Wednesday, 06.04.08
The End of the Clinton Era?
PAUL RICHARDS/AFP/Getty Images
A Visit with Bill Clinton
October 1992
The Atlantic explores the conflict between the "A student" and the "pol."
A Triumph of Misinformation
January 1995
Take Two: Hillary's Choice
November 2006
Joshua Green documents how Hillary Clinton turned herself into the consummate Washington player.
The 1992 campaign was the first election that I followed closely, and with some understanding of what was going on. I was twelve, the son of two diehard Baby-Boomer Democrats, and every night we kept up with the race on ABC's World News Tonight, where the late Peter Jennings jousted entertainingly with then-White House correspondent Brit Hume. During the Connecticut primary, when the Democratic race was down to Clinton and Jerry Brown, my father took me out to Wooster Square, the old Italian neighborhood in New Haven, to see the Man from Hope put in an appearance. (All I remember is the top of his head, gray but not yet silver, bobbing just above the crowd.) Later, my parents made a sign -- this was just after the Republican Convention -- that read "Our Family Values Clinton" and took it to rallies, where at different moments my mother managed to shake both Clintons' hands. (Bill was warm, she told me, and definitely sexy. Hillary was cold.)
Later I grew up, became a conservative (not necessarily in that order), and lost most of my pre-teen affection for the Man from Hope and for his wife, whose chilliness went from an impression passed on by my mother to an article of faith among the pundit class. But I never developed into a full-blown Clinton hater -- not in the '90s, when Clinton-hatred was de rigueur on the American Right and fairly common among a certain set of liberal pundits, and not during this election season, when it passed, like a flu strain mutating to attack a previously immune population, into the bloodstream of the Obamaphile Left.
I think I was too young for it. Clintonism represented a distinctively Boomer strain of politics, but Clinton-hatred did as well. For Boomer conservatives, it was a reaction to the Clinton personae, his and hers -- to the way Bill and Hillary embodied, in so many respects, everything that fortysomething right-wingers despised about their own peer group -- joined to an anger at the First Couple's facility for winning political battles (if not the war) in an era that was supposed to belong to Reagan's heirs. For Boomer liberals, it was a mixture of self-loathing, sibling resentment, and the inevitable disappointment at the Clintons' failure to live up to the idols of their youth, the brothers Kennedy ... and then, more unforgivably, their failure to get out of the way when a New Kennedy came along.
For someone who came of age in the 1990s, though, with no memories of previous presidencies -- whether JFK or Reagan -- to judge Billary against and find them wanting (and no memory of a pre-Boomer world, for that matter), the Clinton style of politics was simply the only style there was: dishonorable, yes, and cynical, yes, and calculating and demagogic and ideologically promiscuous and narcissistic and every other epithet you wanted to throw at it, but by no means unique to the First Couple. They just happened to be particularly good at it (though perhaps not so good as their flailing enemies liked to insist, defending their own failures on the grounds that the Clintons were just too good, or too bad, to be defeated), and particularly unwilling to internalize the self-righteous critique that people close to power, journalists and pundits and ex-politicos, like to make of those who actually wield it.
This is admittedly a cynical point of view, and one could argue that I was simply born too late to experience a politics, whether liberal or conservative, that inspires idealism rather than a weary resignation. And there's no question that I'm envious of those liberals who have found, in their support for Obama, a sense of purity, of idealism unleavened by calculation and allegiance untainted by doubt, that thus far has eluded me. Still, I prefer to think of my cynicism as realism: as a recognition that to be in American politics is to play a game that's hard and dirty by its very nature, and that what you want in a politician is a personality capable of compartmentalization -- someone who can hold on to idealistic ends even while they get their hands dirty playing the sort of day-to-day hardball that makes ends of any sort attainable.
But that, of course, sounds an awful lot like something Hillary Clinton would say.
The good and the badA pre-Vanity Fair Todd Purdum recapitulates the successes and failures of Bill Clinton's two presidential terms. |
The First CoupleNew York Times shows that Bill and Hillary formed a unified political machine from the very beginning. |
Irrational hatredGQ struggles to explain the phenomenon of Clinton hatred. |
Looking beyondTo be successful, William Greider explains, the Democratic Party must find an identity that exists outside of "Team Clinton." |
Bill's legacyU.S. News and World Report suggests that, despite his sometimes controversial contribution in the primary season, Bill Clinton's presidential legacy remains intact. |
(21)
Your cynicism is realism, and in a sense, so is Hillary's.
