A New York Times profile (1/8/11) of author/economist Robert Reich was headlined “Obama the Centrist Irks a Liberal Lion.” It’s hard not to see where reporter Michael Powell comes down in the debate over Democrats moving to the right:
Mr. Reich sees a parallel with his former boss, Mr. Clinton, and draws no comfort from the comparison. Confronted with a muscular Republican majority in the House in 1994, Mr. Clinton mastered triangulation, which is to say he sailed into a sea neither Republican nor Democratic. It was a strategic masterstroke, but he threw overboard some liberal founding stones.
It’s hard to know what is meant by a term like “strategic masterstroke.” Obviously Bill Clinton was re-elected; whether voters were responding to Clinton’s supposed drift to the right is much more debatable. (The economy improved from 1994 to 1996, which is likely to have been more important.) In any event, Clinton-style centrism did the Democratic Party no favors. As FAIR founder Jeff Cohen wrote (L.A. Times, 4/9/00):
While Clintonism may be good for Bill and Hillary and Al—all of whom seem willing to say or do anything to win the next election—it’s worth asking whether Clintonism is good for the Democratic Party.
Let’s do the numbers. When Clinton entered the White House, his party dominated the U.S. Senate, 57–43; the U.S. House, 258–176; the country’s governorships, 30–18, and a large majority of state legislatures. Today, Republicans control the Senate, 55–45; the House, 222–211; governorships, 30–18, and almost half of state legislatures.
The Democrats under Clintonism resemble a house of cards, with the Clintons and Gore inhabiting the White House atop a party structure crumbling because of an ever-shifting foundation.
You can’t really be that clueless, right? You read that profile of Reich and conclude it’s applause for Bill Clinton? For real?
It was a strategic masterstroke, yes. He turned the Republican tide by becoming a little bit Republican.
The piece was about the disconnect between strategy and core moral principles, as an awful lot of folks seem to have gathered. Except, congratulations, the irony immune FAIR.
I couldn’t agree more. I thin k this “centrist” “trianguation” ruined things and I want the Clintonistas to just go away and leave room for a real movement. they did a lot of damage. They did their part to contribute to the race to the bottom and economic downturn (Specifically “Welfare reform”). There were quite a few things they did that were damaging – Fair Trade, (NAFTA), Telecommunications Act, to name some
Michael Powell: The piece was a profile of Reich. It was about Reich’s perception of a disconnect between strategy and core principles. The paragraph Peter Hart cites is the reporter’s lone editorial comment — the only opinion statement that wasn’t a quote from the sources or a paraphrase of what they’ve said. If there are any words in the article that betray the reporter’s own opinion, it’s those ones.
You’ve just offered a nice defense of Clinton’s “triangulation” as a strategic success. FAIR doesn’t accept that politics ought to be a cynical game where violating core principles, thus betraying the contract with the public that elected you, can be considered a winning move. That the reporter took the initiative to praise that stratagem suggests that he does accept that vision of politics, despite what his interview subject seems to think.
And while I think the tone of your comment here was rather bitter and self-assured, I understand it’s easy to slip into that mode of rhetoric on these political blogs. Of course, if the reporter himself had made such a comment, I’d call it desperate and unprofessional.
I’m not sure I see Powell’s point here (though, as he put it, I could be both cluess AND irony immune, which sounds truly awful).
His piece is about Robert Reich’s criticism of Clinton and Obama. Those criticisms (from Reich and others) are set against Cinton’s move to the right (“triangulation”), which is deemed a “strategic masterstroke.” This is a consensus view in the media: Clinton went to the right and he found considerable success. That record looks far less masterful, though, when one considers the fate of the Democratic party during Clinton’s presidency. That was the point I was making, and I think it is pretty clear.
Was it H.L Menken who said – “The press can’t tell the difference between a bicycle accident and the end of the world.” Never a truer statement and Powell’s B.S. proves it.
Clinton was about Clinton and his “centrism” is at the base of much of what is wrong with the economy and politics.
As a Democrat and a Journalism graduate I find the party lost without a foundation because of Clinton’s lack of principle and Journalism the great failure of our democracy and 1st Amendment – it is a business that delivers the propaganda of its corporate masters. Nothing more.
Since there is NO real left in the U.S., the “center” is automatically to the “right”. Here in France (where I am a legal resident), Robert Hue, former Secrataire General of the Communist Party, said the party needed to be “de-Stalined”. Still, Communists are given media coverage and elected to office here. In the U.S., we threw the baby ourt with the bathwater a
As I was saying…… We threw the baby out with the bathwater during the brainwashing of the better-dead-than-red era. / The first dirty-word that I noticed in the internet-vitriol was “liberal”. “Socialist” is a dirty-word. “Socialized Medicine” is a dirty-term. And I saw the slippery-slide down the slime to “Commie” and “nigger”. / Let’s stop pointing fingers at each other and, instead’ point at the Special Interest money-propaganda that runs our government and pitts us against one another. // Jean Clelland-Morin
Peter Hart is dead right. If only more people would come forward to condemn the devastation of traditional Democratic values, we might stand a far better chance of defeating what is nothing less than a fascist juggernaut now gathering steam, raising money and preparing to seize power in 2012. The lessons of 2010 are perfectly clear: the progressive and liberal base of the Democratic Party refused to vote for a conscientiously centrist Congress infested with Blue Dogs. The fact that the Blue Dogs were crushed at the polls while the Progressives returned in full power proves Peter Hart’s point. Centrism has failed the ultimate test of democracy, and it must be abandoned to prevent a cruel and predatory form of right-wing tyranny to run amok in January 2013.
Clinton tried(and was smart enough) to squeeze every drop from the toothpaste.He learned that success whether created from the left or the right ,in the end fell to him to take the accolades.So i agree with this article(a first).I love guy’s like “early” Clinton, and early Obama who were much more unabashedly left.It makes it easy for conservatives.The more the left talks the more America turns away from them.Obama is failing because America was paying attention.But now dammit the left has gone into hiding.Obama the jello man is doing what he does best. Transforming before our eyes into a shapeless formless blob.That will be our hardest task in the coming election.To scream at the top of our lungs LOOK AT THAT MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN.Because under it all beats the heart of a community activist.