"Are you goin' to Potter's?" "Better to get half than nothin'!"

[Berry Cool]

"Now listen--now listen to me! I beg of you not to do this thing! If Potter gets a hold of this building and loan, there'll never be another decent house built in this town! He's already got charge of the bank, he's got the bus line, he's got the department stores, and now he's after us! Why? Well, it's very simple--because we're cuttin' in on his business, that's why! And because he wants to keep you livin' in his slums, and payin' the kind of rent HE decides!...Can't you see what's happening here? Don't you see what's happening? Potter isn't selling--Potter's BUYING! And why? Because we're panicky and he's not--that's why! He's pickin' up some bargains! Now--now--we can get through this thing all right! We've--we've got to stick together, though! We've got to have faith in each other!"

"But my husband hasn't worked in over a year, and I need money!"

"How am I gonna live till the bank opens?"

"I got doctor bills to pay!"

"I need cash!"

(shouts multiply into a din of jumbled cries until one voice breaks through)

"How much do you need?"

"...Hey! I got two thousand dollars! This is two thousand dollars--this'll tide us over until the bank reopens!"

...

You probably know this dialogue. It's from a movie that's pretty popular at this time of year. Ordinary people are confronted with a source of evil and greed trying to scare them so badly that they will take something, anything, they can get, just to scrape by. They're ready to sell out their principles in the name of necessity.

But one man, and his wisely chosen new bride, talk them out of it. How? Not only by standing firm on principle, by trying to get the people to see the greater values at stake and exactly what they'll be giving up if they sell their souls just to meet their immediate needs. But by being willing to share the pain, to put their own skin in the game, to make a sacrifice so that everyone will see them, quite literally, putting their money where their mouth is.

I wish I saw that kind of leadership from my President and the people who are supposed to be supporting him in Congress. I don't. And it seems to me that because it is missing, there are way too many people--both unemployed as I am, and those who claim to speak for we the unemployed--who are all too willing to scamper on over to the "deal" because it's "better to get half than nothin'!"

Why? Because we're panicky, and the Republicans are not.

And once the GOP pays us that half, they will own us. They're not selling, they're buying. And once we're all bought, there'll never be another decent house built in this town.

[tomg]

1. I agree with all of your sentiments,

but one. In this case, it is George Bailey who is talking all of those people into taking the deal - in fact, he is brokering it for Potter. Those people are saying they will hold out if he is with them. He's not. Think of the Senate as George's incompetent Uncle.

[EstimatedProphet]

14. Almost...

I think it's more that George Bailey took the deal. I think Obama has bought into the "wealthy people create jobs, so tax cuts are necessary" lie. It's a small point, but I think it's that Obama has been fooled himself, rather than being one of the fooling ones.

[tomg]

17. You are probably right.

George Bailey was the most decent guy going, but he wasn't exactly the sharpest knife in the box. President Obama is, I have to admit, far more intelligent academically than i am but he is either absolutely duplicitous (which I don't believe) or utterly naive and trusting (which in some ways is even scarier). Still, i think you are right.

[Vinnie From Indy]

18. Brilliant catch!

Cheers!

[tomg]

19. Damn good catch. As a

former athlete, i love a good catch. But still (and seriously), what do we do? Assume it is naieve. Or buying into a false premise. Either are legitimate concerns. i will go with naieve. One of the most difficult things I face is that I genuinely like President Obama. The ethos he follows is one I believe in ( the assumption of the basic good intentions of the opposition). But we also have a saying: "His heart is in the right place, but his head's up his ass." Even writing this bothers me. This is not about claiming he has sold out or lacks a spine or whatever ( all of which i either disagree with or have no evidence for). If anything, i think hehas a spine, but is committed to a world view regarding republicans ( as humans) that is fundamentally flawed. On a pure and simple level, his negotiation skills blow and his basic negotiation premises ( which is contingent upon his view of republican human beings) is wrong.

If he were a coach, we would all be calling for his head. To think of it as, say, basketball ( and it is far more serious than that, i know), if he were trying to run a drivel drive when he does not have the guys to pull it off, you change your strategy. He won't change his strategy and - he is - at this stage 1 and 8 in what promises to be a long season.

[walldude]

25. I think it's debatable on whether or not Obama

is "fooled". And if he is, man how can someone not see how this kind of policy has screwed us over in the last 30 years.

I really thought Obama was kidding when he said he loved Reagans economic policies.

[Tsiyu]

2. Timely post

The dialogue in that movie ...timeless



Where are the George Baileys?


Bernie Sanders, Al Franken, and yes Obama are exasperated with the blatant greed. I want Dems to hold out. I want Republicans to show once and for all that they have zero concern for the American people. THEY are destroying this nation and the People need to see it.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

3. K & R

[Egnever]

4. and Obama is doing exactly that

The pukes are more than willing to let the country burn to get back into power by blaming that burning on the dems and Obama is the guy with the 2 grand (unemployment benefits and midle class tax cuts)

You are hopelessly naive if you think Obama could stand pat and let the tax cuts expire and the dems wouldnt pay out the behind next election for the loss of jobs and homes that would result from it.

