My problem with Clinton is ideology..He helped create this mess.

[Armstead]

Bill Clinton is a great politician. He is miles ahead of anyone in the GOP.

But his time has passed. We need to shake off the shackles of Clintonism and the DLC,

During the 90's, many people warned that the course that Bill Clinton and the DLC were steering the economy would eventually be disasterous. Clinton bought into Church of the Holy Free Market and joined with the GOP in deregulation, privatization, economic consolidation, CONservative Globalization and the influence of special interests.

Clinton helped to marginalize real liberalism and progressive populism.

GW Bush and the GOP were able to put in the last nails in the coffin, but it wasd Clinton and the DLC who handed GW the nails.

He and the DLC Democrats tagged as "naive" and "too far left" anyone who warned that allowing Wall Street to dictate the terms, removing the justified definitions and limitations of financial institutions, allowing mergers that created monolithic companies that were "too big to fail" and looking the other way while income gaps grew, jobs were outsourced and the middle class was weakened.

Now the chickens have come home to roost. I say "Thanks Bill. Now tend to your foundation and let the Democrats get back to being Democrats."

[blm]

1. Deep-sixing BCCI's serious matters of treason and banking corruption should've given us all pause

He showed then and there that he would always side with the secrecy and privilege of Poppy Bush, Jackson Stephens and their powerful cronies over the right of the American citizen to open and accountable government.

[avaistheone1]

88. I forgot about BCCI. BCCI was really buried pretty deep.

From what I understand there were quite alot of skeletons there. I bet most of us would be stunned by the tales they could tell of BCCI.

[Captain Hilts]

2. A president is a function of his times and Congress to a certain extent...

FDR: In my second term I instigated a serious recession to assuage conservatives in Congress, I wouldn't support the anti-lynching bill in 1938, then, in 1939 I appointed Republicans to my cabinet!

[calmblueocean]

38. I think it's fair to say that Clinton was a man of his time

Bush has re-invigorated the progressive brand in much the same way as Reagan re-invigorated the conservative brand. Clinton's 'third-way' triangulation was probably the only way a Democrat was going to get elected to the White House in the 90s. Even so, he (and it has to be said, Al Gore) pushed a radical business-first agenda that helped set the table for the crumbling economic base we have today.

[Captain Hilts]

41. Sad to say, but progressives don't get elected to be president.

That's why we ended up with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. They're complete middle of the roaders.

The economy worked well under Clinton and he didn't stand in its way. That doesn't make it a "radical business-first agenda." Hell, he fought HARD for the family leave act. Business didn't want that. Congress refused to increase minimum wage and he was powerless to do anything about that.

[Enrique]

3. I agree, and I think it's happening

look at Al Gore for one example. He was a cofounder of the DLC, considered more conservative than Clinton, picked Joe Lieberman for VP. Now he's sounding like a progressive dem, and actually has come out in favor of single-payer health care. And he's not looked at as a far left wacko, but as a mainstream leader of the party.

[Captain Hilts]

14. Interesting observation Enrique! nt

[ShortnFiery]

17. Al Gore has changed and changed toward a more progressive message.

Bless him for that. :applause:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. Austan Goolsbee Who Is One Of Obama's Economic Advisors Is DLC

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254285&kaid=125&subid=162

And Senator Obama is also being advised by former Clinton Secretaries Of Treasury, Lawrence Summers, and Robert Rubin:


http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-18-econteams_N.htm


"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence"

-John Adams



Oh, I'm a DSB Democrat

[ShortnFiery]

13. That's the point, the DLC are represented but not all-inclusive of Obama's advisory comittee

Everyone can come to the table but it's not all for the "free market loving" DLCers goals.

[Lilith Velkor]

68. That's how I figured out all the "DLC booga booga booga" stuff here is just plain bullshit

All the purveyors of said booga-booga had no problem with a candidate with identical policy positions. "Progressives" my ass.

[Armstead]

69. I'm not happy about Obama's DLC influence but....

I do think his personal instincts are more progressive than Clinton.

