Rep. Barney Frank: Refight the Nineties?

[AX10]

Read the entire article. This is one of the main reason's why I am skeptical of Barack Obama.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-barney-frank/refight-the-nineties_b_80751.html

"By historical standards -- or any other -- the Democrats have an excellent set of presidential candidates from which to choose this season, and I look forward to campaigning enthusiastically and without reservation for our nominee. But this does not mean that we should be suppressing the discussion of differences, and it is in this framework that I think it is important to express my discomfort with a major theme of Senator Obama's campaign."



I am referring to his denigration of "the Washington battles of the 1990's" and, usually implicitly but sometimes explicitly, of those who fought them. My unease is compounded by the very explicit note of generational politics in his approach. I should note that I cannot be accused of self interest in taking exception to those who lament the baneful influence of baby boomers on our current politics, having myself been born well before the boom. Indeed, being much too young to claim membership in the greatest generation and even being a couple of years short of being a depression baby, I am reconciled to being part of a fairly large birth cohort that goes undesignated in our pop sociology. But since I do not have much intellectual respect for generational politics, I can live with this chronological anomie. I say that because generational politics presumes that I should have a different set of political values today than I had in the sixties when I began my political activity. But I cannot think of a cause that I cared deeply about then that I felt it appropriate to abandon as I aged, nor an important issue in which I had no interest then, but which now gets my attention.

"do take pretty strong exception to Senator Obama's evenhanded denunciation of "the same bitter partisanship" of the nineties. It is true that American politics became much more partisan in the nineties, but that was primarily the result of the successful right wing takeover of the Republican Party, embodied at the time--he has since become a little more moderate for some tactical purpose--by Newt Gingrich. Again I do not think those of us who fought back against Gingrich's poisoning of the atmosphere should apologize for that. If anything, the apologies should come from those who were too slow to respond. It was Gingrich and his right wing allies who decided to inject a much harsher note of partisanship by explicitly rejecting the notion that the Democrats were honorable people with whom they disagreed, and instead decided, as Gingrich's own printed and taped materials argued, to portray us as treasonous, corrupt, immoral and otherwise vile. And when Gingrich was forced by his own flaws to step aside,"



This is one of the main reason's why I am skeptical of Barack Obama.

[Jane Austin]

1. His family is truly brilliant.

He and his sister, Anne Lewis, are both very articulate defenders of Hillary Clinton.

[Auntie Bush]

8. Ann Lewis is Barney Franks SISTER?

I had no idea. How the hell did I miss that little fact? Is that widely known? :shrug: Thanks for the information.

[Jane Austin]

12. I learned it several years ago

to my great surprise!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. Her Former Husband Was Gerald Lewis (D)

He was the state Comptroller for FL back in the eighties...

[THUNDER HANDS]

2. hey, it's not John Edwards saying 'we have to rise above this'

and I say that with all due respect to Edwards. What I mean by that is, you can't have someone who doesn't look like they rise above it all saying that we have to rise above it all. Whatever Obama has, he has some inate quality about him that makes him look like he's above partisan politics - even though he's just as partisan as everyone else. It takes someone with that force of personality to accomplish what he's talking about.

In the 90s, the Democrats couldn't stop the rightwing attack machine because they didn't have anybody who looked like they stood above it. It's one thing to stand in the treches and sling mud back and forth at eachother - it's another thing to have your opponent sling mud at your face and end up only reaching your shoe.

I think Obama can be the guy who can do that - raise politics above the mud trenches. It won't be easy, but you can't start radical change without a charismatic leader, and that's been proven throughout history.

[MannyGoldstein]

3. My Congressman Can Be A Nudge Sometimes

(At a party a year or so ago, he overheard a friend of mine mention impeachment - Barney went nuts, yelling at my friend that impeachment was the worst possible thing that Democrats could do. Of course, a year before he was calling for impeachment hearings himself...)

I think it's reasonable to bring up the fighting in the 90s. It's true that one side was more at fault than the other, but the Democrats clearly were unable to do much about it. They lost elections by the bushel, and the Clintons pushed hard to the right to triangulate the voters in the middle.

I'd rather elect people who *might* be able to deal with the Republicans, than to elect people with a known track record of getting whomped by the Republicans. I guess Barney has a big heart and wants to give the Clintons another chance to succeed. I don't.

[Cameron27]

4. I don't like Obama's take on this either,

do you have a link to the story?

[ruggerson]

5. This is one of the main reasons I'm supporting Hillary

I'm not fond of candidates who talk about unity out of one side of their mouth and then try to foster a generational divide out of the other.

[AX10]

7. True. This is just one of the reasons that I have said that Obama...

is full of it when he says that he's the candidate of change. He is against divisiveness but is a divider too.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-barney-frank/refight-the-nineties_b_80751.html

[hedgehog]

6. There are people in this country who consider themselves apolitical -

they identify as independents, say things like "I vote for the man, not the party", etc. These people are totally turned off by the notion of fighting between parties ands are the targets of the so called "unity" third parties. It's my guess that if a candidate can attract these people, he or she would win in a land slide. Hillary represents a return to the constant sniping of the 90's. If Hillary gets the nomination, I think there is a good chance a third party will put up a candidate that will draw a lot of votes and tip the election to a Republican.

[jackson_dem]

9. Bill Clinton is right

Obama has gotten a free ride from the media and one of the things they have given him a pass on is the disconnect between his rhetoric of unity and his divisiveness about Baby Boomers, the 90's, progressives, and homosexuals. A uniter who is a divider. Where have we seen this before?

[AX10]

11. Bush.

I'll say it. That is one of the big things that would make it hard for me to vote for him.
I may vote for him should he get the nomination. I will not give $$$ or work for him though.
He says one thing and then does a 180%. I don't like Obama because he is putting us in the same boat as
Gingrich and Company. We were being beaten up and didn't fight back and now he is telling us that we are just as guilty as the right wing is. :wtf:

[jackson_dem]

15. This is a big part of why I didn't buy the Obama hype

[durrrty libby]

10. K for later

[Little Star]

13. Obama really has pissed off some of his co-workers it seems.

[Rageneau]

16. Damn Right, Barney!!! Bayonne is proud of you!

Barney Frank is among the best we've got. And he is 100% right about the battles of the 90s. They were thrust upon us by the wingnuts. To not resist them would have been to acquiesce to fascism. Thank God there were Dems willing to fight.

[AX10]

17. Right On!