Are Democrats Determined to Become What They Most Despised About Bush?

I don't get it. Why do Democratic leaders need to use the term "un-American" to characterize their political opponents in an op-ed about health care?

Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American. Drowning out the facts is how we failed at this task for decades.

Un-American?

Yes, insurance companies and well-funded conservative groups are bankrolling protests at town halls. Yes, these town hall disrupters are intentionally hindering reasoned debate. And yes, some of the anti-Obama rhetoric has a race-based component that is beyond despicable.

But throwing around the term "un-American" in the pages of a major paper? Do we really need to use the kind of language that Bush's supporters hurled at Iraq war protesters?

Of course we don't. It's wrong.

And importantly for the health care debate, it's politically tone deaf. [Media Matters is already documenting how the term is being used by the right to discredit Pelosi and Hoyer's argument.]

This is part of an endemic problem, namely, the inexplicable adoption by Democrats of Bush-era policies and political tactics.

It begins with the White House's precedent-setting reaffirmation of Bush's policies on secrecy, detainee treatment, civil liberties, etc, encapsulated in this Glenn Greenwald post:

What is, in my view, most noteworthy about all of this is how it gives the lie to the collective national claim that we learned our lesson and are now regretful about the Bush/Cheney approach to Terrorism. Republicans are right about the fact that while it was Bush officials who led the way in implementing these radical and lawless policies, most of the country's institutions -- particularly the Democratic Party leadership and the media -- acquiesced to it, endorsed it, and enabled it. And they still do.

It's manifested in the gleeful mockery of political opponents, the kind of viciousness that is entirely unnecessary for the party in power and that was one of the worst traits of Bush's supporters when Democrats were in the wilderness.

It continues with the utterly deplorable silence on the part of most Democratic leaders as unimaginably wealthy bankers rake in billions in bonuses on the backs of American taxpayers.

Democrats: wasn't the whole point of regaining power to undo the worst of Bush's excesses? Wasn't Obama's election a total refutation of the Bush presidency? Didn't we want to lead by example?

It doesn't seem that way.

The fact that Democrats are floundering on health reform and Obama's poll numbers are dropping is no coincidence. It's a giant turn-off to voters for Democrats to have spent eight long years railing against Bush, then turning around and copying some of his worst traits.

I broke with my peers when I said that Sarah Palin should be treated like a human being no matter how wrong-headed her beliefs and no matter how incoherent her pronouncements. I did the same when I questioned the strategy of elevating Rush Limbaugh's status. And I did it when I criticized the president's Cairo speech for being tepid on women's rights.

But I did it because I have big expectations of my party, and those expectations don't involve wishy-washy policies in the name of 'bipartisanship', the trashing of opponents, strong-arm tactics, backroom deals, secret meetings with big-moneyed interests, one-upsmanship with Drudge and Limbaugh, the incessant courting of Beltway pundits, and the wholesale repudiation of Constitutional protections and principles in the name of national security.

What I want my party to do is to lay out solid goals based on core progressive values; govern with confidence but not overconfidence; confront opponents with strength but also with decency; make fairness and justice indomitable pillars of policy.

Sure it's idealistic. But as I've said repeatedly: it's good politics, too.

Follow Peter Daou on Twitter: www.twitter.com/peterdaou

Comments

[UKOH]

Like so many you missed the subtle but very important distinction. It was not the people but THE ACTIONS THEY WERE TAKING that Pelosi described as "un-American". i.e. It is not part of our American freedom loving values to shout down others and prevent them from making their point.

Patriotic, very "American" people can still indulge in "un-American" actions.

That having been said I agree with almost everything you write in this article. I strongly agree that we should leave the term "un-American" to the maniac right. Staying above the fray will help us far more than getting into a slanging match.

The only thing I disagree with you about is Obama's Cairo speech. Look I agree completely about the need to raise the women's rights in the Islamic world. However I have lived in an Islamic country in the middle East for a number of years. Had Obama raised women's rights all the rest of the great speech would have been lost; that would have been the entire focus of the region. Also, the Middle East is very proud of its culture and its traditions. Talking about women's rights would have been seen as meddling in matters that do not concern the American president. Even those muslims in favor of urgent reform would have been against the perceived interference.

