Interesting take on Reagan comment: Obama came not to praise Ronald Reagan but to bury the Clintons

[Emillereid]

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/richard_adams/2008/01/remembering_reagan.html
January 18, 2008 1:00 PM | Printable version
<snip>
In an interview with journalists from the Reno Gazette-Journal in Nevada, Barack Obama had this to say:

I think part of what's different are the times. I do think that for example the 1980 election was different. I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not, and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. I think they felt, with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s, and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was: we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.

<snip>
Regardless of how you feel about Reagan, there's more going on here than meets the eye.
<snip>.


It seems to me that Obama's description of Reagan's significance seems self-evident. Reagan certainly did change the direction of US politics, like it or not. Obama's words hardly stand as an endorsement. Instead he is drawing a parallel about the mood for change, and implying that it is up to politicians to read that mood.

Looking more closely at Obama's words and his real purpose comes out. The key phrase is this: "I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not, and in a way that Bill Clinton did not." Obama hasn't come to praise Ronald Reagan, he has come to bury the Clintons. It was Bill Clinton who spent much of his presidency in vapid triangulation. Hillary Clinton bases much of her claim to greater experience on her place in the White House during that period. What Obama is doing is drawing a clear distinction between the sweep of the Reagan era and the incrementalism of the Clintons. You don't have to be a genius to figure out which side he wants to place himself.

<snip>

And while we're doing historical parallels, how about this one: the Democratic primary contest of 2008 most closely resembles that of 1984, when Walter Mondale was battling the energetic challenge of Gary Hart. Mondale, like Clinton, was campaigning on his experience as an old warrior in the White House and was supported by the Democratic party establishment. Hart was the youthful up-start senator offering change. After a bitter fight Mondale eventually won the nomination. And then he was utterly crushed in the general election - losing 49 out of 50 states - by Ronald Reagan.

[aquart]

1. "Vapid triangulation."

You mean, sitting down with his opponents and working with them as Obama has promised to do? That kind of "vapid triangulation"?

[Bodhi BloodWave]

22. No, there is a rather large gap between what the clintons did and

what Obama wants

Obama is willing to sit and listen to all respectfully then make an decision after getting as many to his side as possible, he might make a few concessions but keeping the most important parts and the core of the issue

triangulation is totally different as defined by Wikipedia: Triangulation is the act of a candidate presenting his or her ideology as being "above" and "between" the left and right sides of the political spectrum. It involves adopting for oneself some of the ideas of one's political opponent. The logic behind it is that it not only takes good ideas away from your opponent, but that it insulates you from attacks on that particular issue.

Triangulations origin based on wiki

The term was first used by President of the United States Bill Clinton's chief political advisor Dick Morris as a way to describe his strategy for getting Clinton reelected in the 1996 presidential election. It is often referred to as "Clintonian triangulation". Morris advocated a set of policies that were different from the traditional policies of the Democratic Party.The idea Clinton used behind some of these policies was to be "more Republican than the Republicans." These policies included welfare reform, tax cuts for the middle class and balanced budgets. One of the most widely cited capstones of Clinton's triangulation strategy was when, in his 1996 State of the Union Address, Clinton declared that the "Era of Big Government is over."

criticism on triangulation from wiki site

Many members of the U.S. Democratic Party, in particular the rank and file, insist that triangulation is "dead." They cite the attempted uses of triangulation by Democrats in the 2000 and 2004 U.S. presidential elections. In the 2000 election, Al Gore's call for larger tax cuts than those of opponent George W. Bush were seen more as an admission that Bush was correct on the issue. The use of triangulation by John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election, in such areas as the War in Iraq, resulted in flip-flopping charges. It also forced Kerry to defend positions that he took which he may or may not have actually had.

Many rank-and-file Democrats use the term "triangulation" as a pejorative, sometimes in reference to the Democratic Leadership Council. They believe that triangulation has led to multiple electoral defeats and eroded the principles of those who use the strategy.

[xchrom]

2. Ronnie, Donnie and Barack -- the new Holy Trinity

:eyes: impressive.

