David Gergen's Blog, page 14

CNN's Your Money Discussion with panel about the Tucson Shooting ,Tea Party and Civility

Son: Reagan had Alzheimers in Office

Did Obama rise to the moment?

President Barack Obama greets family members of shooting victims during a memorial event in Tucson, Arizona.STORY HIGHLIGHTSDavid Gergen: The pep-rally atmosphere at Arizona memorial service was unusualGergen says President Obama's message about improving political climate was rightThe big question is whether the president and Washington will take actionGergen: Glorious moment when Obama revealed Rep. Gabrielle Giffords opened her eyesEditor's note: David Gergen is a senior political analyst for CNN and has been an adviser to four U.S. presidents. He is a professor of public service and director of the Center for Public Leadership at the Harvard Kennedy School.(CNN) -- My friends at CNN have asked for a few reflections about the president's speech Wednesday night in Tucson.These are really just jottings, and they are a bit disconnected, partly because the hour is late, partly because I experienced the events of the evening as somewhat disjointed.• Like many others tuning in from afar, I had anticipated that we would witness a solemn service commemorating the dead and wounded from a tragedy. It was jarring to find that instead, we were watching something more akin to a pep rally, even a campaign-style rally. It took me a long while to settle in to the rhythm of the evening.• Afterward, John King, on the scene for CNN, reported that he had been in Tucson for several days, witnessing the grieving and hurt and felt that people there needed a chance to cheer. That was comforting. None of us who live outside Tucson can fully appreciate what they have been through -- if they needed a catharsis, so be it.• Once one got beyond the atmospherics of the evening, you could begin to focus on the content of President Barack Obama's speech. His central message focused on what has happened since the shootings -- the bickering that has broken out as liberals have charged that the rampage grew out of a rancid political culture created by conservatives and conservatives countering that there was no evidence of such a linkage and that the culture, such as it is, went bad during the George W. Bush era and has grown worse because Democratic mal-governance has sparked a citizen revolt. Obama said that in the aftermath of the shootings, we should speak to each other in ways that heal, not wound. Obama is right and deserves to be taken seriously. (One could also argue that implicitly he was telling his liberal base to cool off.) Yet I also wonder where his speech leads. It was very good for the moment, but will it have a life beyond the moment? I am not so sure, unless -- as I hope -- he continues to pursue some of the underlying issues that surround these heinous shootings. We have allowed a culture of violence to grow up in this country: too much hate, too many guns, too many killings. My hope is that he will create a broader, nonpartisan effort to change the culture. Without follow-up, the effect of Wednesday night's speech will fade rapidly as the politicians return to the wars in Washington.
• Some of the president's fans were delighted that in the rallylike atmosphere, Obama seemed to find his old voice from the campaign trail. They were heartened that he aroused the audience again and again. From my perspective -- a traditionalist at heart -- that was what I found off-putting. To me, the focus of the evening should not have been upon Obama -- how well or how badly he performed -- but upon our remembrance of those who lost their lives or were grievously wounded. I wanted something more to chew on than whether Obama had found his voice again. It will be interesting to see how others respond.• The most glorious part of the evening was hearing the president electrify the crowd with his report that the wounded congresswoman, Gabrielle Giffords, had opened her eyes earlier and then to hear three women from Congress relate to Anderson Cooper how they had been present in her hospital room to see the miracle before their very eyes. How could one not be moved? Gabby, as we all know her today, has become a uniting figure for the nation.• All in all, it was a fascinating evening. Many turned off their television sets with elation. Others had much more mixed views. But what matters now is whether we can find ways to create a more civil and decent society, as the president urges. Whatever one thought of Wednesday night, our work begins anew today.

Analyzing Pres. Obamas' Speech

What More Must We Do?

Many of us in the TV audience tuned in to Tucson expecting a solemn service memorializing the dead and wounded. So, it was jarring at first to find an atmosphere more like a pep rally, even a campaign rally. John King, on scene for CNN, explained that folks in Tucson needed a catharsis. 
Once one adjusted to the atmosphere, I thought the President had an important message -- that in the aftermath of the massacre, we should speak to each others in ways that heal, not wound. Now the question becomes: will we? Will our leaders finally become role models? What more must we do?