I'm trying to be optimistic and see Obama as a transitional figure....Not as progressive as (I think) we truly need, but a bridge.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

75. Every American President

Every American president has been pro business including Andrew Jackson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the latter whom saved it from itself...


Some have tried to put a human face on it... Some have tried to work with it to make it more equitable...But none have tried to wrest away its privileged position in American society...

[RichGirl]

5. How is this helpful to Obama.

If you can't come up with a simple answer, then save the conversation for AFTER the election.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. It's Silly When Robert Rubin, Lawrence Summers, And Austan Goolsbee Are Advising Obama

Three classically trained market oriented economists; one of whom is DLC...

[ShortnFiery]

18. ONE of whom is DLC, focus on *ONE* and not all. That's the ticket - inclusion not a stranglehold of

free market DLCers.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. FAIL-Your Obscurantist Style Of Argument Notwithstanding

Saying because Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers aren't DLC because they aren't formal memebers but embrace their policies is a distinction without a difference...


The four main people who have Senator Obama's ear on economics are a DLC member, two former Clinton Treasury Secretarys, one of whom is a former Wall Street banker, and the Fed Chief who brought interest rates to eighteen percent to stave off inflation at the cost of higher unemployment which is a Republican goal...





"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."


-John Adams

[ShortnFiery]

36. Oh professor, "Obscurantist"? No, but I will add this word to my 14 year olds ACT/SAT word list.

Yes, Obama has DLCer's advising him BUT, unlike a third Clintonian Executive Branch, Obama's Executive Branch will not be chock full of that soon to be OBSOLETE wing of the Democratic Party. :shrug:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

79. Res Ipsa Loquitur

Question

Who is Senator Obama's chief economic adviser?


Answer

Austan Goolsbee

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=616587835


Question

And who is Austan Goolsbee?

Answer

Austan Goolsbee is a senior economist for PPI and the Democratic Leadership Council.

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254285&kaid=125&subid=162


"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

-John Adams


I could give a rip about the DLC or the Blue Dogs or the PDA but it's funny to see people tie themselves into intellectual knots denying the influence of the DLC and Clintonistas, especially on the economy, on Senator Obama...The DLC is just a trojan horse to beat Hillary and Bill Clinton over the head with... The people engaged in this practice deserve a ten for mental gymnastics...

[Captain Hilts]

7. Don't believe the RNC or the MSRNC! It's ALL Clinton's fault!

Believe the worst about Bubba!

[Armstead]

71. Not all Clinton's fault -- But his [policies had a hand in it

Much of the crap that is now boiling to the surface was added to the withches brew during the 90's.

[ShortnFiery]

8. Adrian Kuzminski addresses the emergence of a right wing duopoly in "The Death of American Politics"

http://www.counterpunch.org/kuzminski08182004.html

The crisis of Vietnam shattered the coalition of neo-imperialist cold warriorers and social activists which had sustained the Democratic Party for a generation after World War II. In the McGovern campaign in 1972, the social activist wing seized control of a shrunken party while the neo-imperialists and cold warriorers began their drift to the right. McGovern's humiliating defeat confirmed the new minority status of the Democratic Party.

The political vacuum was filled by a reenergized conservative movement focusing on patriotism,'free enterprise,' and a militarily reassertive America. Shocked by the Vietnam defeat and the 'excesses' of the counterculture of the 60s, wealthy political conservatives like Richard Mellon Scaife, Lynde and Harry Bradley, John Olin, Joseph Coors, David and Charles Koch and others, funded a series of foundations, publications, university chairs, and media outlets to promote the free enterprise system, corporate power, and renewed American leadership in the world. (Cf. "Tentacles of Rage: The Republican Propaganda Mill, a Brief History," by Lewis H. Lapham, HARPERS, September, 2004)

As a result, the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, the Cato Institute, the Howard Pew Freedom Trust, the Business Roundtable, and later, entities like Fox News and conservative talk radio, succeeded in redefining political discourse in America in favor of the conservative agenda. The alliance with religious fundamentalists -- who were left out of the progressive New Deal-Great Society coalition -- beginning with Jerry Falwell and Pat Robinson, ensured a grassroots base for corporate power and an uncritical sympathy for right-wing Israeli governments. At the same time, southern voters (many of then fundamentalists) alienated by the civil rights commitments of the old Democratic party, moved into the Republican Party, a development heralded by Nixon's southern electoral strategy.