[glockman]

"This is part of an endemic problem, namely, the inexplicable adoption by Democrats of Bush-era policies and political tactics"

Actually, it's easily explicable: the democrats are the same as the republicans. ALL politicians are self serving people, concerned only with retaining their power.

[simplesense]

As an independent, I see the abject hypocrisy of partisans on both sides - and it makes me sick. People simply follow 'their party' like the good little kool-aid drinkers they are, and come against anyone who dares to disagree with the party line with absolute vitriol. As long as the leader has the right letter after their name, they must be good, right? They immerse themselves completely in the propaganda of their choosing, eating it up like dogs, while decrying the 'propaganda' coming from the other side. All the while, the dear leaders in both parties set fire to the constitution in front of their eyes. Day after day the leaders spit on them, call them names, laugh at their ignorance and ignore their primary job. Yet year after year the masses of partisans keep electing vainglorious buffoons cut of the same cloth.

It is high time everyone realizes that BOTH parties have let us down. They do not listen to us, nor do they care what we think. As soon as they are elected, and probably even before, they think of us as kids, at best. Someone to talk down to, patronize, keep the truth from and manipulate for personal gain. With each passing administration, the line is pushed a little further. At what point do the people wake up and see how far indeed that line has come?

Let's elect some Independents in 2010!

[Kazuhiro Shino]

I can't get this distruption issue. Why security personal dismiss all those who are intending to disrupt by malicious purpose. Just put sign in entrance" Anyone who interrupt the meeting by uncivilized manner who would be eliminated from the room" This is systematic violent act nothing to do with first amendment right.

[johnashman]

Thank you! You catch more independents with honey than vinegar.

If the name calling and 'we won, deal with it' attitude went away, we could have a discussion about how to solve problems with everyone involved and onboard.

[TruthJusticeForAll]

McFlip-Flop=Shrub in oh so many ways.

[lightningbolt]

The fact that Obama's policies are not much different than Bush's means that it is not the democrats and republicans who are making the decisions for our government. It is the corporate campaign donors who are governing us, and they will simply give money to whatever party is in power. Therefore, the same policies are carried out no matter what party is in "power".

[HumeSkeptic]

Tell us which of these Obama actions would have taken place under Bush:
Stem cell order reversed.
SCHIP passed and signed into law
Ledbetter bill passed and signed into law.
Major Green energy initiatives started.
EPA rules revised to address Climate Change.
Executive order signed to protect large areas from drilling.
Car emission standards revised.
National Science Foundation funding boosted.

Stimuls bill passed, and already helping revive the economy.
Finacial system reform plan implemented.
Regulations on the way.

Gitmo closing ordered.
T0rture banned.
Iraq troop withdrawal ordered.
Afgahnistan approach revised.

Direct negotiations with Iran on the way.
Negotiations with Syria in progress.
Disarmament talks with Russia re-started.
Travel restrictions lifted and normalization of relations with Cuba on the table.

Energy/Climate Change legislation passed the House, soon to be passed by Senate.
Healthcare legislation on the way.

[CompashCat]

How come this stuff never makes the Big News cycle, hmmm? I'm as Left/Dem a they get and I still think our party is stupid when it comes to PR.

[elz]

Not bad for eight months in office. It will take every bit of 8 yrs and then some to ameliorate the damage the Bush gang inflicted on us and the world.

[fairwitness]

There is absolutely no basis in fact for your ideal expectations of the Democratic Party.

Obama misled us with HIS supposed ideals but subsequent adoption of most, if not all, of Bush's abuses and imperial attitudes (and plutocratic insider-ism). We were simply played by a very good politician who knew that the majority of the electorate was fully disgusted with Bush and his brand of Republicanism and that whomever expressed that the best would win. Consumate "politics-­as-usual", where they promise something new and better and deliver more of the same--and the wheels keep spinning...

Where are those ideals of transparency, egalitarianism, pacification and populism now, hmmm?

The ruling class is corrupt almost without exception (in varying degrees, perhaps, but of the same usurious mentality); they crave and pursue power and wealth, whatever ideals they enter with are checked at the door.

We who buy their shiny promises are the rubes at the carnival--and it's an endless supply of coins we toss at the barkers.

[DocTwain]

The Centrist and Blue Dog Democrats have amply demonstrated that they are merely moderate Republicans.

