E.J. Dionne's column in yesterday's Washington Post reminded me that I had failed to comment on Barack Obama's Father's Day sermon. As Dionne wrote,
The reason Obama's speech is important beyond all of the short-term political calculations and analysis is that it reflects a hard-won consensus that family structure matters.... When Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote about "the weakness of the Negro family" in 1965, he was denounced for "blaming the victim." This was a misreading of what Moynihan was saying, and also of the purpose of his words. Moynihan's view was vindicated years later when many of the most important African-American advocates of equality came to see strengthening the black family as essential to the civil rights agenda.... It augurs well that Obama clearly stands with Moynihan.
Here's the relevant passage:
How many times in the last year has this city lost a child at the hands of another child? How many times have our hearts stopped in the middle of the night with the sound of a gunshot or a siren? How many teenagers have we seen hanging around on street corners when they should be sitting in a classroom? How many are sitting in prison when they should be working, or at least looking for a job? How many in this generation are we willing to lose to poverty or violence or addiction? How many?Yes, we need more cops on the street. Yes, we need fewer guns in the hands of people who shouldn't have them. Yes, we need more money for our schools, and more outstanding teachers in the classroom, and more afterschool programs for our children. Yes, we need more jobs and more job training and more opportunity in our communities.
But we also need families to raise our children. We need fathers to realize that responsibility does not end at conception. We need them to realize that what makes you a man is not the ability to have a child--it's the courage to raise one.
Think about that and contrast it with the "Broader, Bolder" statement. Both indicate that "schools alone" can't overcome the problems of our inner-cities. And both want greater government interventions such as after-school and pre-school programs. But only Obama pays any real attention to the role that families must play.
Dionne admits that this could be a ploy to win Republican votes--Republicans like me who are excited to hear a (Democratic!) candidate talk about families and fathers. But that just points to a huge blind spot for modern liberalism. What is it about "progressives" such as the Broader/Bolder crowd that make them uncomfortable with saying that strong families are indispensable? In the uber-liberal hamlet of Takoma Park, Maryland, where I live, I see "family values" all the time, with fathers (sometimes two fathers) walking their kids to the bus stop, foregoing high-paying jobs so they can spend more time with their children, getting home early to take their kids to the park. As a new father myself I feel a kindred spirit with these guys. But many in their party continue to treat any talk of families with disdain.
Maybe schools can't do it alone, but surely government can't either.