The minority status of the Democratic Party was disguised by its lingering control of Congress (until 1994) and the fluke election (thanks to Ross Perot) of Bill Clinton. Social activists and progressives of various sorts remained the party's base, even as party leaders, embodied in the Democratic Leadership Council, sensing the limited electoral appeal of the progressive agenda, steadily drifted to the right. Their failure to rearticulate a compelling vision of social justice and democracy sealed the party's fate. Conservative attacks on 'big government,' and their promotion of 'deregulation' not only of much of the economy but of campaign financing, solidified the corruption of the political process. As early as the Carter years, conservatives captured the leadership of the Democratic as well as the Republican parties, and created the two-party, right-wing duopoly which now confronts us.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. Too Much Cut And Paste But Would You Please Answer Question Nine

~

[ShortnFiery]

15. I took the segment directly from the article. Would you please pay attention? eom

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. Armstead-I Have A Question For You

If you think Clintonomics are the reason we are in this economic mess ,why is Senator Obama relying on its architects to get us out of it?

[vaberella]

58. You've misunderstood.

Clintonomics as you so put it was not made up of ONLY one policy as the remittance of this paticular Act. It's a series of policies all together that worked together. Again during Clinton's time the process of deregulation was far from seriously instigated. It wasn't until later with the aid of this loophole do we see Bush 2 & Co. steal their way into the White House leading to this situation. Of course it would be wrong to think hypothetically, but let's say Gore then or Obama Now would suceed Clinton...that act would mean nothing in regards to everything else that would have been implemented.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

81. My Point Is The Same "Economists" Who Served Clinton Are Now Advising Obama

And to criticize them for the current economic unpleasantness while not criticizing Senator Obama for relying on them to fix it strikes me as intellectually dishonest...I don't even have to address whether their policies were good or not...

[Armstead]

72. I wish Obama weren't -- but times are at least pushing them in a ....

more progressive -- or at least liberal -- direction.

I wish Obama's team had more actual progressives in it for balance.

[KingFlorez]

11. So George Bush is absolved of any responsibility?

I find your argument ludicrous, it's contrived from nonsense.

[vaberella]

59. I don't think it's contrived nonsense but it needs to be clearer stated.

Bush & Co are far from absolved. But I have to wonder, and this is completely hypothetical and questionable, that if a series of Dems suceeded Clinton we would not be in this mess in the first place. This was just a loophole in a rather strong policy set forth. Of course we can also say that the Repubs/GOP whenever they came into power wouldn't care about policy.

Obviously Bush didn't, as Dennis Kucinch, stated in his proposal to the WH impeachment of Bush. Bush broke laws, acts, and anything else to get what he wanted. He lied and cheated to do it as well and got away with it. So this act here or not would have been broken.

[Armstead]

73. Obviously not -- But Bush overcooked the bad ingredients he was given

[Zuiderelle]

12. Well, isn't THIS ridiculous!? Let's just blame Clinton... then no one really gets blamed.

What a fucking great idea. :eyes:

[ShortnFiery]

16. The Clintonian DLC, moved our beloved party way too far to the free market right during the 1990s.

Yes, the DLC can be representative in Obama's cabinet but they will NOT hold the reins as they did during Bill's Presidency. The era of DLC control of OUR Democratic Party is coming to an end.

BALANCE is the key.

[harun]

51. The DLC and the Blue Dogs need to move left to where they belong (n/t)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

82. I'm A DSB Democrat

But given the fact the DLC and the Blue Dogs control over ONE HUNDRED House seats the Democratic party needs them more than they need the Democratic party...

[depakid]

19. Rational people who deal with policy- and who lived through the Clinton era

know damn well how he enabled and legitimized far right ideas and signed off on them.

Whether it was market deregulation- or media consolidation- or any of a host of other matters (like say, allowing pharmaceutical companies to disease monger on TV)- the chickens were going to come home to roost, if certain elements of the party abandoned traditional Democratic values.