[andym]

5. Actually it is a call to people's better nature combined with his own personal sacrifice.

Read the beginning of the speech. And the next part (which you left out), where he explains how the money isn't at the Savings and Loan, but invested into each members home.

The combination of a call to one's better nature, and a practical demonstration of self-sacrifice on the part of Mr. Bailey is what makes this scene from "It's a Wonderful Life," so wonderful.

From the point of view of George Bailey, he just gave up his honeymoon to save the Savings and Loan. So he and his wife gave up what they wanted most in order to help others. Each of the people who accept his proposal only get enough money to tide them over. So there are compromises galore in this scene, all for the greater good. I suspect a case could be made that this scene supports people who compromise on what they want most, in order to get something they believe is for the greater good.

Great art often cuts more than one way. The film seems to be saying don't get panicked into a compromise that hurts others, but rather make a different compromise that might help others.

[hfojvt]

7. oh they compromise with George

but do not compromise with Potter

[pnorman]

8. "....but rather make a different compromise that might help others."

I'm glad that SOMEONE here actually got it!

[Berry Cool]

13. I don't need to read it. I know it. And I only left out the beginning for brevity.

You have made my point. The combination of a call to one's better nature, and a practical demonstration of self-sacrifice, is indeed what makes this scene so wonderful.

What you and I disagree on is the kind of compromise that needs to be made. George and Mary Bailey made a sacrifice and the people accepted only enough money to tide them over because there was a "greater good" known as the long term.

A case can indeed be made that this scene supports people who compromise on what they need most at the moment in order to get something they believe is for the greater good because they will not have to pay for what they need right now with their souls.

Yes, "The film seems to be saying don't get panicked into a compromise that hurts others, but rather make a different compromise that might help others." But this is NOT that kind of compromise. It is the "Mr. Potter is offering us 50 cents on the dollar!" compromise. It hurts everyone but "Mr. Potter." Because in the end, if we make it, he will win.

And THAT was my point.

[Supersedeas]

15. how many points are you making? The current compromise is like the compromise people refused to

engage in with Potter?

Or that the current compromise looks like the one Bailey suggested when there was a run on the Bank?

[andym]

16. It doesn't really make your point

because the alternative here isn't getting something to tide you over (for the common good), but rather nothing. It's like not going to Potter, but getting no money to feed your family from George.

BTW, I agree that the Democrats should take nothing (since it's an all or nothing deal apparently thanks to Potter (I mean the GOP)) and let the tax cuts expire, rather than keep the tax cut for the wealthy. But I'm not happy about this being an all or nothing decision.

But if we allow the middle class tax cuts to expire, and unemployment insurance extension to expire we would not be getting a compromise for the good, but rather real pain for the unemployed and middle class, which will somewhat damage the economy in the short run by limiting spending (though it would help the deficit). As a progressive, the all or none nature of the tax deal is a no win situation.

Because of this, Potter (GOP) is happy either way. If you take his deal, he's fine. If we don't take the GOP deal, they then can blame Bailey (Dems) for taking away the middle class tax cut and for hurting the economy (short term) by reducing consumer spending due to the "increase," which serves his ultimate goal of firing George (Dems and the President) from the Savings and Loan on whose board Potter sits.

One last thing, it appears that you were saying that the Dems are the members of the Savings and Loan and not George. But then there is no George here (no one offering a real compromise for the good), so the analogy doesn't hold that way either.

[Berry Cool]

20. You just made my point.

No one is offering a compromise for the GOOD. Not even US. We are just taking what Potter offers us, and not even proposing any alternatives.

[andym]

22. You're right that no one is offering a compromise for good-- that is my point

so, that means we're helping Potter no matter what we do: whether we run from him or not, he wins.

Was that you're point too?

[earth mom]

6. Love the movie and absolutely love this post! You nailed it!

:applause:

[hootinholler]

9. I love you truuuulllllly

Truuu leeee dear.

-Hoot

[me b zola]

10. K&R

:applause:

[gmoney]

11. Then there's Tom the Republican

Who even after the moving speech, STILL insists on getting his entire $242, without waiting the 60 days... and Barry, I mean George, caves in, gives him the money, and they calls lamely after "your account's still here, that's a loan."

[myrna minx]

12. K&R n/t

[Dappleganger]

Ok, now we have to watch the movie again!

What a timely post, btw.

[Dappleganger]

21. Ok, now we have to watch the movie again!

What a timely post, btw.

[reformist2]

23. We need to teach people why the New Deal was put in place.

Most people today think the dominant "middle class" is somehow a natural development of American history - most people don't realize that it owes its existence to the New Deal.

[Canuckistanian]

24. But Potter's paying 50 CENTS ON THE DOLLAR!

Get it while you can, SUCKERS!