Here's my favorite case: Clinton I believe might have altered the course of the donk parade, if in early '93 he'd stumped for a bottom-up payroll tax cut. I believe not only would he have gotten it, but he might have re-labeled the donkery for a generation as the working stiffs party, and without triangulating a damn thing.
But as he's mentioned many times since, the very notion of a working family tax break was ruled out by Wall Street Bob Rubin -- from day one.
So we got instead... that's swell but don't tell, and Hillary's health folly. And so the '94 housecleaning was a lock.
Comments (6)
Hey! what kind of commie talk is that? Don't you know that when the far-left wing of the Democratic Party runs the party, we lose?
Al Gore: swore to randomly expropriate honest shareholders; pour encourager les autres, as he put it. Loser.
John Kerry: stormed into the Fed one day, pointed at poor old Alan Greenspan and said, "sometimes four walls are three too many". Loser.
Tom Daschle: rallied the Senate to defeat the Patriot Act and deny President Bush extraordinary war powers. Now he's slinging hash in a greasy spoon. Loser.
I could go on, but the point is clear. The radical tendency is killing the party!
Posted by J. Alva Scruggs | May 1, 2006 5:30 AM
Posted on May 1, 2006 05:30
jas:
my god what a sub textual article
the lex and shooooomeee
hour
whjat's with all
the blatant
odd couple contrasting
sure both "urban"
both into
" brash...big shouldered .."politics
but one's
late and sloppy ....
while the other's
"prompt....precise "
for heaven sake
"a former ballet dancer"
Posted by jsp | May 1, 2006 9:18 AM
Posted on May 1, 2006 09:18
Hillary had spent six years on the board of directors of Wal*Mart. That was a clear indication of where her friends were--and they weren't working stiffs. And when her hubby was running for office in 1992, he wasn't talking about "workers" or "the poor", he talked constantly about the "middle class" (whatever it is that is supposed to mean.) He never aimed his campaign at those at the bottom of the socio-economic scale.
Posted by Haikuist | May 1, 2006 9:56 AM
Posted on May 1, 2006 09:56
That article really is sublimely rich with awful, disgusting signifiers, JSP. It's a gold mine, and perfect of its kind.
I like the glee with which Nagourney anticipates the lean, agile and hungry one joining hands with the lumbering, fat and hungry one. Will they eat each other? Or go on to victory, and then eat each other?
Posted by J. Alva Scruggs | May 1, 2006 1:42 PM
Posted on May 1, 2006 13:42
Speaking of Hillary and health care reform, here's an excerpt from a Socialist Worker interview with Dr. David Himmelsteing, professor at Harvard Medical School and cofounder of Physicians for a National Health Program:
Posted by Tim D | May 1, 2006 10:10 PM
Posted on May 1, 2006 22:10
Now, now, Tim D. Hillary didn't call for the legalized summary execution of anyone who couldn't pay his/her medical bills. That proves inescapably that Democrats are superior to Republicans.
So there.
Posted by alsis39.9 | May 3, 2006 12:05 AM
Posted on May 3, 2006 00:05