And now they have.

The blame, so to speak- lies with stupid right wing policies- and with those who embraced them- regardless of whether what letter is behind their names.

[Zuiderelle]

20. Well, I'm a rational person who lived through the Clinton-era

And I saw a lot of movement to the middle, but I did not see a wholesale abandonment of democratic values. I saw a more centrist government than we've had since, and blaming Clinton for the mistakes of the Bush administration (and the prior Bush and Reagan administrations, which I also lived through, rationally) is just idiotic.

[ShortnFiery]

21. centrist values - abandoning of social justice causes toward free markets and deregulation.

Also reflected in your idol, Nancy Pelosi. exclaiming, "Impeachment is off of the table!" You can't get any more gawd awful centrist (GOP enabling?) than Pelosi's infamous forgoing decree. :thumbsdown:

[Zuiderelle]

25. Yeah, you're apparently one of the impeachment proponents. Nothing to say to you then.

Unfortunately for you, our country is made up of a hell of a lot of people in the middle. We all have to compromise, just as Obama has compromised on my civil equality, same as Bill did. I accept it, knowing that it will continue to be a fight after he's elected... which I intend to participate in. But to have a pipe-dream that someday we'll have a Kucinich-like progressive as president of this country is just idiotic. Will never happen.

[depakid]

31. So what is the so called "middle?"

half a universal health care?

Half an economic meltdown?

:shrug:

[ShortnFiery]

34. No pipe dreams here. George W. Bush should have been Impeached - That's A FACT!

Just like Charlie Rangel (a man I genuinely respect) should promptly step down from his Committee Chairmanship now that he's admitted to be sloppy on his taxes, Bill Clinton should have RESIGNED as soon as they analyzed the DNA on Monica's blue dress.

Whether it be small or large moral/legal lapse, we have EVERY RIGHT to expect MORE from our leaders and demand that they *accept responsiblity* when they transgress.

Any representative who ENABLES his/her fellow lawmakers to pass "under the radar" are as guilty.

It's time to have some TRUE LEADERS in our government: We should demand nothing less.

[Zuiderelle]

37. Yeah, 3 or 4 years ago... or even 2 years ago... but to continue NOW to gripe about it?

Stupid.

[depakid]

23. "a whole lot of movement to the middle?"

"centrist?"

Maybe you can be a little more specific and tell us what you mean by that.

[Zuiderelle]

26. Nah, not worth it. I have to go work now instead of talking in this echo chamber of Clinton hate.

[Zenmaster]

47. A move to the middle, from the left, is a move to the right.

You can't get to the middle, from the left, without moving to the right.

[Zuiderelle]

80. LOL! Right, moving away from Reagan and Bush toward the middle was moving right.

Yeah... ok.

[Midlodemocrat]

39. Agreed totally. This Monday morning quarterbacking is getting tiresome.

[Armstead]

74. Clinton should have done more to roll back Reaganism -- instead he advanced it

Bill Clinton had a golden opportunity to move the spectrum towards the true middle. Instead he let the right-wing, pro-corporate tide continue to surge with very little challenge.

[blm]

90. Not only that, but deep-sixing BCCI, IranContra, CIA drugrunning assured the American public would

never know the extent of criminal operations conducted by Poppy Bush throughout that time and under Reagan's nose. So...instead of their legacies being permanently blackened and the thugs in jail, we have suffered through the Sainted image of Reagan being prepared for the history books and the coverups throughout the 90s also led directly to the emergence of Bush2, with a network more powerful than ever.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

22. No Need To Debate That

Nobody has directly answered my question and I don't include obscurantist answers as answers...

Sorry for shouting

1)IF CLINTONOMICS SUCK AND IS THE CAUSE OF OUR PROBLEMS WHY IS SENATOR OBAMA RELYING ON ITS ARCHITECTS,ROBERT RUBIN & LAWRENCE SUMMERS, TO GET US OUT OF THEM?

2) IF THE DLC SUCKS WHY IS ONE OF ITS MEMBERS, AUSTAN GOOLSBEE, ADVISING SENATOR OBAMA?



