It's uncanny how much this last week recalls the 90s and not at all in a good way. In recent years many of us have come to see the 90s as an almost mythical, idyllic time. After all, it was the longest peacetime economic expansion, jobs were very plentiful, and the Internet was a new thing that seemed to offer limitless possibilities.
Few of us remembered this part of the 90s; the endless scandal mongering by President Clinton's political enemies. That's because in hindsight everyone looks back on the 90s as a great time. Liberals like me see it as validation of Clinton's policies-though many at the time thought he was too far on the Right. However, conservatives too have come to look back on it as a kind of Golden Age; they have also come to love Bill Clinton. During the 2012 campaign Romney often tried to claim Clinton for his own. I remember Republican operatives declared the election over the night of Clinton's great DNC Convention speech.
This week, however, we got the other side of the 90s: Whitewater, Ken Starr's open-ended fishing expedition, Monica Lewinsky, impeachment hearings. Who remembers it now but Clinton was impeached. However, the GOP didn't have the votes to actually force him out of office so that was the end of that.
Already we have all the over the top claims of Watergate equivalence. There are no end of conservatives now fulminating that this is the worst thing since Watergate.
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2013/05/after-reading-peggy-noonan-today-maybe.html
Much as I'd like to say Noonan is one of a kind, her absurd post yesterday is to use a term Republicans always use when they''re trying to turn a little smoke into a huge fire, "just the tip of the iceberg."
What's interesting though is that she didn't say "the worst thing since Whitewater"-nobody ever says that. Clinton's supposed sins are long since forgotten. Watergate on the other hand is one of the most overused analogies in American politics. Digby reminds us just how bad Watergate-and Nixon-was.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/scandal-history-101.html
With Nixon, Watergate-where Nixon's plumbers broke into DNC headquarters-really was just the tip of the iceberg. Nixon had systematically abused his power to target political enemies. President Obama certainly hasn't done anything on those lines. Digby argues that part of the trouble is that the GOP wants to be even the score. However, the can't as Nixon really was that bad, that corrupt, and was one of a kind.
Is there any cause for optimism or are we condemned to totally replay the 90s-Ken Star without the growth? Well remember that ultimately Clinton won. No one remembers all the crazy antics of the GOP witch hunt. Everyone sees Clinton as a hero in retrospect. Republicans too-their narrative is that he wasn't partisan like President Obama!
I do expect Obama to outlast this as Clinton did. In 10 years maybe the GOP will love him too. That may seem unthinkable but no more than in the 90s the idea that Clinton would find favor with them. The real concern is that this totally puts a straitjacket on his agenda that already was up against a GOP brick wall of obstruction.
How much time will be wasted on these fake scandals? This time is time stolen from us. This week there are new signs of the pain the sequester is imposing on the economy. Of course, we're not talking about this but listening to conservatives whine that the Koch Brothers were "intimidated" by the IRS. We get to hear about how the civil liberties of people opposed to gay marriage have been violated.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/todays-persecution-testimony.html
What's next? Was the Klan made to wait two years to receive 401(c)(4)? There is a piece in Politico's Playbook-that apparently is what all the big shots in Washington read-that says friends are urging Obama to adopt a Circuit Breaker to deal with Scandalgate. The trouble is that it's already a sign of resignation isn't it? It's almost on the level of appointing an Independent Counsel-something they must resist I believe.
I find the idea that Obama wants his staff to spend no more than 10% of their time on Scandalgate rather sobering too. That's a lot of time stolen from the public! And of course that's the most optimistic scenario. How often is that the one realized? Does this mean that we're going to see the White House spend considerably more than 10% of its time dealing with the scandals?
http://www.politico.com/playbook/
The question is how long the staying power is for this stuff. If scandals were about the truth it wouldn't have any. Benghazi has been decisively debunked. Yet, GOPers have moved the goal posts demanding more unclassified information. So we will waste more time on something that's already been shown every which way to Sunday to be a total red herring.
Still, my premise is that while scandals are not about truth, over time truth does start to nibble around the edges of scandals. In the Clinton years there really were a lot more scandals-mostly trumped up, but from the time Clinton was sworn in there was something in the news every day about some trumped up charge-the number was just dizzying. And let's be honest-Clinton's personal peccadilloes made him a real target. This is America where your career can be ruined for sending a single tweet that's felt to be inappropriate.
Obama is squeaky clean personally and his Administration has not been dogged by the scandals the way Clinton was from day 1. So maybe James Carville will be right. It's obvious that Obama did nothing wrong in the IRS case-though as Darrell Issa says ironically enough, based on his own personal history, 'you can always build a circumstantial case."
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/01/24/110124fa_fact_lizza?currentPage=8
As has been pointed out on the AP phone records furor it's basically a policy issue-one that the GOP has been far on the Right of until now. The headlines at many blogs seem to have calmed down too. So maybe it will blow over. But I won't believe it till I see it.
