The Era of Bill Clinton Is Over

"While Bill Clinton said that the era of big government is over, I believe we must enter a new era for the Democratic Party—not one where we join Republicans and aim simply to limit the damage they inflict on working families. … I call now for a new era, in which we rewrite our Social Contract. We need to provide certain basic guarantees to all those who are working hard to fulfill the promise of America."

So declares Howard Dean in a speech today outlining his governing philosophy. It's a perfect homage to the man he belittles: an embrace disguised as a repudiation.

Everyone remembers Clinton's 1996 proclamation that "the era of big government is over." What everyone forgets are the words that followed: "But we cannot go back to the time when our citizens were left to fend for themselves. Instead, we must go forward as one America, one nation working together to meet the challenges we face together." In other words, big government wasn't really over. Clinton was bashing "big government" so that his audience—congressional Republicans and the moderate voters who had put them in power—wouldn't think of his programs as big government.

Dean is doing the same thing. When he claims to stand for a "new era" different from Clinton's, he isn't really ditching Clinton's agenda. He's just bashing Clinton so that his audience—liberals, angry Democrats, and disgusted nonvoters—won't think of his agenda as Clintonism.


http://slate.msn.com/id/2092895/

He's bad for the digestion.

Slate has become a monster--and that's all right, but sad.
When the life has been choked out of it, it will die an early and unnatural death.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I held my nose and voted for Billy twice. But, it's long past time that we stop the drift to the right that he started.

Sorry... couldn't resist.

Damn if that Kurdish news wasn't timely though :)

"The campaign also said Dean had supported Clinton's presidential agenda, fought for the Clinton health-care program that was soundly defeated, and that Dean had already declared that if elected, he would ask Clinton to be his Middle East envoy. The campaign distributed on-the-record statements Dean had made lauding Clinton, reaching back to 1998 and also offered three more recent examples, and three recent statements Clinton made speaking well of Dean."http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-dems20dec20,1,5870676.story?coll=la-home-politics

also:

Dean on Damage-Control Mission
By JODI WILGOREN
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/20/politics/campaigns/20DEAN.html?ex=1072501200&en=73b3d4a80d5f0e84&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
people who actually wrote the thing, took the fall for HD:

On Friday, Jeremy Ben-Ami, a deputy policy director in Mr. Clinton's first term, called former colleagues to say that he had written those lines for Dr. Dean and that they had been misinterpreted.

"It's not intended in any way to pick a fight with the Clinton legacy," said Mr. Ben-Ami, whose former boss, Bruce Reed, had called the speech "a cheap shot." "It is intended to pick a fight with the Washington Democrats in power.
****

...larger from a budget standpoint than anytime during the Clinton era? And yet, they have cut billions from the money that used to go to each individual state to supplement social and educational programs.

This has created even larger tax burdens on people at the state and local levels just to maintain the status quo. Those states where the people have rejected additional taxes are now cutting educational and social programs to the bone, if not killing them forever.

I think I've seen this movie before.

It does the party no damn good if he plays the party base so well that he wins the nomination only to get trounced in the general election. By bashing Clinton's economic policies, he's just taken away the biggest reason why people outside the party base would vote for a democrat.

If Bush wins in 2004, you bet the era of Clinton will be over. And despite all the best-constructed fantasies of the Greens and the Dean-nihilists (not all of 'em, but a sizeable lot who think that "cleaning house" is more important than putting out the fire), a Bush victory would validate his policies. That means higher deficits, more war, and a radicalized judiciary.

Oh, yeah, if Dean can't reassure the people who aren't too hot about democrats but voted for Clinton, then we'll get a new social contract Dean never dreamed of.

According to the whole 40-20-40 rules, you can win with the base alone. It would have to be one HELL of a turnout by the base. That said, it's quite possible, though.

I love this: "Oh, yeah, if Dean can't reassure the people who aren't too hot about democrats but voted for Clinton, then we'll get a new social contract Dean never dreamed of."

OK, this blather has had its 15 minutes of fame, now, everybody go back to important things.

I do. This dependent crap is just that-CRAP!

nt

of our lifetime.

Great strategy :eyes:

I remember when Joe Biden was running for president and had that Neil Kinnock plagiarism episode. Then yesterday Rush had a nice time playing a quote comparison game between the two (i suppose Rush must read Saletan - which is a pretty disturbing thought)

If Dean is the nominee, I'm sure this episode is one that we'll be hearing from again.