PDA

View Full Version : Out-Republicaning the Republicans



FORD
04-03-2010, 02:22 PM
Published on Thursday, April 1, 2010 by CommonDreams.org
Out-Republicaning the Republicans
Obama Revives Clinton's Disastrous Triangulation Strategy

by Ted Rall

"It was Bill Clinton who recognized that the categories of conservative and liberal played to Republican advantage and were inadequate to address our problems," President Obama wrote in his book The Audacity of Hope. "Clinton's third way...tapped into the pragmatic, non-ideological attitude of Americans."

Clinton's "third way" was "triangulation," a term and strategy invented by his pollster Dick Morris. Triangulation is a candidate's attempt to position himself above and between the left and the right. A Democrat, Clinton insulated himself from Republican attacks by appropriating many of their ideas.

Obama is even more of a triangulator than Clinton.

Triangulation can work for candidates in the short term. Clinton got reelected by a landslide in 1996. (It failed, though, for Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004.) But triangulation hurts parties, which sell an ideological point of view. Clinton worked so hard to out-Republican the Republicans that he forgot he was a Democrat. He also forgot that Democratic voters expected to see liberal policies.

Clinton's greatest achievements ended up being Republican platform planks: free trade deals like NAFTA and the WTO, welfare reform, balancing the federal budget on the backs of the poor and working class.

By the way, Dick Morris is now a Republican. Maybe he always was.

Because of Clintonian triangulation, the liberal base of the Democratic Party saw the 1990s as a squandered opportunity: eight years of unprecedented economic expansion with not one new social program, not even national healthcare, to show for it. They got the message: voting Democratic doesn't guarantee Democratic policies. Unenthused, liberals stayed home or voted for Ralph Nader in 2000. Liberal disgust for triangulation (they called it "selling out") sufficiently reduced Al Gore's margin of victory to allow George W. Bush to steal Florida and the national election. It took the Democrats six years to begin to recover.

Obama ran as a centrist. It would come as little surprise if he were governing as one.

But he's not a moderate president.

Obama is a Republican.

A right-wing Republican. Thanks to triangulation gone wild.

In his first year Obama chose to continue numerous Bush Administration policies, many of which originated in the far extreme wing of the GOP. Each of the following asterisks represents a broken campaign promise:

* Keeping the Guantánamo torture camp open*
* Continuing the war against Iraq*
* Expanding the war against Afghanistan
* Renewing the USA Patriot Act*
* No-string bank bailouts
* Continuing "military commission" kangaroo trials*
* Reserving the right to torture*
* Continuing the NSA's "domestic surveillance" program of spying on innocent Americans' emails and phone calls*

It took over a year, but Obama can finally point to two legislative achievements: healthcare reform and reducing private banks' role in the issuance of student loans. The student loan bill, though a step in the right direction, is liberal but too modest. Student loans ought to be replaced by grants. Ultimately, universities and colleges will have to be nationalized.

Obama's revamp of healthcare, on the other hand, goes too far, perverting the liberal desire to provide healthcare for all Americans into a transfer of wealth from poor to rich that the hard right never dreamed of.

Buying into the classic, flawed, American assumption that a bad system can't get worse (ask the Iraqis and Afghans), ObamaCare entrusts 30 million new customers, to the tune of roughly ten grand a year each, to the tender mercies of private insurance companies.

ObamaCare pours hundreds of billions of dollars, some from taxpayers, the rest from poor people, into the gaping coffers of giant corporations. Once people find themselves paying even more for visits to the same crappy doctors and hospitals they can't afford now, they'll hold the Dems responsible at the polls. If Republicans stopped to think, they'd love it.

And if Democrats stopped to think, they'd hate it.

Most Americans, and almost all liberal Democrats, want socialized medicine. Like they have in the rest of the world. Failing that, they were willing to settle for single-payer. When Obama let it be known that Mr. Audacity was going to lead as anything but, they prayed for a "public option."

What they got: zero.

Actually, less than zero: We were better off before. Taxes will go up for the already insured. For those about to be forcibly insured, they'll have to pay more. And here's the kicker: not only will the insurance companies be making higher profits at our expense, so will the federal government.

The Congressional Budget Office, invariably described in pieces like this as "the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office," projects that the U.S. Treasury will come out ahead by $130 billion over 10 years.

Deficit negativity helped score votes among Democratic deficit hawks in Congress. But again, think about it: If the healthcare bill is making a profit for the U.S. government, where is that $130 billion coming from?

Correct: you and me. Our taxes will be higher than they should be, our health benefits will be less.

Obama, the media and many of us have forgotten what the problem was in the first place. Healthcare costs were too high. Thanks to this monster of a bill, they'll go even higher.

The government should not make a profit off sick people.

Even the Republicans wouldn't propose a tax this regressive.

Now Obama is echoing Sarah Palin, right-winger-turned-Tea-Partier. "Drill, baby, drill!" says the president, guaranteeing oil-soaked beaches decades after he has retired. It's a terrible policy for the environment, won't lower gas prices by one red penny, and will further turn off liberal Democrats.

Democrats will lose seats in Congress this fall. It may already be too late for Democrats to keep the White House in 2012. But if they continue to follow the Clinton-Obama triangulation strategy, they could destroy themselves for years to come. They might even expose the overall bankruptcy of our two-party pseudo-democracy.
---------------------------------
Copyright 2010 Ted Rall

Ted Rall is working on a radical political manifesto for publication this fall. His website is tedrall.com.