"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence"

-John Adams

[Lydia Leftcoast]

24. To answer your second question, perhaps that was a condition

for full party support? Perhaps the DLC threatened to cause trouble with Obama's nomination if he didn't agree to have one of their guys as an adviser.

We can never fully know what goes on behind the scenes.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

28. Maybe He's A Good Economist...And He's Been With Obama Since Obama Announced His Candidacy

I don't care what you call the cat as long as he catches the mouse...


I just see a paradox...

Some people here are blaming Clinton for the recent economic unpleasantness but are not criticizing Senator Obama for relying on the Clinton economic advisers who got us in said mess...


I don't even have to take a position on the validity of the charge to cite the flawed logic of those who are making it...

[depakid]

29. Obama spent some time with people from the Chicago school

and while I agree that's a confidence builder- and while I take a lot of shit from people for some of my criticisms of things like that- its also apparent that he's not an imbecile or an ideologue- which is what we're facing on the Republican side.

Obama is bright enough to figure out which sets of macroeconomic policies (and specific regulations) have been shown to work- and which have been shown to fail.

Like most other people around the world, I think not only is he the best choice we've got at the moment- but that he possess the kind of character to sort this complicated mess out, while keeping the public interest in mind.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. "Obama spent some time with people from the Chicago school "

The Chicago school of economics describes a neoclassical school of thought within the academic community of economists, with a strong focus around the faculty of University of Chicago, some of whom have constructed and popularized its principles.

The school emphasizes non-intervention from government and rejects regulation in laissez-faire free markets as inefficient. It is associated with neoclassical price theory and libertarianism and the rejection of Keynesianism in favor of monetarism until the 1980s, when it turned to rational expectations. The school has impacted the field of finance by the development of the efficient market hypothesis. In terms of methodology the stress is on "positive economics" – that is, empirically based studies using statistics to prove theory.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_school_(economics)

Freidrich Von Hayek, Milton Friedman, and George Schultz were professors there...

But that's neither here nor there...

My only point...

It's intellectually dishonest to criticize Clintonomics as the cause of the recent economic mess while not criticizing Senator Obama for relying on the architects of it to get us out of it...

[depakid]

33. A valid point

However, my bet is that unlike Clinton, Obama is wise enough to recognize failed economic thought.

(and it was proven to have been failed economic thought in the 1990's).

[Captain Hilts]

49. I love reading Hayek but the Chi School is where people go to learn to hate govt.

Between Hayek and Friedman, it's economic and busienss schools are very right wing.

And their law school gave us the herd of lawyers that pushed the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

70. Friedman And Hayek Are Great Reads

I still have my dog eared copy of "Free To Choose"...I compared the thoughts of Adam Smith and Milton Friedman for my graduate political theory class...


And they are geniuses, ten times smarter than DemocratSinceBirth...


But so are traditionally liberal economists like Nobel Prize Winners Paul Samuelson and Joseph Stiglitz...


And don't forget Lord Keynes...


I'm like Franklin Roosevelt...I'm willing to try anything and see what works....


P.S. If you ever get the chance read Charles Lindblom's "Politics And Markets"...

[Captain Hilts]

87. I think we should be dating...

I've not read Stiglitz, I'll confess.

But I LOVE Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom.
I love Hayek as well.
Lindblom is also a favorite. I'm looking at that bright orange cover on my shelf right now...
Keynes I read about employment and labor.
I prefer Engels to Marx because he has humor.
One of my FAVORITE that wins me the MOST arguments with conservatives is Adam Smith's THEORY OF MORAL SENTIMENTS.

FDR: I'll try anything!
ER: So long as it doesn't draw blood or leave marks - me too!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

89. I Read Free To Choose...It's A Great Polemic

It's the antidote to The Communist Manifesto...

Ideologues scare me with their theories in search of reality...I wonder what Milton Friedman would say about the bail out...

I read Samuelson's textbook for Macroeconomics 101 which I struggled in but not as much as Sarah Palin...Samuelson was a neo-Keynesian...He was also a great practical economist...


I also read a lot of Lester Thurrow and Michael Harrington in college and fancied myself a democratic socialist...Now I am not so quick to label myself...


