to retreat from public life and live out his years in peaceful quiet. No one would have blamed him for that.
But that was not Ted Kennedy. As he told us, "(I)ndividual faults and frailties are no excuse to give in — and no exemption from the common obligation to give of ourselves."

Obamat noted that that sentiment arose from Kennedy's rising from an earlier time:

He was a product of an age when the joy and nobility of politics prevented differences of party and philosophy from becoming barriers to cooperation and mutual respect — a time when adversaries still saw each other as patriots.
And that's how Ted Kennedy became the greatest legislator of our time. He did it by hewing to principle, but also by seeking compromise and common cause — not through dealmaking and horse-trading alone, but through friendship, and kindness, and humor.

Again, hard work was certainlly necessary to get legislation passed, but it was a sense of humanity and a common touch that ultimately got deals made. Standing there as the emissary from the American people thanking a public servant for his years of service, Obama shared a lesson on life at a person's death.

It was the perfect complement to the stirring, tear-inducing eulogy given by Teddy Kennedy Jr., who stepped into his father's big shoes as the Family Eulogizer. His younger brother, Patrick, is the one who went into the "family business," but he's the one who clearly produced an address that reflected the family's potent mix of personal remembrance, salute to public service and a mixture of wit and sentiment that verged on poetry.

He introduced himself as "Teddy Kennedy, Jr. -- a name I share with my son, a name I shared with my father. Although it hasn’t been easy at times to live with this name, I’ve never been more proud of it than I am today."

He shared a tear-inducing anecdote (indeed, he broke down as he told it) of when he was gettiing used to having to walk with an artificial leg after he lost his real one to cancer: "My father taught me that even our most profound losses are survivable, and that is — it is what we do with that loss, our ability to transform it into a positive event, that is one of my father’s greatest lessons." Again, that was the same message Obama gave -- perseverance through pain and loss brings great accomplishment. It enables one to live what Teddy Jr. called "a full and complete life."

In that regard, even as the late senator's politics were saluted by Kennedy Jr. (calling his father, "a proud member of the Democratic Party") and Obama ("the soul of the Democratic Party"), the themes of this funeral ended up being being remarkably non-partisan. They were lessons for all Americans -- faith, hard work, familial bonds, the attentiveness of a father and loving patriarch, a man of principle warmly respected and loved even by those with whom he could disagree.

These life lessons were gifts that Ted Kennedy gave his family as father, uncle, grandfather and general patriarch (a role thrust upon him at the age of 36) and they were gifts that the Kennedy family gave to their country over the better part of a century. And the nation got to hear those lessons one final time foday.

But, being a political family, the Kennedys smartly did not let the issue of health-care -- or Ted's passion for it -- go overlooked. As part of the Catholic Mass' intercessions of the faithful, the offerings were presented by quoting or paraphrasing many of Kennedy's own statements over the years. Coming out of the mouths of one of the youngest Kennedys, Max Allen, his daughter Kara's son, were these words:. "For what my grandpa called the cause of his life, as he said so often, in every part of this land, that every American will have decent quality health care, as a fundamental right, and not a privilege, we pray to the Lord."

It was a nice way of recognizing both the "cause of [Kennedy's] life," but also his "life's work" -- politics big and small -- in a muted, respectable manner.

The question for the Democratic Party -- especially President Obama upon whom Ted Kennedy did his best to pass on the Kennedy torch -- is whether the small-P politics which the Senate lion mastered can be absorbed by a new generation.

Labels:


Bookmark and Share
|

Thursday, August 27, 2009

 

Democratic Rush to Judgment Proves Correct

From the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's website in March:
Today Rush Limbaugh yet again crossed the line saying: by the time the debate on President Obama's health care plan is over, "it'll be called the Ted Kennedy Memorial Health Care bill.” It is outrageous to demonize a patriotic Senator who has spent his life fighting so that every person has the opportunity to live the American dream.

