|
||
Convention Dispatch: Does It Always Have to Be About the Clintons?
Does it always - ALWAYS - have to be about the Clintons?
This is the question on Day 1 of the Democratic convention. About a week and a half ago, the Denver Post previewed the convention with a story about how the Clinton forces are attempting to make the first two days of this convention a celebration of the Clintons - and Clintonism. As one Clinton ally told the newspaper, "We want to make this all about her."
Now, on the first day of the Democratic convention, top Clinton aide Howard Wolfson has taken to the pages of The New Republic to publish a screed demanding Barack Obama use the convention to make amends with Bill Clinton. Wolfson writes:
"There is still work to do on the Bill Clinton front. He feels like the Obama campaign ran against and systematically dismissed his administration's accomplishments. And he feels like he was painted as a racist during the primary process."
As disgusting and disingenuous as this is, it is pretty predictable. The Clintons are doing everything they can to make this convention all about them - and to absolve themselves from the substantive criticism of both Clintonism and Bill Clinton's behavior on the campaign.
Yes, many of the Obama campaign's themes indict the Clinton record - and rightly so, because so much of the country has turned against Clintonism. In places like Wisconsin and Indiana, Obama turned the primary into a referendum on the Clinton-backed NAFTA-style trade policies that have decimated the heartland swing-states that will decide the 2008 election. According to polls by the Wall Street Journal, Fortune Magazine and CNN, those policies are now wildly unpopular - and Obama is capitalizing on the populist anger they have fostered.
No, Bill Clinton was not "painted as a racist" - he was a racist during the campaign. He famously downplayed Obama as a new Jesse Jackson - a not-so-subtle attempt to tie Obama to all the unfair and racially-charged animosity regularly directed at Jackson. The Clinton campaign told the Associated Press that Obama was "the black candidate." And perhaps worst of all, Bill Clinton claimed the Obama campaign "played the race card on me" - a clear attempt to stoke the usual anti-affirmative action backlashes that mark so many campaigns.
That Clinton's top surrogates are now saying Obama's major task is to appease Bill Clinton - rather than, say, win the election - shows just how egomaniacal the Clintons really are.
What Obama should respond with is a very simple directive: President Clinton, please exit stage Right.
For more Huffington Post coverage from the Democratic National Convention, visit our Politics @ the DNC page, our Democratic Convention Big News Page, and our HuffPost bloggers' Twitter feed, live from Denver.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Does it always have to be about the Clintons? As long as people like you write articles like this it will be.
Yes, my friend, it's ALWAYS about the Clintons! At least, as long as they're still alive. Only the grave will change that.
David, as at least one other commenter asked: Do all your articles have to be about the Clintons? I understand by now that you do not like them. That is your right. However, from your picture, I would guess that you really didn't have the experience of the Nixon-(Carter)-Reagan years. It seems to be currently fashionable to diss the DLC as "Republican-Lite", but that is about as accurate as Ralph Nader seeing no difference between Bush and Gore. The Clinton Administration was not a progressive paradise, but it was a hell of a lot better than what preceded and followed it.
Why should the Clintons have a significant role at the convention? Well, (1) Bill was the last Dem President, and the only twice-elected Dem President since FDR. I'd think that makes him kind of significant to the party. (2) Hillary got almost as many pledged delegates as Obama -- certainly the closest primary race in a long time. Why wouldn't it make sense for her to have a more prominent role than the typical primary loser? (3) Obama did campaign against Bill's record, politics, and personality. While this proved effective, it was -- for those of us of a certain age -- almost as divisive as Hillary's stupid "McCain and I are qualified" meme.
As to the recurring theme that the Clintons should just fade away because it's Obama's party now: It will be "Obama's party" when he WINS. It never became Dukakis's, or Gore's, or Kerry's party.
Your are right! There is a lot of sexism at play here; if a male opponent of Obama's had garnered 18+ million votes, he would probably be the VP candidate, not just a speaker on Tuesday night! Obama has yet to do much for the Democratic Party that has traction - only the general election will tell us that outcome.
The Clintons combined, have raised 10s of millions of dollars for the DNC and have supported numerous Democratic candidates for office over the years; President Clinton is just getting his due for all the work he has done on behalf of the DNC. Those that wish the Clinton to do a disappearing act are being shortsighted and well stupid. I will gladly take the 8 years of peace and prosperity that President Clinton provided; if Obama wins, he will be lucky to do half has good as Bill Clinton as he is not an experienced operator and has the Bush disaster to rectify. Be careful what you wish for. . .you just might get it!
Right on Rockerbabe! Not to mention that Hillary is just exactly like all the other women who for years have been out there in the work force - working their a.....s off, long hours, often three times the workload and not getting the same pay as men doing less and often having to raise the kids on top of it - including wash the dishes and cook - ALL to achieve that same OLD American Dream as the "white guys" who have always expected and felt ENTITLED to this kind of treatment and for centuries.