[sandnsea]

3. He came to bury conservatism, to change the trajectory

Which anybody would know if they just listened to his words and stopped dumping 100 different hidden agendas onto him.

[FiveGoodMen]

4. I listened. I didn't reach your conclusion.

[sandnsea]

8. No you dumped your agenda onto him n/t

[FiveGoodMen]

11. You are in no position to say that.

[sandnsea]

14. It's Plain English

There is no confusion in those words. We've been on a conservative path since 1980. We've tried all their ideas. We need to set ourselves on a totally new trajectory.

What's difficult to understand?

[FiveGoodMen]

17. In plain English, he said Reagan gave the country what it was ready for

What did Reagan give us? Bigotry, militarism, exceptionalism, delusion, heartlessness. I don't care who was ready for that; it was a big pile of shit. And Obama made it sound kind of good.

I don't really know all of what Obama thinks about Reagan, but the fact that he even brought it up -- and didn't immediately say, "those were good campaign techniques and they changed a lot, but of course it was a change for the worse," bothers me a lot!

So it doesn't bother you? Fine. But don't tell me what I really think, because you're in no position to know that.

[sandnsea]

21. And dressed it up as optimistm and hope

yes that is exactly what happened and is exactly why we need to change the trajectory. Clinton failed to do that.

Also from the book, "Others pursue a more "centrist" approach, figuring that so long as they split the difference with the conservative leadership, they must be acting reasonably -- and failing to notice that with each passing year they are giving up more and more ground."

Read everything he has said, not just the cut and paste mish-mash.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=388x1190

[FiveGoodMen]

23. If he becomes president, will we have to read a book to decode every statement he makes?

[sandnsea]

26. If anybody had been listening to HIM these last months

and paying the slightest attention to his record, there wouldn't be any decoding to do. The only ones who need any decoding are the ones dumping their own agenda on his head.

[FiveGoodMen]

30. You don't know what my agenda is. Stop acting like you do.

[sandnsea]

32. Then stop acting like you can't understand English

It's crystal clear what he meant to anybody who has the slightest capacity for rational thought. If you don't understand it, it's either because you don't want to or you have your own agenda not to.

[MADem]

7. No he didn't. He came to triangulate, to pick up Indy Reagan Democrats, and to

suggest, in a backhanded way, that Bill Clinton wasn't 'all that.'

It's a fucking joke, but that's what he's trying to do. Life was just so 'optimistic' under Reagan...sure!!

They're his words, and he owns them. If he'd chosen them more carefully, he wouldn't be catching all this shit.

[sandnsea]

9. Reagan is one of Hillary's favorite Presidents

Not Obama's.

[MADem]

15. We await your citation of that assertion with bated breath. NT

[sandnsea]

16. It's on her own web site

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=4674

(thanks to Jefferson Dem)

[rox63]

18. List of Hillary's favorite presidents

From the link above on her web site:

But no president can do it alone. She must break recent tradition, cast cronyism aside and fill her cabinet with the best people, not only the best Democrats, but the best Republicans as well.. We’re confident she will do that. Her list of favorite presidents - Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, Truman, George H.W. Bush and Reagan - demonstrates how she thinks. As expected, Bill Clinton was also included on the aforementioned list.

[MADem]

24. Ah, but she doesn't say why he was a 'favorite'--wedged in there with a dozen others--does she?

There's just a list of names there, recited to an eager reporter writing an endorsement. For all we know, she liked his taste in jellybeans or hair dye. Nothing about trajectories, and government excess, and "enterpreneurship" (a GOP word for We're Taking Your Social Security) or comparisons to JFK in that weak cite you provided...is there?

Here's how she feels about the subject at hand, in her own words, not an ambiguous assertion by a reporter:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/01/18/politics/fromtheroad/entry3728663.shtml

During a campaign stop in Las Vegas, Clinton said, “My leading opponent the other day said that he thought the Republicans had better ideas than Democrats the last 10 to 15 years. That’s not how I remember the last 10 to 15 years.”