Tell Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele to denounce Rush Limbaugh once and for all.
Now, from Senator Robert Byrd (quote from Ben Smith at the Politico):
I had hoped and prayed that this day would never come. My heart and soul weeps at the lost of my best friend in the Senate, my beloved friend, Ted Kennedy.

...In his honor and as a tribute to his commitment to his ideals, let us stop the shouting and name calling and have a civilized debate on health care reform which I hope, when legislation has been signed into law, will bear his name for his commitment to insuring the health of every American.
Shame on Senator Byrd! How dare he "demonize a patriotic Senator"!

Tell Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean to denounce Senator Robert Byrd once and for all.

Labels: , ,


Bookmark and Share
|

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

 

"The Speech"

In a summer where the initials have needed to have been used a remarkably frequent amount of time, once again they are employed to say, R.I.P., Sen. Edward M. Kennedy.



His 1980 Democratic National Convention speech was not my earliest political memory. That would have been Nixon campaign commercials and then subsequent Watergate hearings a couple of years later.

However, Kennedy's convention address was the first such political speech that I remember watching and hearing and saying to myself, "Wow! That's amazing stuff." I had followed the campaign. As a kid in high school, my default political temperament at the time was liberal. I had There was little affection for Jimmy Carter. I may not have known that being a journalst would be in my future, but I instinctively knew a good story when one was occurring.

Ted Kennedy challenging the sitting president was a great story. And it turned out to be an exciting year -- even if made somewhat anti-climactic from early on when Kennedy stammered and floundered during an early interview with Roger Mudd. However, as winter rolled into the spring, Kennedy found his groove. He rattled off a number of late primary victories -- inclucing New York's (where I was living).

It wasn't enough. Carter had a significant lead in delegates. Kennedy's only hope was that his late showing and Carter's weakness in the polls against Ronald Reagan might be enough to inspire the convention to allow pledged delegates to "vote their conscience" -- and flip away from the incumbent.

Kennedy's people, however, lost a floor fight on those rules. When he came to he podium that night in New York City, he knew that there would be no way he would rest the nomination away from Carter. And with that, he then gave one of the greatest convention speeches ever. There's some speculation that much of it was constructed as an acceptance speech and then re-drafted when he lost the rules fight.

But, in truth, it doesn't read that way. There is a rhythm and tone throughout that is one of acceptance and reflection. It comes across as very clear that he likely knew the night before what the result floor battle would be -- and decided then that his speech would be an affirmation of the liberal ideals that his family and party had fought for his whole life.

Conservatism might be ascendant in the embodiment of Ronald Reagan, but Kennedy was not going to bow down before it. There is an integrity within that spirit. And the passion behind it comes through so vividly within the speech which is quite partisan -- against both Reagan and the GOP -- but delivered in a manner much less harsh than is heard in political rhetoric these days.

In any event, there is much to criticize Ted Kennedy on both personal and policy grounds. But, truthfully, rarely a week goes by when those words from 1980 don't float into my mind: "For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."

They are words that inspire, not just the politically-minded, but also the budding speechwriter, even as they break a cardinal rule of rhetoric -- the rule of three. Kennedy's speech concluded with a quartet -- "work," "cause," "hope," "dream." The speech couldn't have worked any other way. He sold it in a way that no one else could. This was his shining moment. (And speechwriter Bob Shrum's too.)

Again, R.I.P. Edward M. Kennedy, 1932-2009.

The rest of the speech: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.

My further thoughts on Sen. Kennedy.

Labels:


Bookmark and Share
|

Friday, August 21, 2009

 

A Bridge Too Far

There's a definite poignancy to Sen. Ted Kennedy's letter to MA Gov. Deval Patrick and state legislative leadersurging a change in state law to allow Patrick to appoint an immediate successor should the cancer-stricken Kennedy either give up his seat or die in office. The current law, passed in 2004, leaves the seat open pending a special election which cannot take place any later than 145 days after the seat has become vacant.

The letter is written with a tone of awareness of mortality -- and the realization that in the curren political environment, every vote will be critical on healht-care.

