Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
PAUL JAY: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Paul Jay in Washington.
Now joining us to talk about President Obama's State of the Union speech is Dayvon Love.
Dayvon is president of Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle in Baltimore, Maryland. He was also
a candidate in the city elections recently. Thanks for joining us, Dayvon.
DAYVON LOVE: Thanks a lot. How are you doing?
JAY: Thanks for staying up so late. So what's your take on the speech? What's your first
impression?
LOVE: I was actually quite surprised with the assertive tone that Barack Obama had during
the speech. I mean, one of the things that has been a constant criticism of Obama, and
myself included, a criticism that I've had of him, is that he's been too lax, too compromising.
But this is a speech where he demonstrated the kind of leadership that I think people
have been waiting for, which is the kind of leadership that is more aggressive and more
assertive so he could stand his ground.
JAY: But is part of the problem this is an election speech? I mean, is there any reason
to think that this is any more than election rhetoric? And if he's reelected, that essentially
it's a replay of the last four years?
LOVE: Yeah. I mean, I'm kind of conflicted about what I think about the content in the
speech, because, you know, in many ways the rhetoric actually appealed a whole lot more
to the left, to the left as a political base, than I would think during an election year,
when many people try to play as close to the middle as possible. And so I'm kind of conflicted,
because I'm not sure that's just a result of the political climate being such that it
lent itself to a very progressive message in terms of public policy, or if it's just
a part of his galvanizing of his base.
JAY: What struck you as so progressive? 'Cause, like, on the jobs program it was all about
market policies. He was very clear everything had to be done through the private sector.
In terms of the bank regulations and all this, the kind of things in fact that have been
done have not been very strong, and the issue that banks can no longer play, take risks
with your money and so on, it really isn't true. The regulations have been very weak.
What seemed progressive to you?
LOVE: Yeah. I mean, I guess for me the rhetoric more so than the actual policies. I mean,
I think a president who--you know, like Barack Obama, who in many instances has been afraid
to even really talk directly and sternly about, you know, the nature of deregulation, and
how it is, you know, created an economic climate that is bad for working people, and really
talking about the importance of those who can afford to pay their fair share, you know,
I just feel like with the amount of energy and emphasis that he put on that, to me, is
more progressive than I've heard him throughout his presidency. And, I mean, you know, in
the constraints of contemporary political landscape, you know, there's only so progressive
that he's going to actually be, you know, in the State of the Union.
JAY: Right. You ran for city council in Baltimore in a district where there's a lot of poverty
and, you know, hundreds if not thousands of boarded-up houses, a public school system
which is collapsing, more or less. Did you hear anything in the speech that talked to
the poverty facing many American inner cities?
LOVE: I mean, one of the things that is disgraceful about contemporary political discourse is
its lack of attention on the communities that are represented in the 8th District of Baltimore
city, I mean, particularly if you look at the emphasis on the middle class without really,
you know, the discussion of the working class. You know, so for me that's just--I don't see
that necessarily as a problem squarely on Obama's rhetoric, but more as a problem with
the limitations of the contemporary political discourse.
The one thing, though, that I actually got very excited about in the speech was that
he said the phrase that we need to stop "teaching to the test". And to me, just that sentence,
I think, was very important, because for me it speaks to the very foundation of a system
that generates the kind of poverty that we see in cities like Baltimore. I mean, if the
president of the United States is willing to say that teaching to the test is a bankrupt
pedagogical practice, then I think it opens up the possibilities for public education
that we may not have seen in previous administrations.
JAY: What would you have liked to have heard that you didn't hear?
LOVE: I mean, I would have liked to hear about more investment in communities of poverty.
You know, one of the things that Newt Gingrich has said, you know, a lot recently is talking
about Obama as a food stamps president. And one of the problems in the discourse on that
is that there aren't enough people that are (A) unpacking that discourse and parsing out
the implications of that discourse, the racial and class implications of that discourse,
right, because what it does is that it creates a veil that then makes any attempt to address
the substantive social inequalities to seem as if they are an attempt to coddle to the
needs of the poor, instead of, you know, being engaged in a form of social justice. The other
problem with the way that that discourse is addressed is that people don't take the time
to articulate all the moving parts of a hyper market economy that is more interested in
profits than in investing in the communities that would make, you know, everyone--it will
make everyone prosperous. And so that's something I really would have liked to hear.
JAY: I mean, I don't think I heard the word "poverty" in the speech.
LOVE: Yeah, not all.
JAY: Or "the poor" for that matter.
LOVE: Not at all. And for me, I mean, you know--and while even mentioning it would have
been better, I just think that that particular line of argumentation that Newt Gingrich and
others are engaged in is of particular importance, because I think--because it's not just a question
of it coming up in conversation or it coming up in the discourse in politics, but it's
a question of, you know, what argumentation can be deployed in defense of programs that
substantively address poverty.
JAY: Yeah, and he didn't take on this Gingrich position. And, I mean, I think the stats are
the majority of people on food stamps--if not the majority, close to a majority--are
actually have jobs and work. They just have such lousy wages they can't make it through
a month. So this kind of dichotomy between, you know, paycheck versus food stamps is completely
false. But President Obama didn't take it on.
LOVE: Right. I mean, and what's interesting is that many of the--in many states, you know,
because a lot of welfare programs and food stamp programs, you know, they're adjusted
to the state, you know, whatever state that they're in, and in many states there are work
requirements that are attached to a lot of these requirements, so, I mean, yeah, part
of it is the demystification of the nature of food stamps so that, you know, the image
that we have in our minds of it isn't just a lazy person sitting around, but we can actually--you
know, the attempt to humanizing those who are casted as food--they're just food stamp
recipients, passive food stamp recipients, would have been something that I would have
appreciated Barack Obama addressing, especially it being in his interests, since that's the
primary rhetorical weapon that, you know, one of his potential competitors for the presidency
is going to use.
JAY: [incompr.] Thanks for a much for joining us, Dayvon.
LOVE: No problem. Thank you.
JAY: And thank you for joining us on Real News Network.