Like I said I don't care what you call the cat as long as it catches the mouse...

[Captain Hilts]

52. And their law school supplied several lawyers that worked to impeach Clinton.

Has anyone asked Obama what he thinks of ChiLaw's alumni's role in the impeachment process. They made it possible.

[depakid]

30. dupe

[Captain Hilts]

40. Round goes to DemocratSinceBirth!!!!!!!!!!!! nt

[ShortnFiery]

42. And who made you "The Ref" sport?

;)

[Captain Hilts]

54. Someone while you were banned for trolling. nt

[ShortnFiery]

63. Shame on you, I didn't start this thread.

:(

[Armstead]

76. I support Obama, but I don't support his embrace of Rubin

Frankly you're falling into the same trap we fell into during the 90's. Becauase these guys are Democrats, we have to assume they have the answers.

Rubin and Summers helped to create and support the very conditions that are now melting down.

It's like asking for a match to fight a fire.

[jonnyblitz]

35. then it must comfort you to know that some of the key architects

of this MESS under CLinton are now on board with OBAMA. let the COGNITIVE DISSONANCE begin!!! :rofl:

[Captain Hilts]

43. And conservative opponents of gays inthe military and healthcare reform are consulting with Obama.

He's not a progressive. And that's why he'll win. Sad to say, but true.

It's how Clinton won and how Obama will win.

[ShortnFiery]

45. Obama, unlike Bill Clinton does not "live for the limelight" ... he truly cares.

Many people "fell hard" for Bill Clinton because he's so intelligent and a great communicator. However, I've always been wary of him and knew that Bill Clinton's primary motivation is to be "the center of attention." Obama, unlike Bill Clinton, is not wired to be "adored", in fact, Obama shines best when he encourages - guides those around him to achieve.

Obama is a true inspiration in troubled times whereas Bill Clinton was "very attractive" during an enconomic upswing.

Obama is not "label worthy" because I honestly believe that he listens to all sides and will ACT in the best interest of MIDDLE CLASS AMERICA.

[Captain Hilts]

57. People didn't "fall hard" for Obama "because he's a great communicator?"

Obama also wants everybody to like him. He shares this with Clinton. That's why he's using NRA language to discuss gun laws with hunters, anti-choice language to talk to anti-choice folks, supporting the embargo on Cuba while talking to conservative Floridians, flipping on FISA. He's every bit the chamelion - spelling - that Clinton was. It's something they share.

[ShortnFiery]

64. No, I don't think so. More so, with Obama, you truly feel that "team building" mantra

probably from his days as "a community organizer."

Sure, all politicians have an overblown ego, but I honestly SENSE that Obama cares, whereas, I was always leery of Bill Clinton. Perhaps it was all my bad experiences with the a**hole frat boys I had to tolerate in college - I always felt that Bill was not "personally invested" in the welfare of Middle Class People. :shrug:

[JuniperLea]

44. Hide Thread #7

[W_HAMILTON]

46. Running away from Clinton...

...is why we keep losing elections.

As I said in another thread, it seems we have a lot of Democrats around here that want to run from Clinton the same way the Republicans run from Bush. It's ridiculous. It's probably made even worse, because a shunned Clinton goes out and makes comments like he has lately, where it almost seems like he is supporting McCain more than Obama.

Do you think he would have made those sorts of comments on The View (and other places) if his wife were the Democratic nominee? Do you think he would have made those sorts of comments if he had been included more in the whole process, and was an active and willing member of the Obama campaign?

Why do we treat Clinton like the Republicans now treat Bush? If we could run Clinton again, we'd be smart to, because we'd win.

Running away from the most popular and successful Democratic president in a very long time (hell, my entire life) is silly. It's cutting off our nose to spite our face. All our nominees keep pushing Clinton aside, thinking they can win on their own......and where has that gotten us?

[ShortnFiery]

50. "The Clintons" are not the alpha and omega of democratic politics, they are the free market right

wing democrats that are quickly falling out of favor with the electorate.