Few of us remembered this part of the 90s; the endless scandal mongering by President Clinton's political enemies. That's because in hindsight everyone looks back on the 90s as a great time. Liberals like me see it as validation of Clinton's policies-though many at the time thought he was too far on the Right. However, conservatives too have come to look back on it as a kind of Golden Age; they have also come to love Bill Clinton. During the 2012 campaign Romney often tried to claim Clinton for his own. I remember Republican operatives declared the election over the night of Clinton's great DNC Convention speech.
This week, however, we got the other side of the 90s: Whitewater, Ken Starr's open-ended fishing expedition, Monica Lewinsky, impeachment hearings. Who remembers it now but Clinton was impeached. However, the GOP didn't have the votes to actually force him out of office so that was the end of that.
Already we have all the over the top claims of Watergate equivalence. There are no end of conservatives now fulminating that this is the worst thing since Watergate.
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2013/05/after-reading-peggy-noonan-today-maybe.html
Much as I'd like to say Noonan is one of a kind, her absurd post yesterday is to use a term Republicans always use when they''re trying to turn a little smoke into a huge fire, "just the tip of the iceberg."
What's interesting though is that she didn't say "the worst thing since Whitewater"-nobody ever says that. Clinton's supposed sins are long since forgotten. Watergate on the other hand is one of the most overused analogies in American politics. Digby reminds us just how bad Watergate-and Nixon-was.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/scandal-history-101.html
With Nixon, Watergate-where Nixon's plumbers broke into DNC headquarters-really was just the tip of the iceberg. Nixon had systematically abused his power to target political enemies. President Obama certainly hasn't done anything on those lines. Digby argues that part of the trouble is that the GOP wants to be even the score. However, the can't as Nixon really was that bad, that corrupt, and was one of a kind.
Is there any cause for optimism or are we condemned to totally replay the 90s-Ken Star without the growth? Well remember that ultimately Clinton won. No one remembers all the crazy antics of the GOP witch hunt. Everyone sees Clinton as a hero in retrospect. Republicans too-their narrative is that he wasn't partisan like President Obama!
I do expect Obama to outlast this as Clinton did. In 10 years maybe the GOP will love him too. That may seem unthinkable but no more than in the 90s the idea that Clinton would find favor with them. The real concern is that this totally puts a straitjacket on his agenda that already was up against a GOP brick wall of obstruction.
How much time will be wasted on these fake scandals? This time is time stolen from us. This week there are new signs of the pain the sequester is imposing on the economy. Of course, we're not talking about this but listening to conservatives whine that the Koch Brothers were "intimidated" by the IRS. We get to hear about how the civil liberties of people opposed to gay marriage have been violated.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/todays-persecution-testimony.html
What's next? Was the Klan made to wait two years to receive 401(c)(4)? There is a piece in Politico's Playbook-that apparently is what all the big shots in Washington read-that says friends are urging Obama to adopt a Circuit Breaker to deal with Scandalgate. The trouble is that it's already a sign of resignation isn't it? It's almost on the level of appointing an Independent Counsel-something they must resist I believe.
I find the idea that Obama wants his staff to spend no more than 10% of their time on Scandalgate rather sobering too. That's a lot of time stolen from the public! And of course that's the most optimistic scenario. How often is that the one realized? Does this mean that we're going to see the White House spend considerably more than 10% of its time dealing with the scandals?
http://www.politico.com/playbook/
The question is how long the staying power is for this stuff. If scandals were about the truth it wouldn't have any. Benghazi has been decisively debunked. Yet, GOPers have moved the goal posts demanding more unclassified information. So we will waste more time on something that's already been shown every which way to Sunday to be a total red herring.
Still, my premise is that while scandals are not about truth, over time truth does start to nibble around the edges of scandals. In the Clinton years there really were a lot more scandals-mostly trumped up, but from the time Clinton was sworn in there was something in the news every day about some trumped up charge-the number was just dizzying. And let's be honest-Clinton's personal peccadilloes made him a real target. This is America where your career can be ruined for sending a single tweet that's felt to be inappropriate.
Obama is squeaky clean personally and his Administration has not been dogged by the scandals the way Clinton was from day 1. So maybe James Carville will be right. It's obvious that Obama did nothing wrong in the IRS case-though as Darrell Issa says ironically enough, based on his own personal history, 'you can always build a circumstantial case."
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/01/24/110124fa_fact_lizza?currentPage=8
As has been pointed out on the AP phone records furor it's basically a policy issue-one that the GOP has been far on the Right of until now. The headlines at many blogs seem to have calmed down too. So maybe it will blow over. But I won't believe it till I see it.
No comments:
Post a Comment