Only problem is that, with all respect to the ill Senate legend, this is the rawest form of partisan politics -- even for him. He supported the 2004 change -- which was precisely designed by the Democratic-heavy state legislature to prevent then-Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican, from having the ability to fill a possible vacant seat if John Kerry had won the presidency that year. In other words, had the pre-2004 law been in place, Kennedy's letter wouldn't have been necessary. Patrick would have been able to appoint a successor at any time. Indeed, it's arguable that Kennedy might have already stepped down given his grave condition.

But now, the circumstances have changed: Kennedy realizes that -- despite the day-to-day problems of Obama's health-care proposal -- this is the best chance ever to make his life-long ambition, a national health-care insurance, a reality. He can't stand the irony that his absence -- or the absence of another Democratic vote -- might prevent that from occurring. So, he's trying to get a law he supported overturned.

What makes this even more unseemly is that it harkens back to how Kennedy first got the seat. When John F. Kennedy won the White House in 1962, little brother Ted wasn't yet of the Constitution-mandated age of 30 to be able to be appointed the seat. And so, the Kennedys turned to family friend Benjamin Smith to keep the seat warm until Ted could run for it in 1962.

The same dynamics are in play again -- Kennedy is recommending that whoever is picked for the seat not run for it permanently. While that gives a veneer of "non-parttisanship" to the selection process, it actually would obviously benefit any other politicians with large campaign war-chests or great name-recognition -- of which there are plenty of both in Massachusetts. Ted's nephew, former Rep. Joe, as a likely heir to the seat that has been in Kennedy control

Sorry, but Sen. Kennedy shouldn't be allowed to have it both ways -- just to benefit his own policy or political preferences. The current law should remain in place and the political chips should fall where they may.

Labels: ,


Bookmark and Share
|

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

 

Obama's Big Mistake

OK, here's an anecdote that underscores the "lack of love" Hillary Rodham Clinton faces within her own party: Two weeks ago while performing stand-up, I casually asked the comedy club's heavily Democratic audience how many there were for Hillary. Only one hand went up. I then asked for Obama supporters -- about nine or ten hands went up. This in a New York venue. The response was such a surprise that it briefly threw off my timing.
That moment came to mind as I watched the big 'Camelot' endorsement yesterday.
The stagecraft certainly looked nice: At some point, CNN, Fox and MSNBC all went live with the Kennedy clan -- or at least three significant members of them -- endorsing Barack Obama's presidential campaign.

Ted Kennedy gave one of his better speeches -- not up there with his 1980 tour de force ("the cause goes on, the hope endures and the dream will never die"), but Obama gave homage to that when he accepted the symbolic passing of the Kennedy torch. Kennedy looked better than he has in some time -- his face wasn't as bloated

After first being taken in by the theatrics of the moment, it suddenly hit me: Hillary Rodham Clinton must be loving this.

Consider: What was the big mistake the media jumped on Hillary for during her post-Iowa speech? The appearance of all of those Clinton administration officials and hangers-on, right? It made Hillary look like the candidate of the past -- not of the future.

So, didn't anyone in the Obama camp ponder the logical incongruity of their candidate saying, "[This race] is about the past and the future." as he's blessed by THE dynastic family of the Democratic Party of the last 50 years? Suddenly, the claim that Bill and Hillary are using the power of their former White House connections to beat up on this newbie doesn't ring so true when King Kennedy and several of the royal children are lining up with the insurgent. Consider these headlines as listed on DRUDGE earlier today:


Sharpton to Bill Clinton: 'Shut Up'...

Nader rails on Clinton family...

KENNEDYS: FIRED UP...

SPEECH: Backing Obama for President...'Through Barack, I believe we will move beyond
the politics of fear and personal destruction and unite our country with the politics ofcommon purpose'

Earlier there was John Kerry complaining about Bill Clinton and Tom Daschle complaining about Bill Clinton...yada yada yada.

So the insurgent is also endorsed by the most recent Democratic presidential nominee (Kerry) AND the former Senate Democratic Majority Leader (Daschle)?.