However, and this a very important however:
It is crucial to the success of democratic political systems that the participants recognize that integrity and respect for opponents' views cannot be excised from the process. This is something Bill and Hill fundamentally do not understand. Her campaign was vile, unmitigatedly celebratory of every necessary evil and contemptuous of every unnecessary value. It's convenient to call it all a boomer dispute and wash your hands of it, but that way out denies the threat that her politics (and, in a related form, Bush's politics) pose to the foundations of our democracy.
The Clinton era will be over years from now when they have passed away.
The Last of Team Clinton's Rope-A-Dopes? What is a Rope-a-dope you ask? read on.
The Clintons have been known to pull large political rabbits out of their hats for quite some time. Just what has made them so successfull in the past? One strategy they use is the rope-a-dope. That is, they instigate a dirty trick on an opponent and before anyone notices (indeed sometimes before they even accomplish the feat itself) will accuse their opponent of doing it to them. Then the news media usually faithfully follows their accusations while their dirty tricks do their damage. Another definition for their rope-a-dope is that they will deliberately distort a very important fact which is advantageous to their opponent and lie to claim it themselves for their own advantage. This sort of thing goes way beyond mere spin....it's usually gross lies which they don't back down from...to the point where people wonder if they are delusional. As examples, I submit Hillary last night at her non-existent concession speech stating that South Dakota (Who happened to go her way) was the last Primary. Not so....Montana which went Obama's way was. Or, Team Clinton's submission that Hillary has the Popular vote (See below for more on this). Or....Hillary making the point that she, not Obama has the white male working class vote, then accuses Obama of sexism towards her campaign....this came after many of her supporters were outwardly racist towards Obama. Lately, Hillary has mobilized the feminist demographis of here supporters to make it appear all her supporters are vocal, upset, mad, etc. In truth out of 17+ million voters you're bound to have a few very lound nutjobs. These are the ones who now show up at her gatherings. And the Hillary of long past fantasizes that she is the leader of the feminists. (She may be...but she was always a lightweight in such reagrd). Now she wants us to believe all her supporters feel the same as this smaller minority. It may have worked, if just a few weeks ago, she hadn't wanted us to believe that her supporters were mainly made up of white working class males, whch she, not Obama could capture according to her thought. Anyways, the Clinton Rope-A-dope comes in many flavors, but they all have the same purpose...and that is to deceive the masses of the real truth. There are countless other examples...you may be able to remember a few. You will, if you pay close attention. This is the sort of politics that Obama wants to remit to the trasheap of history. He may have accomplished it last night.
Ya know, last night I heard Hillary state she had more than 18 million votes in her pocket. And imply that she has the popular vote by stating she has more votes than anyone else. This is more than mere sleazy political spin...it is a monumental lie by omission. Whe one gets the truth about the popular vote by going to RealClearPolitics.com, they see that Obama, not Clinton claims the popular vote.
The only way Clinton wins the popular vote is if Obama gets absolutely no votes from Michigam Primary. BUT, since the Rules committee of the DNC legitimized the Mich Primary votes to the extent they did, Obama does in fact officially claim the uncommitted Mich Primary votes since his name wasn't on the ballot. Clinton would like us to beleive that Obama should get no votes from Mich, according to "the rules". Imagine that....Clinton's bunch arguing Clinton gets her votes and Obama gets none, then because of that false tally...claim she has the popular vote.
Shame...Shame...Shame. What audacity. I guess I can be grateful that she has to make such a case to the superdelagates, and not the masses...because the superdelagates see the Clinton sham for what is is. They live and breath this political stuff every day. Obama indeed rightfully claims the popular vote, not Clinton.
So...there you have it. Another Team Clinton's Rope-A-Dope. How about it, any Dopes out there?