She continued on with a laundry list of reasons saying, “I don’t think it’s a better idea to privatize Social Security. I don’t think it’s a better idea to try to eliminate the minimum wage. I don’t think it’s a better idea to undercut health benefits and to give drug companies the right to make billions of dollars by giving prescription drugs to Medicare recipients. I don’t think it’s a better idea to shut down the government and drive us into debt.”

[sandnsea]

27. Well she's lying again which isn't surprising

He never said Republicans had better ideas, that's just another Clinton lie that you guys defend time and time again. It's disgusting.

[MADem]

33. Well, whatever....but when he says "Party of Ideas" he isn't talking about BAD ideas

Unless you're applying a Gumby interpretation to this comment as well:

“I think it’s fair to say that the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10-15 years in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom,” Obama said in an interview with the Reno Gazette-Journal.

[sandnsea]

34. vouchers, privatization, deregulation, outsourcing

Yes, he was talking about bad ideas and they had run out of everything which is why all they had to say was tax cuts and more tax cuts.

[MADem]

36. And your fellah was praising the bozos that came up with that shit.

Go figure!

[sandnsea]

37. Clinton implemented most of that n/t

[MADem]

38. The one who is running for President? I think not. NT

[sandnsea]

39. Hey, she's running on his record, that's her experience n/t

[MADem]

40. Like Obama is running as a Reagan clone? NT

[sandnsea]

41. The DLC centrist Hillary who praises Goldwater, Reagan and Poppy n/t

[MADem]

42. When you can't defend your candidate, pick another one, and attack.

Why not go after Edwards, too, and make it a merry threesome?

It doesn't matter if Hillary suddenly decides to become a Ron Paul enthusiast, Obama is still in the Hurt Locker for that interview, and for those assertions. But hey, distract away...pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, stay focused on the Wizard of Oz!

[sandnsea]

43. You wouldn't care if she embraced Ron Paul

and that's the bottom line of it.

[MADem]

44. It would make my choice quite easy; I could leave the coin to flip at home.

Go, Johnny, go would be my mantra for the near term....

[sandnsea]

45. You've got no coin

although supporting two IWR voters and two true centrists explains a lot.

[MADem]

46. You really love to tell people what they are, what they have, and what they think.

I do have a coin--it's a Kennedy half.

What you don't have, apparently, is much of a life; otherwise you'd spend less time speculating about the motives of others.

[FrenchieCat]

48. Kennedy wasn't even one of Hillary's favorite Prez.....

Nor was LBJ. Guess canvassing for Nixon did that to her.

She "admired" Reagan's communications skills:

ad·mire (d-mr)
v. ad·mired, ad·mir·ing, ad·mires
v.tr.
1. To regard with pleasure, wonder, and approval.
2. To have a high opinion of; esteem or respect.
3. Chiefly New England & Upper Southern U.S. To enjoy (something): "I just admire to get letters, but I don't admire to answer them" Dialect Notes.
4. Archaic To marvel or wonder at.
v.intr. New England & Upper Southern U.S.
To marvel at something. Often used with at.

[MADem]

49. For all you know, she admired his taste in jelly beans. But keep carping about bullshit

...it really helps your candidate, keeping that REAGAN business alive!!

[rodeodance]

12. yes, Obama does a great job at triangulating.

[MADem]

5. Yeah, life was just SO optimistic under Reagan!!!

And there sure was clarity--when you lost your job, it was CLEAR that you weren't gonna get much help from the GOP government!!!!

And "dynamism and entrepreneurship" is code for "FUCK SOCIAL SECURITY--you make it on your OWN, and you'd better put grandma in the attic, too! No rest home for her!"

If you're not 'endorsing' you don't talk about optimism that was only optimistic for the fatcat businessmen, you don't talk about change that fucked working families, and you don't praise a miserable, Defense Spending Maniac for 'tapping into what people were feeling' when all he did was deliver shit, shit, more shit, and heartache to so many Americans.

[sandnsea]

13. Yep, that's what Reagan was selling

that's what he said right there in those words. Reagan was selling it, America bought it, including all those ideas. And he wants to put us on a new trajectory - NOT REAGAN'S.

