I can't emphasize enough how important the final eight or nine minutes of the president's address was last night. It was a perfectly constructed pitch for liberalism without specifically saying so, and I suspect that more people than just liberals were moved by that section of the speech, perhaps exposing the reality that there are more liberals in America than people will admit to.
This was another major step towards crushing the heretofore demonization of both the ideology and the word itself. In fact, for the first time in several decades, the president actually used the word in a sentence, specifically "liberalism."
Some people, even on the left, are dismissing this section of the speech as just another heap of "soaring rhetoric" -- belching it out in passing as some kind of damning by faint praise immediately preceding a big "but." More soaring rhetoric. Feh. But... Yet while the first two thirds of the address were important in terms of making a pitch for crucial legislation, the final five minutes is something that ought to resonate beyond the healthcare debate.
It ought to be a touchstone for us as we work to restore the idea that America was founded on liberal principles and the majority of great American accomplishments were set into motion by liberal leaders and liberal citizens.
This has always been the history of our progress. In 1933, when over half of our seniors could not support themselves and millions had seen their savings wiped away, there were those who argued that Social Security would lead to socialism. But the men and women of Congress stood fast, and we are all the better for it. In 1965, when some argued that Medicare represented a government takeover of health care, members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, did not back down. They joined together so that all of us could enter our golden years with some basic peace of mind.
You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom. But they also understood that the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little; that without the leavening hand of wise policy, markets can crash, monopolies can stifle competition, and the vulnerable can be exploited.