Hillary did not teach Obama anything. She fought to win the White House and thats that! She didnt win! That is the beauty of our democratic process. There is a winner and there is a loser. Its not "o.k. you win and if you take me as your VP I will give you my voters". That is bologna. The fact is the Obama camp dethroned the deep rooted Clinton monarchy. He will take down Mcain the same way, but not with Hillary. Her politics and Republican politics is what Barrack says needs to be changed. If he gives into Hillary and brings her aboard he will lose at least 50% of his supporters. Come on America.......... when do we say enough is enough.Remember when kids could play in band in school or do all sports or just get an education.The schooling of our children is our future. Both Repubs and Dems have short changed our kids ,lets make a change and show them old dogs some new tricks. Thanks God Bless. David Bintliff-Independent
Liberals largely didn't hate the Clintons for the reasons Ross claims here--maybe that stuff was present, but it wasn't dispositive. It's not that Clinton was insufficiently JFKish--he was, in some ways (especially in a few). I think that informed liberals disliked him because they believed (and still believe) that the Clintons will sell them out if it makes them more popular. Clintonism was mocked as "Republican-lite", as we all know.
I'm sure that some of those compromises were necessary at the time, but Bill Clinton could have done a far better job at picking his battles (Telecom Deregulation, DOMA, and the DMCA are the most egregious to me, though not the only ones). He didn't take a single populist stand of which I am aware, and many of the stands he did take were belied by said compromises. That's why liberals disliked him. Also because he made lots of people defend him on personal failings that they found reprehensible, but had to support anyway.
This said, I do think that Ross's suggestion that Clinton hatred on the right was caused by an impression that he ended (okay, interrupted) the era of Reagan has enormous merit. I'll buy that.
I am very tired of hearing about how Billary ran a courageous campaign. Billary ran a self-serving, deceitful, damn the consequences campaign true to the lack of character shown but her and her Bubba. The Obama promise is about a change in politics. We who support him did not do so that Billary could back door their way to the White House. Contrary, we support Obama because we love our country and see a fresh new hope and distain the old way of things that has put our country in peril.
Indeed you ARE too young to have experienced "a politics, whether liberal or conservative, that inspires idealism rather than a weary resignation." You are fortunate to have witness Obama -- granted that you have gained sufficent maturity to understand it. By which standard, you will have ceased to call yourself a "conservative."
Interesting comment. As a realist, I think you'll find the Obama presidency fascinating.
The recent New York Times bio on Obama quoted a Chicago politician as saying "I think he has read his Machiavelli."
From my vantage point, having watched Obama carefully, and having read The Prince carefully, I think it was one of the more insightful comments to reach the public ear.
The Untied States are in far better shape than Machiavelli's Italy, but I believe Machiavelli's wisdom and insight will serve Obama well.
Ross - as a Gen Xer (I would say you are from the beginning of Y?), the Clintons were everything that I despise about the Boomers, and not necessarily just the liberal ones. The Boomers were the first generation to decide that they really didn't want to fight in their generation's war - and in order to get out if it, they decided decided to redefine morality and patriotism for their own purposes. They won't help fix Social Security out of pure selfishness. They invented the concept of "Sexual Harassment" and then turned around and decided that it didn't really matter so long as the harassar had the right politics. Never has there been a generation so in love with itself and so willing to remake the country in their own distorted and puffed-up image.
Frankly I am sick of them all: The Clintons and George W. Bush are just two sides of the same selfish Boomer coin, and I'm more than ready to be rid of them all.
I remember crying with my classmates when JFK was assassinated. We played the sole copy of his famous "Ask what..." speech over and over and some of us rushed to the cinema to pour out more tears during the then screening of PT 109. That was in Tropical Malaysia.
Fast foward some 30 odd years and now I live in Australia. Much more mature and knowledgeable having lived across different political and cultural systems.
I just cannot understand how an advanced society like the USofA can have such an adoring crowd of people in their millions who can be hoodwinked by a husband and wife team of liars. Are they any different from the thousands in developing countries who give their unfailing support to despots and tyrants. One group may do it out of fear while the other out of blind "patriotism" or ideology. The end result is the same- the majoority are shafted.
GOD BLESS SANE HUMANS. nair
"(Bill was warm, she told me, and definitely sexy. Hillary was cold.)"
Jesus Christ!
what you want in a politician is a personality capable of compartmentalization -- someone who can hold on to idealistic ends even while they get their hands dirty playing the sort of day-to-day hardball that makes ends of any sort attainable.