And HIllary is no exception to the SECOND RULE ! That same woman," who DOES NOT get the job is NOW expected to SUPPORT, teach, guide and otherwise work hard to make this unqualified guy look good (all for the sake of the company - of course) or just QUIT! NO, LITTLE HAS CHANGED!!!! And some of us just don't intend to get back on that old horse again without CHANGE. I won't vote for McCain - but I will not VOTE for Barack Obama until he addresses it and proves he IS qualified and knows how to do it himself - since that is his CLAIM and it was exactly that CLAIM that won him this primary!!! Was it false or REAL!?
Thanks Strangelet- This is exactly the way I feel about David and the Obama suppoters who feel they have to trash the Clintons in order to move on. The paradox is that they need our support to elect their candidate far more than we need them for anything. Pissing us off wil be unproductive in making this Barack's democratic party.
Obama should run as a Democrat. That means, he should recognize the great leaders of the Democratic party: Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, and Clinton, and compare their successes to the failures of Nixon, Reagan and the two Bushs. All of these Democrats gave us balanced budgets and left the people at least a little better off than when they entered office (even Carter who is better remembered for the stagflation at the end of his administration.) Clinton actually reduced the US debt and pushed the worst case breakout of Social Security back several years.
Obama doesn't have to run against these Democratic leaders the way McCain has to run against Bush because our guys have covered themselves in glory. Al Gore has followed his political defeat by winning an emmy, an oscar and the Nobel Peace Prize. Even Jesse Jackson, given that he is one of those Republicans particularly like to demonize, has moral authority.
You bet!! Bill Clinton has been the only successful Democrat in the last 50 years!!
- declining poverty
- Family Medical Leave Act
- rising real income
- budget surplus
- wildlife and environmental protection
Democrats set high standards, and failed Democrats like Johnson and Carter worked harder and did more for the country than the most successful Republican. Johnson introduced Medicare and a most successful Civil Rights program. Carter broke out of the Ford administrations stagflation and strengthened the dollar for subsequent Republican administrations.
the author is either really young, really naive, or really not clear about how elections work. if you want to win, you unify the factions of the party. you don't tell half the party to take a hike and call them morons. and while i am one of the clintonites who would never even think about voting for mccain, and while i am now a total obama supporter, i am completely disgusted by the kind of rhetoric this author spouts which is repeated ad naseum thru huffpo. i will not be surprised to see half the democratic party stay home in november if the tone of the conversation doesn't change. (and then you will blame the clintons instead of yourselves) if you keep insisting that half the party is stupid or racist or a follower of lady macbeth, how many of us do you think are going to respond well to that? you are playing right into the hands of republicans. if you think obama is capable of widespread racial healing and mr. understanding, then follow his lead. or lose.
Thank you David! I am so sick of this I could scream. All i want to hear about Hillry is how she is working to fix the problems. And, I wish the MSM would just knock it off.... fueling the fire the way they are.
Honestly, I am nervous about tonight. I hope that she proves my worst fears wrong tonight. I hope she nails McCane in no uncertain terms. I hope she slaughters the GOP for 8 years of disaster. And, I hope she praises Sen. O and inspires her supporters to get behind what is a truly winning ticket. My fear is that she will continue to be tepid and speak out of both sides of her mouth. I pray she proves me wrong.
I personally wish that O had gotten it his way. I'd have loved to have seen the outrage from half of the Dem party.
The left-wing of this party is driving away moderates by the droves.
That's funny. I'm a centrist, and I have no problem with Obama people. It's the PUMAs who want to put another Republican in the White House I have a problem with.
My thoughts exactly. I'm having a hard time understanding this. The campaign for the democratic nominee was a race and could only be won by one person. All the candidates know this. Why then does Clinton act like she has been wronged? Why must it be her or no-one else? All this unnecessary pandering to the Clintons. A waste of precious campaign time and just giving the Republicans ammunition for the campaign ads and thus causing a further waste of campaign time by having to refute the Republicans. Hillary and her supporters need to get over themselves and get on board or just shut up and go home. The mathematics are simple enough - only one candidate can win, if your choice does not win, then move on and vote for the winner. If they were true democrats there would be no talk about McCain and voting for him. It's obvious they only supported her because she was a woman and not because they are democrats. If you want to vote for McCain - go ahead, you will get the President you deserve. Very soon we will either bury you or your children killed in some senseless war.
well said.
I am trying to pinpoint the day when the Clintons dropped their facade and showed their true colors, their negative, lying, distorting, race-baiting, pandering colors. Now they've successfully poisoned the Dem party, sowing division while straining to appear detached from it, through their dead-end surrogates and sour-grapes PUMA morons.
