Well, that didn’t take long:
Whether or not he deserves any credit – and he certainly deserves a lot of credit for some bad things – what I think has been lost is the fact that the latter half of the Clinton years were good times. Good times in a way that that hadn’t been experienced since the late 60s or so. I don’t just mean in terms of purely quantifiable things – though the numbers there are good – it was also the case that there was a real sense of optimism. America, we’re back, bitches! It wasn’t all a horror story in the previous couple decades, but “morning in America” ads aside, there was a feeling of stagnation.
Dems have plenty of reasons to be mad at Bill Clinton, but for those wondering why there’s fondness – it’s because the economy boomed and he ultimately kicked their asses.
I was a Democrat and ran for the Board of Ed on a Democratic ticket back when Clinton was president and I don’t have any reason to be angry. Yeah, yeah, I’ve heard all the reasons why people in Atrios’ clique think I *should* be mad at him and it’s not like I’m politically naive and don’t know what they’re talking about. Perhaps they overestimate their own self-importance and authority. Or it just might be the case that a good chunk of the Democratic base (more than half), analyzed the data with their own set of criteria and expectations, which are no less legitimate, and came to a different conclusion. And you’re never going to be able to convince us otherwise no matter how hard you try. We only end up resenting the people who seem determined to rewrite history to reflect their own cultural biases. They just frustrate our will, leave the Democratic party in a permanently broken state and make it easier for Republicans to win. I’m pretty sure that’s not what they want but they keep undermining their party with their futile attempts to make us change our minds. It’s like they can’t evolve until they’ve stamped out every bit of good feelings we have for the Clintons. They seem to be on a mission to delegitimize our perceptions. I don’t think this is a good use of their time or effort. It’s like an evangelical fundy spending 40 years trying to convert a non-believer. At some point, it becomes disrespectful and we have to disassociate ourselves from the zealots.
Except for the Gramm- Bliley bill, which passed thru Congress with a veto proof majority, I just don’t see Clinton’s terms as a string of bad things. Atrios’ little ditty sounds a lot like Reg and the People’s Front of Judea complaining about the Romans.
Whatever you think of Clinton, Obama can’t hold a candle to him. Not even close. I can’t see either Clinton compromising our civil liberties or turning their backs on the unemployed or soon to be homeless for even one year compared to Obama’s four. Clinton is a true politician and did Obama a huge favor last night that he didn’t deserve. Some of us don’t even recognize the Obama that Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren and Bill Clinton talked about last night. THAT Barack Obama is a fictional character and we all know it.
I hope Clinton got something out of it, but don’t hold your breath for Hillary in 2016. We were cheated out of that possibility by the people in Atrios’ tribe of Democrats. And he would have to be politically naive to believe that the powers that installed Obama over our objections will ever let someone like her run unless they are defeated and scrubbed from the party. It is my mission to deprive those people of power and that’s why I am voting third party this year.
But in any case, the proof is in the data, which Atrios readily admits to, as much as he doesn’t like it. People like Bill Clinton because he was a good president, a masterful politician and their lives improved while he was in office.
Alas, beautiful theories destroyed by ugly facts. Or, in this case, ugly theories destroyed by beautiful facts.
Filed under: General | Tagged: Atrios, Clinton, Democrats, Life of Brian |
The Confluence 
What a bunch of whining asshats. A hostile meda, spineless turncoat Democrats in congress and Bill still manages eight good years for America. Atrios should take his head out of his ass and take a good look at what Obama hasn’t accomplished with a fawning media and congressional majorities Bill could only dream of. These people make me sick.
You do have to wonder why Atrios isn’t seeing the situation in context. There is no comparison between Clinton and Obama. For one thing, Clinton is an actual Democrat. The jury is still out on Obama.
Eschaton used to be where I hung with my homies, until they ran me out on a rail for having cooties.
We LOVE cooties here. This is the place where it is safe to be unpopular. We take pride in it because we tend to be right.
🙂 {{Sweet Sue}}
Welcome to RD’s wretched hive of scum and villainy. 😈
Hell, I’ve been stealth-banned from both the Hullabazoo and the Rabbit Hole (actually called Hullabaloo and The Crawdad Hole, for new readers), because like others here, I refused both the Blue Obummer Kool-Aid and the Red Wingnut Kool-Aid.
Also for new readers, The Crawdad Hole consists largely of people who left The Confluence because they thought the Red Wingnut Kool-Aid was yummy and insisted the rest of us drink it as well. RD finally had to show them the door.
The most honorable and upright sort of banning takes place at Colonel Lang’s Sic Semper Tyrannis. Colonel Lang both sets his rules and warns people ahead of time if they are doing something which will get them banned if repeated. Except on rare occasion where someone offends the Colonel so badly that he runs a quote from what they said and says why it is immediately banworthy and then says . . . ” and you are now BANNED from this blog.”
The Crawdad Holers at least announce their rules for banning. If they were to warn people in advance and/or at least say publicly: “you have done this, that, and the other and you are now BANNED from this blog”, they would be operating at Colonel Lang’s level of transparency and honor. If they were to pretend they ban nobody and stealth-ban people (and stealth-censor comments) while pretending they were doing no such thing, then they would be operating at Hullabaloo’s level of opacity and dishonor. It was the opacity and dishonor and deceit at Hullabaloo which really embittered me and does so to this very day.
Still, it would be best if TCH would say WHY someone is being banned and say it in public. That would be the most honorable approach.