There has been no accountability for Bush's violations of our laws and Constitution.
Geithner's banking bailout is indistinguishable from Paulson's--a massive plutocratic giveaway of taxpayer dollars to the banking cartel, with no real reform or accountability.
The Centrists betrayed the only real money-saving health care reform (single payer) even before negotiations began; they are turning health care reform into an opportunity to create corrupt market-gaming and inflated profits schemes for the drug and private health insurance cartels at the expense of taxpayers and consumers; they want to cripple any public option so that it is more expensive-­-deliberat­ely increasing the cost of health care for ordinary Americans in order to guarantee graft to the cartels.

The problem is plutocracy in America.

FDR would have told it like it is and name our enemies for what they are. He would fight them and their corrupt plutocratic schemes, instead of covering for them and guaranteeing their graft and extorted profits.

The GOP is in the minority. We don't need a single Republican vote. That means that Centrists and Blue Dog Democrats are no longer part of the problem--they are the whole problem. THEY are the enemy of American workers, they are the plutocrats and obstructionists who stand in the way of true reform. The biggest enemies of the American worker today include Baucus, Nelson, and Ross. Is OBAMA also among their number?

[krocklin]

FDR was more aware of the forces against him than Obama is. But his situation was even worse. Obama's may have to get to this stage.

[Truthahn]

Dems are politically inept. Right off they squandered their credibility on health care by promising to conduct the reform process transparently and on C-SPAN, then instead doing it all in smoke-filled backrooms with industry bigwigs. Obama certainly didn't help by sealing the White House visitor logs, then divulging them only after a lawsuit was filed by a civil liberties group. If Dems wanted to make the public cynical and paranoid, they couldn't have found a better way to do it than what they are now doing. You shouldn't create expectations of transparency unless you intend to deliver.

[antiintellectualosity]

So right. It would be good politics. It's was the best of Obama's recent campaign. So he knows how to do it. Informative, unapologetic policymaking, brushing away the opposition with a few facts, and a little "the public doesn't appreciate obstructionism" vibe is all I think is needed from progressive politicians in this historic climate.

[CactusTom]

What are the Democrats supposed to do, just sit on there hands and let the massive right-wing shill machine of the insurance industry push the gullible over a cliff, and take the national interest along with them. The fact is that Obama tries to combat these thugs with reason, while they on the other hand employee deadly emotional lies. Hardly fighting fire with fire. So your point itself is a giant distortion of reality, just to be polite about it.

Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh, the biggest special interest shill of all, not too long ago signed a 340 million dollar contract. Now where do you suppose that money ultimately comes from, a few random sponsors.? The Democrats don't have such funds to defend themselves from guys like Limbaugh. MSNBC is the only media organ that stands up to these loud mouth, fear mongers.

[Truthahn]

The right-wing shill machine hasn't been the Dems' biggest obstacle. It's been the beancounters of the CBO. The Dems' fiscal numbers don't add up, and the CBO has let the American people know that.

[robbie]

They have?

http://www.truthout.org/072809L

[GHO]

"This is part of an endemic problem, namely, the inexplicable adoption by Democrats of Bush-era policies and political tactics"

Not so inexplicable if you look at the larger picture. Republicans neither invented nor own copyright to hypocrisy and dirty politics. Both parties have used and will continue to use hypocritical, ugly rhetoric whenever it suits their needs - just like politicians have done for centuries. You fool only yourself if you choose to believe that Dem politicians are better people than Repub politicians.

The problem we have is the "Rep vs Dem" paradigm that we live with. Everything is the other guys' fault, not our guys' - thereby explaining the amazing paradox where we somehow all agree that Congress s*cks, but incumbents enjoy a 95+% re-election rate.

[glockman]

You know you can hardly get away with speaking the truth like this around here. Usually they just brand you a closet "rethug," or something similar.

[suzc]

Democrats have ALWAYS (well, the last 30-40 years) snatched defeat from the jaws of victory!!!!
They are the dumbest bunch of politicians I can imagine!
Of course they DO have to "herd the cats" in the big tent -- the one with everyone in it in America who is not white male upperclass. But still....
This is not the first time they have been handed a golden opportunity and have handed it right BACK to the Republicans -- who truly do NOT have America's best interests at heart!
Of course, the most powerful Dems don't seem to have America's interests at heart either.
So who cares.