No time for finger pointing

(CNN) -- Until we have more definitive information about the shooter, pointing fingers at who might bear responsibility for the Tucson, Arizona, massacre only contributes to what we must end in America: a toxic political environment.Soon after the news broke, the internet lit up with accusations, even before we knew anything at all about the man who pulled the trigger. Much of the early commentary, especially from the left, blamed the Tea Party, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, etc. for employing a rhetoric of militarism and creating a climate of hate.Commentators from the right soon retaliated, arguing that the left was just as guilty of rhetorical excess and through bad governance, had inspired a citizen revolt. As of this hour, we have a country that is not only deeply saddened but even more divided than we were before the shooting.We can do better -- a lot better.My experience in government is that typically, a lot of what we think we know in the first hours of a calamitous event turns out to be wrong. In the White House Situation Room just after President Reagan was shot, we were first informed that press secretary Jim Brady had died; we said a prayer. Later we learned that he had miraculously survived; we said another prayer. It took even more time to figure out whether the would-be assassin John Hinckley was a loner or what his motivations were. Even now we are still unsure about what prompted his madness.As a young man, I was struck by how quickly, after Lee Harvey Oswald had murdered President Kennedy, speculation centered on whether Oswald was acting on behalf of the right-wing John Birch Society. Instead, we learned that he was tied to Fidel Castro.This is not a moment to point fingers and make accusations. But it is a time to pray for the victims...
--David GergenRELATED TOPICSGabrielle GiffordsJohn HinckleyRonald ReaganShootingsGovernment and PoliticsThe country would be well served now if we cooled the accusations until we learn more about the man police are holding in Tucson, Jared Loughner. He appears to be mentally unhinged, someone who has threatened others. Why he targeted one of the most admired and popular political leaders in Arizona is unclear.None of this is to excuse the climate of hatred that has built up in the United States over our politics and our politicians. Its origins go back a long time, but it has undeniably grown worse in recent years -- during the George W. Bush years, when the left was intensely alienated, and now during the Obama years, when the right has become vitriolic.During the 2008 campaign, many of us in the "commentariat," including me, openly worried that occasional calls for violence at Palin rallies would lead to bloodshed. To his credit, Sen. John McCain eventually stepped in and called a halt. Since Obama's inauguration, there have been many signs that threats to public officials have been rising.All of this should be the subject of renewed "soul-searching", as Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik called for in the midst of the carnage. So should the continued, easy access to guns in this country -- something we have fretted about for years but haven't resolved. How can it be that a young man with so many signs of derangement as Loughner could purchase a very dangerous 9 mm Glock handgun less than a month ago -- and legally?Too many times in our history, assassins have struck down our leaders with guns. Four presidents have died at the hands of gunmen -- Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy. Four other presidents have narrowly escaped -- FDR, Truman, Ford and Reagan. Gunmen have also taken the lives of some who have served in Congress.And now we have Gabrielle Giffords, apparently the first female member of Congress who has been shot, courageously fighting for her life. Six others are dead. This is not a moment to point fingers and make accusations. But it is a time to pray for the victims -- and to pledge to each other that we will struggle for a more civil and decent America.

By David Gergen

Putting America First

As we leave behind a year of extreme political turbulence, Americans are rightly wondering: What comes next? Will our politicians spend this year hooting and hollering at one another, letting us drift downhill, or will they put the country first? 

History proves that even in fractious times, it is possible for leaders to work together. Richard Nixon, my first White House boss, told me shortly before he died about one of his proudest moments. Having just returned from World War II, he hung up his military uniform and ran for Congress in 1946. Propelled by a wave of disenchantment with President Truman -- similar to the one that has struck President Obama -- Republicans swept into power in both the House and the Senate and were braced for a fight. 

Only a few months later, things would change. Truman saw that postwar Europe was falling apart and asked his secretary of state, George Marshall, to put together a huge aid package. The plan's expense made it unpopular at first, so Truman invited Republican foes to join the administration in drafting the Marshall Plan, and a bipartisan campaign was launched to overcome public opposition. 

When the plan from a beleaguered Democratic president was put to a vote on the House floor in 1948, Nixon stood up in favor on one side of the aisle, and there, standing on the other side, was another congressional freshman, John F. Kennedy. Though he and Kennedy frequently clashed, Nixon saw that vote as one of his proudest moments because it proved that when the chips are down, Americans can stand up together. 

During my early years in Washington, when the World War II generation was in charge, I witnessed that spirit again and again. The war veterans saw themselves as strong Democrats or strong Republicans -- but first and foremost, as strong Americans. That ethos was in full flower in the Reagan years. Even though the House was in the hands of the Democrats for both of his terms, President Reagan and Congress reached bipartisan agreements at several key moments -- from spending and tax cuts in 1981 to Social Security reform in 1983 to an overhaul of the tax system in 1986. 

More recently, in conditions remarkably similar to Obama's, Bill Clinton showed that it is possible to make serious progress for the country. He suffered a stinging defeat by Republicans in his first midterm elections. He was so devastated, it appeared that Republicans, led by Newt Gingrich, would run over him; then, as he moved to the center, he also angered many in his own Democratic base. Sound familiar? 