Now that might sounds like an "establishment pile-on" to the average person. But, it's actually even worse: These endorsements crowd out the less, known, but arguably politically more helpful-in-the-long run endorsements by such red-state politicians like Kathleen Sibelius of Kansas. Instead, the message getting out is that the Northern liberal establishment is coming out strong for Barack Obama -- the guy who calls himself the "change" candidate. Heck, Teddy Kennedy fought tooth and nail against Bill Clinton's welfare reform -- calling it "legislative child abuse."

What does the "change candidate" think about that?

Kennedy, Kerry and Daschle also carry another "L"-word -- Loser. Kennedy lost what was arguably the most bitter Democratic presidential primary until the current one -- his 1980 challenge of incumbent President Jimmy Carter. Kerry lost to Bush in 2004 and Daschle, the Democratic minority leader lost his seat to John Thune, also in 2004. Say what you will about Bill Clinton, but there's one "experience" he brings to the Democratic Party that is grudgingly respected -- he will do what he has to win, without apologizing. Whining over unfair tactics is only another tactic in itself for the Clintons.

So, two days after Obama became the "black candidate" by winning South Carolina with an overwhelming proportion of the black vote (and Bill Clinton belittles the impact of the win by comparing it with Jesse Jackson's '80s victories), Obama allows himself to become the "liberal candidate" by getting the blessing of the quintessential Senate liberal.
And being on the wrong side of Al Sharpton? Oh, bring it on, please!

Worse, just when Obama is forcing the media to consider the freak show that the Clintons can sometimes unleash on the body politic, out come the Kennedys. Caroline has managed to carry the Kennedy legacy with dignity and grace, but Teddy and Patrick are walking (driving?) symbols of a freak show of a different brand. They are quite literally punchlines to late-night talk shows (which are, conveniently, now returned from their strike-impacted absences). Who will be the first to come up with the Kennedy-DUI/Obama-Driving-While-Black joke?

In short, if I'm the Clinton camp, I've gotta be quite happy with these developments. There's lots of real "love" for Barack Obama in the Democratic Party. For, Hillary, not so much. However, she's playing long-term strategy, not short-term tactics.

Labels: ,


Bookmark and Share
|

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

 

To Surge, With Love*

Paul Roberts -- a former Reagan administration official and an avowed "anti-war conservative" -- speculates that all the talk over the "surge" is really just so much noise to "distract" the public from the real focus: Iran.

In fact, Roberts is only partly right: Iraq is, in many ways, already in the administration's rear-veiw mirror: Iran is the central policy concern right now -- as the recent military leadership changes suggest. Thus, the surge is not really a "distraction," as such. But by committing only 20,000 troops (as if there were more to send out), it is a temporary band-aid while broader strategic moves are put into place, as Ralph Peters explores here).

Furthermore, as the ongoing developments in Somalia show, a commander-in-chief has remarkable options at his disposal. The Democratic Congress had better realize what is going on here. Ted Kennedy can give his full-throated opposition to the surge all he wants. There is greater U.S.-sparked movement on the "War on Terror" chessboard than, arguably, at any point since the beginning of the 2003 Iraq invasion. It is Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Afghanistan and more.

As far as the Iraq portion goes, I can't say that I am exactly optimistic. I'll be listening closely to the president's speech tonight, but from the early details leaked, it seems that there is definite decision on how to get the Sunni and Shiite forces to agree to run the country together.

As long as Prime Minister Maliki chooses to take orders for Moqtada al-Sadr (rather than the other way around), U.S. forces will continue fighting with one arm tied behind their backs -- trying to figure out which way the bullets are coming from and where all the IEDs are planted.


*Sorry it took me so long to drop that awful pun.

Labels: , , , , ,


Bookmark and Share
|

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Google
Web raggedthots.blogspot.com
Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Technorati search
Search Now:
Amazon Logo
  •  RSS
  • Add to My AOL
  • Powered by FeedBurner
  • Add to Google Reader or Homepage
  • Subscribe in Bloglines
  • Share on Facebook