Some of us think we've found exactly that in Obama. I suspect that those who think he's just O'Bambi are in for a rude awakening. The man has very sharp elbows, and one of the great benefits to him from this 100 Years War is that it's honed his political instincts for when and how to throw them (witness "you're likable enough" from the final NH debate - fine substantively, but rolled out at the wrong time).
This week's demarche by senior Clinton supporters may well be an example. Clearly, her performance Tuesday night left everyone unhappy, but someone had to do something about it. If allowed to fester in political cyberspace, it could have created significant diversions during a critical period when Obama should be focusing all his fire on McCain, yet Obama couldn't lead the charge directly as that would have further inflamed her base. It could have happened had Obama remained completely inert, but there is every reason to conclude that he nudged Rangel, Mikulski and Schumer to carry the message to her. He got what he wanted with a fast turn-around, but there are no fingerprints on the gun. Political insiders can suspect all they want, but now the rank and file anger is deflected away from him to the party itself, and this is diffused because its her supporters who 'did it' to her, not Obama sock puppets.
His first debates with McCain will be fascinating. Obama gets under John's skin, and Barack knows that. He will be consistently respectful to McCain's past - we'll hear "I honor the Senator for his courage and service to our country" so often we'll be muttering it in our sleep - but he'll needle him with throw-away lines and elliptical digs until McCain erupts like Walter Matthau on steroids.
So no, I don't think people on the Left are looking for saintly behavior. I think they're looking for someone dedicated to meaningful policy advances; smart enough to stay just on the sunny side of the ethical street (God knows the Clintons weren't); yet shrewd enough to use all necessary political tools in what always winds up in turd-slinging.
Obama is the "Lion AND the fox"--which is the only formula for a successful Presidency.
He is also as tough--AND as tender--as Bobby Kennedy.
He is the ONLY man on the political in America right now who is TEMPERAMENTALLY equipped to be President of the United States.
The inner balance and serenity of the man is awe-inspiring, and America will be blessed to have him as her leader in this perilous period of her history.
Forget all the brilliant analysis. Hillary Clinton voted for Bush's war, mostly because she felt she had to pander to her pro-Israel New York constituency, and also because she was still stuck in the old Reagan-Gingrich-era, Stockholm-syndrome mentality that Democrats have to vote for war so they don't appear "weak."
Since this massive and disgusting pander also turned out to be wrong on the merits -- which all honest people KNEW AT THE MOTHERFUCKING TIME -- it bit her on the ass. Therefore, she went down in flames. Which she deserved. All the rest of this boomer psychology hoo-hah is pure crap. It's the war, stupid. You shouldn't doubt that, Douthat.
I disagree with the generational slant behind the argument -- extrapolating personal perceptions to a whole generation is a little shallow and narcissistic. I'm three years older than you, was also raised by Boomer liberals, became a conservative as a teenager and then a liberal after 2000, and every step of the way have deeply resented the Clintons. They've invited us to believe in the worst about our leadership and in a narrow political possibility, the same way that George W. Bush did: they explicitly made the personal political (and vice versa, I guess); their triangulation was only a means of personal survival and demographic slicing, never on behalf of a larger public good; they were (and remain) willing to be deeply divisive and crass when it suits their purposes. The liberal and former conservative in me can be equally horrified by Bill's exploitation of the death of Ricky Ray Rector, just like I can be horrified by Bush's mockery of Carla Faye Tucker, and it doesn't have a thing to do with Reagan nostalgia or sibling resentment. Cynicism and realism have their place, but these are people who, like Nixon, took it several steps too far -- at heart, they're not cynics, but nihilists. I may find Bush more troubling, but at least he can be credited for believing in something.
I was born in 1960 Obama in 61. When will some of you folks realize putting poeple in demographic boxes like Boomer and Gen X/Y blah blah only shows how subserviant you are to marketing memes...It only obfuscates the fact that some of you are too lazy to look at the ISSUES...Most folks want Obama for President because he is ISSUE based...and does not bother to "use demgraphics" to blow smoke up our butts...
MS Clinton lost the bid because she fought the last political war not the current one.
Obama understood what Howard Dean saw in 04.. MILLIONS of us reading,blogging and interacting with each other on the net. Indeed WE are reading about and discussing the ISSUES... because of the Web and this has lead to a rise in a whole new community of informed folks who are educated about the facts.