But Clinton nimbly outmaneuvered both the right and the left, and we moved forward as a people. In his later years in office, he and the Republicans not only overhauled the welfare system -- a significant milestone -- but also produced four straight balanced budgets, something not seen in over half a century. He left office with Democrats mostly assuaged and the general public giving him high marks. 

So, it can be done. Even with polarization, a weakened president and a fractious Congress can put down their differences and lift up the country. In fact, Yale political scientist David Mayhew has conducted a pioneering study showing that times of divided government -- contrary to conventional wisdom -- produce as much effective legislation as do times of unified control. 

The question before us is whether this generation of leaders can rise to the call as others have. The public knows we can't go on living as we have. Can President Obama finally sound a clear trumpet, leading the country to support a brave agenda for a renewed, competitive nation? Will Republicans be willing to meet him halfway? Will the extremists in both parties allow sensible compromises to be forged and passed? 

There were glimmers of hope -- and lots of dark moments -- as the old Congress returned for a quick shirttail session. But now a new Congress has come to town, and the real work is about to begin. A moment of truth is upon us. The chips are down. Once again, we Americans must summon the courage and goodwill to stand up together. 


-David Gergen
Published in Parade Magazine January 9, 2011

Horrendous Shootings

Accusations are already flying about what sparked the gunman in the horrendous shootings in Tucson. But so far, we really don't have hard evidence. Rather than pointing fingers -- and further poisoning our politics -- this is a moment to pray for the victims. And to renew our pledges to each other to build a more civil country.

3 cheers for wise White House counselor

By David Gergen

(CNN) -- In our national politics, where power and fame are the most powerful narcotics, it takes a rare person to walk away from it all. But Pete Rouse has just done that in the White House and he deserves a hearty salute.




Most Americans have never heard of Pete Rouse, and he is just as happy they haven't. He came to Washington some years ago and worked his way up to become chief of staff to Tom Daschle, the Democratic majority leader in the U.S. Senate.

When upset in a re-election race in 2004, Daschle recommended to a freshly elected senator from Illinois that he hire Rouse as his own chief, helping him to find his way around the Capitol.
Rouse wasn't sure at first if he wanted to stick around, but Barack Obama persuaded him to try it for a while. They have been together ever since, as Rouse has provided critical strategic thinking and quiet, behind-the-scenes management during Obama's rise to the presidency. At the White House, Rouse has been the deputy chief of staff who kept the place together and won deep affection from the staff, even as he kept his name out of the headlines.

It looked like all that would change when Rahm Emanuel decamped as chief to run for mayor of Chicago (where he is now favored). Obama asked Rouse to step in as provisional chief of staff and to finish up a strategic plan for the next two years. Most people would have instantly maneuvered to capture the post for himself -- it is easily one of the five most powerful jobs in Washington -- and by early accounts, Obama was ready to anoint him this week if Rouse wanted it.
But Rouse just said no.

Obama names Bill Daley Chief of Staff New White House Chief of Staff White House changes: 'Wall Street won!'

Why would he do such a thing, giving up a chance to bend the arc of history -- not to mention, the financial rewards on the other end?

It was, I believe, a noble act that reflected two qualities in short supply these days among the elite. First, Rouse has consistently demonstrated a great deal of self awareness. He knows where he is good -- building a team, encouraging them to work together, creating an esprit and very significantly, managing up -- but he also recognizes and accepts those areas where he isn't so comfortable -- leading out front, talking to the press, engaging in verbal combat.
He was superb as provisional chief during the lame duck session of Congress, after Emanuel left, but that was a special moment that played to his strengths; he knew instinctively that the next two years will be much rougher politically.

Just as importantly, Rouse is also selfless. He could see that Bill Daley was a more natural fit for the job, so he stepped aside in order to advance his boss instead of himself. Daley is a heavy hitter who knows how to make the system work and is not afraid to bang heads. He can stand as an equal with the titans of Congress as well as Wall Street, even as he schmoozes with the press and appears on the Sunday talk shows.

Obama admires Jim Baker, the extraordinary chief of staff for Ronald Reagan; in Daley, he has chosen his own Jim Baker. Rouse knows that and sacrificed glory for the larger good. That's selflessness.

There will be time enough in coming weeks to assess the new team. My bet is that Daley will be extremely effective as chief and will help to move Obama where he needs to be -- more to the center -- but Daley will also become a huge lightning rod for liberals who will blame him for every compromise.

In Gene Sperling, the president has selected an economic leader with a proven track record of excellence. He is also a strong team player. Over time, it will be seen that this reshuffling has also elevated Valerie Jarrett, who will be even more valued as counselor and friend to the President and first lady.

But before he slips behind the scenes in his role as senior counselor to the president, this is a moment when Pete Rouse deserves the rousing applause he received from the White House staff yesterday when Daley was named. We need more role models in Washington -- and Rouse has just given us one.

Not so lame duck?