There are quotes from his book that say it and have been posted, but that doesn't fit your agenda so you ignore it.

[MADem]

19. Good grief, Gumby, I didn't know you could stretch THAT far!!!!

:rofl:

That is the most PAINED "reinterpretation" of the truth since Hitler's public affairs officers got on German radio and talked about the "Wonderful Progress" the Nazis were making on the Russian Front!!!!!


Here's a little more 'context' to get you up to speed on your candidate's world view. His remarks were NOT PROGRESSIVE, to put it mildly.

I think you aren't clear on where he actually sits, or what he actually said--read and listen: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/16/obama-compares-himself-to_n_81835.html

But perhaps the most interesting offering was when he tried to place his candidacy into a historical context. Which elections does Obama see as analogous to 2008? And with which presidents does he share personal similarities? That would be John Kennedy in 1960 (hardly surprising) and Ronald Reagan in 1980 (more daring). But not, it should be noted, Bill Clinton in 1992.

In fact, Obama offered praise for the Gipper, lauding him for tapping into the country's concern with the growth and "excesses" of the federal government, and its desire to "return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship" -- hardly a welcomed interpretation within progressive circles. Said the Illinois Democrat:

"I don't want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what is different is the times. I do think that, for example, the 1980 election was different. I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. They felt like with all the excesses of the 60s and the 70s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think he tapped into what people were already feeling. Which is we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing."
]
Obama went on:

"I think Kennedy, 20 years earlier, moved the country in a fundamentally different direction. So I think a lot of it has to do with the times. I think we are in one of those fundamentally different times right now were people think that things, the way they are going, just aren't working."

Way too many "I"s in his narrative. IMO. And I find his comparisons presumtuous.

[sandnsea]

25. "fundmentally different direction"

What would be a "fundamentally different direction" from the one we've been on since 1980???

good grief gumby you're supporting a DLC centrist who has praised Goldwater, Reagan and Poppy Bush and whose husband's military, welfare, and trade policies were taken directly from Republicans.

What the fuck??

[MADem]

35. I'm not the one who's having trouble with a candidate's position, here.

He said what he said, and he spent an hour saying it, ON TAPE.

And if you didn't happen to notice a sharp change in direction during the Clinton years, you're either being deliberately obtuse or you aren't very observant. We haven't been on the same track since 80, as anyone who suffered under Reagan, and later reaped the benefits of the Clinton years, can tell you.

And I'm not "supporting" Clinton, either. I've decided that I can't vote for Obama in the primary, but that's as far as I've gone in terms of my choice of candidate.

I'm simply reality based, and what you're trying to shop about what Obama actually said is pure fantasy.

He praised Reagan, and compared himself to JFK. He's wrong on the first, and presumptuous on the second.

Have another glass of Kool Aid, though--it's pointless discussing anything with you--one would get the same feedback from a parrot. When you run out of ideas, you mimic those of others, and that gets old real quick, eh Gumby?

[Ian David]

6. If Obama had compared Reagan to Hitler, I would have written him a check.

Instead, as it stands now, I've moved him down in my preferences to slightly below Clinton.

[robbedvoter]

29. Bingo! I am with you!

[Hobarticus]

50. I second that....being a divisive SOB like RR is nothing to admire

or cite as an "agent of change".

[rodeodance]

10. umm. I think the 'bitter fight' met a wall with the sailboat photo??

Hart was the youthful up-start senator offering change. After a bitter fight Mondale eventually won the nomination. And then he was utterly crushed in the general election - losing 49 out of 50 states - by Ronald Reagan.

[robbedvoter]

31. And the Bush fingerprints are all over that Boat and its name....Lee Atwater.

They picked their opponent (not that I don't like Mondale - and he's probably more progressive than Hart)

[BootinUp]

20. You had to read about it to figure that out?

It was crystal clear. Thats why I am enjoying his getting skewered so much.

[robbedvoter]

28. Had he used JFK or FDR, he might have accomplished something

Legitimizing Raygun - probably sunk him.

[XemaSab]

47. interesting