In other words, they are doing the GOP's work for them. Why hasn't Clinton come out and said to her idiot PUMA followers:
"Stop it, I appreciate the support but you are doing more harm than good, I lost and you need to get behind the nominee."
That's the problem, she's still talking about getting X amount of votes and blah blah blah, feeding the PUMA mentality. This is no accident. The PUMAs are useful in keeping Obama off balance, which is why HRC wants the convention roll call for her name. Hoping McCain wins, she has already said she'll run again, she's thinking 2012.
Disgusting.
So agree with you. Why can't WE (the public) be the center of attention - what we want, where we're going, what we can give to the country - rather than the endless Clinton demands for the spotlight on them? It's really become nauseating. And you're right, HRC should have done more, much more, than she has to date to stitch up the huge tear in the Dem party she created by praising McCain over her Democratic running "mate." That was a first in low-blow primary tactics, and hopefully will never be repeated. Look at the damage it has caused.
To say the Clintons should just bow out of the Democratic party is pure stupidity!!!!
In 1992, Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton was elected the 42nd President of the United States. President Clinton ran on the promise of a New Covenant for America's forgotten working families. After twelve years of Republican presidents, America faced record budget deficits, high unemployment, and increasing crime. President Clinton's policies put people first and resulted in the longest period of economic expansion in peacetime history. The Deficit Reduction Act of 1993 — passed by both the House and Senate without a single Republican vote — put America on the road to fiscal responsibility and led to the end of perennial budget deficits. Having inherited a $290 billion deficit in 1992, President Clinton's last budget was over $200 billion in surplus. The Clinton/Gore Administration was responsible for reducing unemployment to its lowest level in decades and reducing crime to its lowest levels in a generation.
In 1996, President Clinton became the first Democratic president reelected since Roosevelt in 1936. In 1998, Democrats became the first party controlling the White House to gain seats in Congress during the sixth year of a president's term since 1822.
READ THAT LAST LINE AGAIN!!! Then tell me that the Clinton's have no place in this year's convention.
Bill Clinton has too big of an ego. Bill can't seem to get off the stage.
Maybe someone should tell Bill Clinton to keep his mouth shut.
Anyway, Obama and Biden have my vote.
OBAMA / BIDEN 08
McCain's web election site has a plea for all right thinking American patriots to do the right thing and in a bipartison surge of unity contribute, support, and work to elect McCain. For a steadfast Clinton supporter, this might be considered a toxic purge leaving the country feeble and ready for Nurse Hillary.
I'm angry with Hillary Rodham Clinton, too! I wish she'd tell them ALL (Democratic Party) to stuff it and run as an independant in THIS ELECTION! Instead she's eating crow and humiliating herself by supporting a candidate who does not appreciate her AND most of his fans irrationally HATE her. How can she be apart of the Democratic Party? The first night of the convention was a DUD!
Obama supporters act like the whole darned world voted for him.
No. We don't hate Hillary.
We're not crazy about people who scream at us in CAP LOCKS that we're haters. We're not thrilled with so-called Democrats who threaten to put someone in the White House who will overturn Roe v Wade and wage perpetual war until we're all dead or broke. We could live without being blackmailed by narcissists who care only about nursing their own manufactured grievances.
You know who we mean, don't you?
The whole damn world didn't vote for him... but, enough voters to nominate him DID! There is no reason to act like someone wronged her. All I'm asking is that she stop assisting McCane, at least. I want her to suspend her 2012 campaign, if that is ok w/ you.
I think this might be some of that post-rational "thought" Rachel Maddow was talking about last night.
Rachel Maddow sucks! She adds nothing to the Obama lovefest at MSNBC. Not that there is much more to add to Chris Matthews blathering and Keith's inane phony outrage on his special comments.
IF - IF Rachel Maddow said this and she said it with a dismissive and derogatory tone that it seems you may have in mind - then she is not respecting the women and the arduous work of the women who have gone before her AND who have made it possible for RACHEL MADDOW to be in that position she is today! She did not just WALTZ into it on her own! MANY WOMEN went before her and fought for themselves and for women like her. Many women who will NOW never realize what Rachel Maddow is now experiencing! I cergainly hope she respects and has that understanding. There's nothing irrational about those of us who feel this way! There IS something irrational about NOT listening to our voices, acknowledging it and DOING something about it!
Now I'm off to LISTEN to this extraordinary woman, Hillary Rodham Clinton and what she has to say to EVERYONE tonight at this convention!
Let's all agree that there's only so much energy in the universe and from this moment on those of us who really want to see the White House cleared, fumigated and then occupied by President Obama will devote whatever energy we've been allocated to that end; we'll praise Obama, castigate McCain and, when it comes to the Clintons, we'll zip it until Wednesday, November 5.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