Everytime some bozo political operative tries to throw out a personal attack via the media it is parsed, discussed and refuted within days because of netizens like us...The same with anything said by anyone of any political stripe...
Obama understands this...Hillary and MaCain do not...That is why he is so calm and centered...He need only to focus on the issues and understands that whatever he says will be parsed and debated by millions of us interacting with each other...
Netizens make it allot easier for politicians like Obama to speak DIRECTLY to our concerns and it is to his advantage...Netizens know that in this day and age only the truth can stand up to our scrutiny...The age of the TV soundbite is over. Welcome to the new world of Net Democracy where you Mr/Ms Politican stand before us naked with only the your set of facts to cloth you...
William Hazen
Egypt Steve: Right on. This Fawlty Towers-esque "Don't mention the War!" mentality has grown very tiresome (although I would posit that the war is but one of a number of factors that contributed to Hillary's demise, albeit a crucial one). There is also more than a smidgen of generational tension here, to be sure, but the quackish generational pyschoanalysis that Douthat's piece indluges in is just fatuous.
Ross, Sorry but this is such a compilation of pop psychology nonsense and cliches. You and Andrew Sullivan need to get over your obsession with the boomer generation culture war as the go-to meme when you run out of interesting things to write about.
Ross, you must develop your arguments with more examples. And for God's sake, stay away from the (Boomerish!) habit of writing op-ed pieces that are ostensibly political analysis and filling them with personal stories!
That said, this:
"...when it passed, like a flu strain mutating to attack a previously immune population, into the bloodstream of the Obamaphile Left."
is delightful writing. Keep it up!
I hate to break it to y'all but the terms "Baby Boomer" and "Gen X'er" are ludicrous, sweeping generalizations that have distorted social and political discussions for decades. People are best seen primarily as individuals, not as members of some arbitrarily defined demographic. I was born in 1952. I'm a NOT a "Boomer"--I'm me, a unique human, as are all of you. You know virtually nothing about me as a person, and please stop thinking you do just because you know my age.
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although The Current does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
-->
Hillary Clinton is STUNNING!!!
You have just witnessed the greatest political campaign fight in American history. One for the textbooks, and the history books. Hillary Clinton fought her heart out against all odds to win for all of the American people . While at the same time doing her best to prepare Sen. Barack Obama to win in November if he was the nominee. STUNNING!!! WELL DONE HILLARY CLINTON. WELL DONE! Your AMAZING! :-)
Sen. Obama could not have had a better opponent than Hillary Clinton. Nor could he have had a better opponent to prepare him for the battle royal to come against John McCain and the Republicans ahead of the November elections. Hillary Clinton was like a big Mama cat determined to teach her kitten how to hunt, and hang with the big dogs for the fights ahead.
And how about Bill Clinton, Chelsea, and th whole Clinton team. They were magnificent. They really showed their metal. BRAVO! TEAM CLINTON... BRAVO!
And how about YOU! my fellow Americans. I'm so proud of you. And proud to be one of you. You showed what you are made of. And what makes America so great. You never gave up on your Champion Hillary Clinton. Time, and time again you eagerly waited your turn to vote for Hillary Clinton. To pick her up and pass her along down the line to the rest of your fellow Americans.
You never gave up on her. Just as Hillary Clinton never gave up on you. No matter how many times they counted her out. No matter how many times they brutally knocked her down. You knew she would get back up. And you were ready to support her when she did. AMERICA LOVES A FIGHTER. AMERICA UNDERSTANDS A FIGHTER. AMERICA IS A FIGHTER. I'M PROUD OF YOU AMERICA!
Hillary said she would accept the VP spot on the ticket if ask. And I am thrilled to hear that. I think it would be crazy not to take her up on that offer. You could not have a better VP than Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton is Sen. Obama's best chance of winning the Whitehouse in November. And it is essential that the democrats take back the Whitehouse.
The American people are in a very desperate condition now. George Bush has wrecked America, and much of the world.
YOU MADE US VERY PROUD HILLARY CLINTON! :-)
WE LOVE YOU...
jacksmith... Working Class :-)
p.s. I really liked Sen. Barack Obama's speech in Minnesota. I think he just maybe ready now for the Bush Republican attack machine, dirty tricks, and vote fraud machine. :-)
Posted by jacksmith | June 4, 2008 2:54 PM