[W_HAMILTON]

61. Then who is?

John Kerry? Al Gore? Maybe, but he now seems to be out of the realm of politics, at least in terms of running for office. Obama? And what happens if he loses? Is he going to slowly fade away from the national stage like Kerry, or is he going to keep at it, thinking that "next time is our time?"

I don't agree with everything Bill Clinton did while in office either, but he was successful. We can't even get one Democrat elected to the presidency, much less a two-term Democratic president. There's a reason why he was so successful. For our candidates (and some of my fellow Democrats) to run away from Clinton like the Republicans run away from Bush is astounding.

I know he makes some questionable decisions, but it's also a "questionable decision" to distance yourself from the most successful Democratic figure since, I don't know, Kennedy? Almost half a century? If we had such better options, why the hell haven't we been utilizing them? Why the hell haven't we been winning?

[ShortnFiery]

65. I'm sorry but it's becoming increasingly clear that "The Clinton Era" in the WH is over.

:shrug:

[W_HAMILTON]

67. It is over.

And a Republican era took its place.

That's the problem. Hey, if we can win without the Clintons, and win consistently, great.

But we haven't been winning. Even with the poor state of the nation right now, it's still a close race between Obama and McCain. That's unacceptable.

[Captain Hilts]

53. He left office with a 70% approval rating, yet people here buy into "Clinton fatigue," a right wing

fantasy.

[goodgd_yall]

48. I'm not going to heap much of the blame on Bill Clinton

He let policies that had been put into place by the almighty deregulator Reagan, true, but he wasn't the architect. He just didn't do much to stop it. He wouldn't have been able to do anything until he had a Democratic majority congress anyway. I would say, though, that Clinton represents that slice of the Democratic Pary who bought into the unfettered free market ideology. Whether they are/were true believers or just going along for political expediency is hard to say. I don't know enough about Clinton's musings on economic policy to know.

[MSU_Spartans]

55. Clinton is partly to blame

but such a small part, it's hardly worth mentioning. He signed the legislation allowing this sort of thing. But, if he were still President, he would've stopped it, amended it, or fixed it before it got this out of hand.

Bush let this get worse and worse, and only now is saying "Oh no, it's broken!" It's been broken for a while, now it's just blowing up.

[MSU_Spartans]

56. sorry, dupe

dupe, sorry.

[McCamy Taylor]

60. Armistead, I remember you from the primary. Clinton is about to campaign for Obama and here you are.

What is your game?

Anyone who does not say that the Republicans and Bush created the current crisis by enabling predatory lending (see Eliot Spitzer's editorial in the Washington Post this Valentine's Day) is a tool of the RNC and Karl Rove.

[AtomicKitten]

62. Three months in and he's "about to campaign for Obama?" One stop in Penn 3 weeks from now.

How does one quantify such generosity of spirit?

[Armstead]

78. Anyone who denies the role of Clintonomics in this mess is not payiong attention

Throughout the 90's, many progressives were warning about what would happen with the free-market fundamentalism that Clinton supported too much.

The Democratic Party is supposed to be the liberal check to the conservatives. When the Democrats abandoned that role in the 80's and 90's, they allowed the scales to tip way too far to the right.

That isn't RNC or Rove talking points. That's just basic progressive liberalism.

If we choose to ignore that, we'll continue to be stuck in the present morass, and it'll continue to get worse.

[No Elephants]

83. Three words. Glass Steagall Act.

[Catherine Vincent]

66. "My problem with Clinton is ..."

Everything. Admit it.

[Armstead]

77. Not everything....He's smart, a good politician and probably means well

But his embrace of right-wing free-market fundamentalism and his pro-corporate record while in office -- and his marginalization of liberalism -- is what helped to defang the Democratic Party and contributed to the mess we have today.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

84. Then Why, Pray Tell, Is Obama Relying On Clinton's Economic Advisors To Get Us Out Of It?

~

[Armstead]

85. please read my previous responses to your question

[DemocratSinceBirth]

86. I Did

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

-Albert Einstein


I'm not a DLC, PDA, or Blue Dog Democrat...I'm a Democrat...

I just see people here using the DLC as a trojan horse to beat the Clintons over the head with...That's a mixed metaphor but it works...