Article printed from Common Dreams | News & Views (http://www.CommonDreams.org)
URL to article: Out-Republicaning the Republicans | CommonDreams.org (http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/04/01-6)

conmee
04-03-2010, 08:19 PM
Out-Englishing English...

Very good point about not being able to get some of the social programs through during an economic boom... We're fucked as long as both parties continue to represent special interested and corporations...

That is all.

Icon©®™

chefcraig
04-03-2010, 08:41 PM
Who was it that said "He who attempts to be everything to everyone winds up being nothing to no one"?

Perhaps Abe Lincoln said it best..."You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

Little Texan
04-03-2010, 10:21 PM
I think OBush guaranteed himself a one term presidency the moment he signed that stinking turd of a healthcare bill into law.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_HYfw9dUXfzY/SYyt8v6-6VI/AAAAAAAAA3A/C1731BfIoyw/s400/barack+obush.jpg

Kristy
04-03-2010, 10:27 PM
The more things change, the more the stay the same no matter who is in power. However, I do find the line between Rethuglican rhetoric and their policy objectives is more than thin; they use words to obscure, not to illuminate. They describe what people want but not what they seek to deliver.

Just look how the Rethugs never want to fuck with when it comes to the ability of financial institutions to invent, market and manipulate investments placing other people's money at risk. Look how they are also opposed to ending "too big to fail" but have no problem leaving American taxpayers on the hook to bailout all the banks fuck ups when the next meltdown occurs (and it will occur). The Republicans are utterly retarded: Obama and Voulker are right on that banking and investing needs to be separated, "too big to fail" institutions need to be broken up and strict federal oversight must be imposed. Call it "socialism" all you want but we can allow greedy bankers to bring down the national economy again.

sadaist
04-03-2010, 10:59 PM
I think OBush guaranteed himself a one term presidency the moment he signed that stinking turd of a healthcare bill into law.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_HYfw9dUXfzY/SYyt8v6-6VI/AAAAAAAAA3A/C1731BfIoyw/s400/barack+obush.jpg



Damn. Talk about good photoshop skills. Sheesh.

It's like those brain teaser pictures. Do you see George? Or do you see Barack? It keeps changing in my eye.

Hardrock69
04-04-2010, 12:51 AM
Obama knows though, that the way to nudge the Republicans to be more liberal, is to be more conservative than they are.

So I can understand that tactic. He has to be creative to at least have some success.

chefcraig
04-04-2010, 01:00 AM
For some reason, I believe this fits...and even not...

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pvn-tBeLpCk&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pvn-tBeLpCk&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Terry
04-04-2010, 01:44 AM
As a practical matter, even making the distinctions of "republican" or "democrat" or "liberal" or "conservative"...I mean, it might be useful in describing the stated beliefs of various candidates out on the campaign trail. However, once in office ALL of these characters just look out for themselves, searching for ways to retain elected office because they want to keep their snouts in the trough.

Becoming engaged in the usual partisan bickering and taking sides is exactly what Washington, D.C. WANTS the percentage of the American population that bothers to vote to continue doing.

It's easier for them to keep playing the citizenry off one another. Far easier than finding common ground people can agree on.

Am I alone in thinking that if people put aside the "vs." mentality (be it political ideology, religious beliefs, racial distinctions, class differences) and unified to find ways of making the world a place we all want it to be that these career politicians would quickly find themselves obsolete? Or am I just huffing too much nitrous oxide from my stash of Redi-Whip cans I keep in my fridge?

Nitro Express
04-04-2010, 01:55 AM
The Russians have a saying that goes,"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." Change is all you are going to have left after all these new taxes get going and more jobs are lost due to the increased overhead thanks to the new healthcare law and other things.

If you are in the business of war, business is good and oil will continue to be a good industry. If you are a small business owner and middle class you are screwed.

It is redistribution of wealth. The welfare bunch will continue to get benefits as long as they vote a certain way and the mega rich will make more money than ever. Warren Buffet scored big with the healthcare law. The middle class is going to feel the squeeze big time.

Blackflag
04-04-2010, 01:56 AM
Is Roger Daltrey Russian?

Nitro Express
04-04-2010, 01:59 AM
The reality is they pretty much have killed the golden goose and gave the future super power status to China. The US and Europe will stew around a bit playing games while the rich in both regions steal most of the wealth like a third world country. Meanwhile China and other parts of Asia will continue to modernize and they will be riding in high speeds trains while our infastructure ages and falls apart.

Nitro Express
04-04-2010, 02:00 AM
Is Roger Daltrey Russian?

No but he probably was inspired by the Marxist British government.:biggrin:

FORD
04-04-2010, 02:12 AM
Is Roger Daltrey Russian?

No, but he played a fascist wannabe military dictator on "Sliders". He also had this weird habit of sucking spinal fluid out of peoples necks and then shooting them into himself.

conmee
04-04-2010, 02:14 AM
Wasn't that an episode of Fringe?

That is all.

pIcond©®™

FORD
04-04-2010, 02:21 AM
Wasn't that an episode of Fringe?

That is all.

pIcond©®™

Yeah, I think they did something like that too. For that matter, both shows probably ripped off the idea from Star Trek's "salt sucking monster" episode.