Clinton’s speech was riveting. I was irritated at him early on because he gave a shout out to Reagan and talked about working with Bush on Katrina. No one needs to be reminded of that. Later on he gave a nod to Simpson-Bowles which is a real threat to all of us (the audience reaction was telling – Dems don’t want to eat catfood) but I stuck to the end of a 48 minute speech, got tears in my eyes over families who will lose Medicaid (as did Bill) and was lifted up by the sight and sound of a politician who really does care about the people he was elected to care about. He made mistakes when he was prez, some that were indefensible (Marc Rich pardon) but, at least, he was trying to do what was right which is more than anyone could ever say about Obama.
I really got tears in my eyes when I thought about what it would be like if Bill were up there offering for nomination, for a second time, his wife, the current President of the United States of America.
I may be very wrong but I always found the Rich pardon very defensible. He pardoned Rich because Rich was convicted for doing basically what a whole lot of other guys were doing including Dick Cheney. Clinton didn’t say it was okay, only that Rich was unfairly targeted by an over eager district attorney who wanted to run for Mayor, the despicable Giuliani.
Btw, Elizabeth Warren was way too nice about Obama but I guess she needs his voters in November.
Elizabeth Warren is being hung out to dry. She was encouraged to run for Senate by the Democratic leadership to get her out of Tim Geithner’s hair. Now that she’s in the race, Democrats in Massachussetts are withholding support for her. That demonstrates what the elites in the party think of her.
She’s good enough to make an appearance at the convention for PR purposes–it makes us rubes feel good– but she’s been a thorn in their side all along, and they want her out.
Assholes
Watching these guys operate is like watching the Godfather trilogy . Backstabbing, ruined careers….the works.
Maybe Clinton will campaign for her.
That would be a good play on her part. She should ask him. It gives Clinton an opportunity to take a shot at Obama while supporting a good candidate. She’s a candidate worth supporting, I agree with Jean Louise. If the financial industry hates her, we should all love her.
Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism ran many posts about why Warren should not take the poisoned chalice of “running for Senate” and why she would be more dangerous to the evil Obama and his gang banker sponsors if outside the elective political system than if stuck inside it.
Most people in the country would give their right arm to recapture the Clinton economy. It was the best economy in our lifetimes, unless you came of age in the 60s. It doesn’t matter what bloggers like Atrios think, people saw improvement in their daily lives and that’s what matters. I don’t think it was a coincidence the GOP tried to impeach him, then went all out to defeat Al Gore in 2000. Republicans didn’t like what Clinton/Gore was doing to the country..actually helping working people. That was their real unforgivable sin.
Barack Obama suits the elites just fine. He’s on board with the austerity agenda. He protects the bankers and the criminal executive class from accountability and waves a dismissive hand at everyone else. And despite what Elizabeth Warren or anyone else says about him publicly, he will get worse in a second term. With no re-election to worry about, he can do what he wants with impunity. Good for him, sucks for the Democratic brand and really sucks for all of us.
Since we now know there will be no 11th hour installation of Hillary on the ticket, ( Wall Street would rather burn in hell than allow an independent minded person as president ) we need to mobilize against the probable Grand Bargain that will accompany an Obama re-election. People who are already permanently unemployed will have to wait EVEN LONGER for their retirement benefits.
Totally agree with your game plan. However, Medicare really does need attention. We need to rein in costs and expand the pool of people paying into it. So, if the Democrats, and by that I mean in Congress, want to take that on, by all means, go to it. It’s about time that the providers, particularly hospitals and insurance middle men stopped putting their hands out for every disposable dollar.
Repeal Medicare Part D, and replace it with a carbon-copy of the VA-system of drug coverage for Medicare beneficiaries.
The speech last night certainly made me miss the Big Dawg and Hillary and did not serve well as a “foil” to a weak, whatever way the wind turns, ineffectual politician wanna-be. As for “level-playing field,” which was touted as one of Obama’s virtues, Obama’s “elections” all were run counter to fairness, from the one with Alice Palmer to that of Hillary. (Burned me to hear the convention voting in the background, when Hillary wasn’t even allowed a floor vote.)
For his elevation to Congressional Senator, the Chicago newspaper corp (and its purchase, the LA Times) revealed O’s primary and general election opponents’ sealed divorce records). Unopposed yet again! Emil Jones, Jr. made State reps turn over their bills so that Obama could have some “accomplishments” in his part-time job of seven years. No shame, but “level-playing field”?
Too bad Elizabeth Warren didn’t mention how she was passed over to head the consumer protection agency she proposed. Obama was too fearful (of what, financiers NOT loading his coffers down this time around?) to put anyone with “brass” in the position. Warren needs to get elected to Senator, however.
Obummer’s path to political power was cleared for him from the beginning of his political career, and yet the Blue Kool-Aid drinkers thought he was a Man Of The People. 🙄
Hillary didn’t get a floor vote, and apparently, neither will anyone else, really. Right before Clinton spoke, the Chair said that, ‘according to the rules,’ there was only ONE (his emphasis) candidate qualified for nomination. Is that typical? I don’t remember hearing that before, ever, even when an incumbent was in office.
Loved Clinton’s speech; it felt like he was the one being nominated. (I kept yelling ‘hypocrites!’ at the convention floor, however, and scared the cats.) It’s all bringing back bad memories of last time… Ahhh the days of ‘Obama’s associates…’