David Corn

"Since you asked, they don't for me. "

Me neither. The attacks must be polling better than we might hope.

Are Clintonites Stepping over the Line in Slamming Obama as Pro-Reagan?

Are their lips moving?

Bill Clinton was a relatively good president in continuing w/Reagan's governing philosophies. He was more of a Reagan-Lite than Bush 41.

IF HRC gets in the WH, we have every right to expect she'll be at least, Bill-Lite....or Reagan-UltraLite :~))))

Unfortunatally in the binary political climate, there is no room for unbiased historical analysis. Since Obama didn't explicitly criticize, he must have been endorsing. It's like Time Magazine's past naming of dispicable dictators as Man of the Year. Some people can't comprehend acknowledgement of influence/power/ect. is not the same as approval.

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.

Finally a Democrat willing to tell the truth for one.

The era of big government is over. How's that for a grand Reaganesque declaration? It's certainly a much clearer endorsement of Reagan's view of the world than anything Obama said. Will Frank now ask Hillary to disavow Bill?

It just goes to show why Regean was the greatest President of last century. Must be why hes all the Dems and Repubs seem to want to talk about.

66 (Unflattering) Things About Ronald Reagan

From the firing of the air traffic controllers to Fawn Hall to massacres in El Salvador, it's worthwhile keeping this list in mind when the hagiography of Ronald Reagan reaches fever pitch.

Editor's Note: This list of "66 Things to Think about When Flying in to Reagan National Airport" appeared in the Nation on March 2, 1998 after the renaming of Washington National Airport after Ronald Reagan. As Corn says, "the piece remains relevant today -- particularly as a cheat sheet for those who dare to point out the Reagan presidency was not all that glorious and was more nightmare in America than morning in America."

Funny, I don'y see Clinton mentioning Fawn Hall (LOL) air traffic controllers or El Svador here, nice try though;

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Clinton's Depressing Assault on Obama

Washington Post Writers Group ^ | January 25, 2008 | E. J. Dionne

It was a remarkable moment: A young, free-thinking presidential hopeful named Bill Clinton sat down with reporters and editors at The Washington Post in October 1991 and started saying things most Democrats wouldn't allow to pass their lips.

Ronald Reagan, Clinton said, deserved credit for winning the Cold War. He praised Reagan's "rhetoric in defense of freedom" and his role in "advancing the idea that communism could be rolled back."

"The idea that we were going to stand firm and reaffirm our containment strategy, and ...

the signal had been sent: Clinton was willing to move beyond "the brain-dead politics in both parties," as he so often put it.

I have been thinking about that episode ever since Hillary Clinton's campaign started unloading on Barack Obama for making statements about Reagan that were, if anything, more measured than Bill Clinton's 1991 comments. Obama simply acknowledged Reagan's long-term impact on politics, and the fact that conservatives once constituted the camp producing new ideas, flawed though they were.

Obama's not particularly original insight was a central premise of Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign. Clinton argued over and over that Democrats could not win without new ideas of their own. To reread Clinton's "New Covenant" speeches from back then is to be reminded of how electrifying it was to hear a politician who was willing to break new ground.

That's why the Clintons' assault on Obama is so depressing. ...

The worst thing about all this is what both Clintons are doing to their own legacy ...

I left a message on Hillary's website saying I thought their spin on what BO said just made her look stupid and conniving.
Sadly, this sort of thing happens all the time and God Bless Stephen Colbert for making fun of this very tendancy.
BTW, I'm not voting for Hillary because well, I just hate all other women.
There is such a thing as an evil genius. Just because you recognize that doesn't mean you admire them.

Bush-Hitler: Hypnotizing The Masses

Said by some to be more dangerous than Osama bin-Laden, he has been condemned as a "war maniac," called a "moron" by the Canadian prime minister’s chief spokeswoman, ridiculed as "The English Patient" for his struggles with language, and likened to Adolf Hitler.

Of all the labels hung on George W. Bush, the hardest to shake may be the comparison with Hitler.

*****

Hard to shake the connections ideologically and financially, nobody can say that about either of the Clintons.

I don't remember anybody comparing Reagan to Hitler either for that matter.

The Economic State Of The Union -- 2008

[…]

2008 will be the ninth consecutive year the U.S. economy grows slower than the world's growth while China grows more than three times faster. In the past seven years of sluggish growth, the United States accumulated manufacturing trade deficits (production shortfalls) of over $3 trillion with full current account trade losses of $4.3 trillion; more than the entire nominal growth of GDP.

At the same time, now in the third year of their remarkable eleventh Five-Year Development Plan, China's accumulated Current Account surplus soared by nearly $1 trillion since 2001, near 13 percent of GDP in 2007. These surpluses are funding China's now $1.5-trillion war chest of foreign currency reserves.

Farewell To Supply-Side Economics: A Stimulus To What? Delusions Prevail In Washington

[…]

The Bush administration has in mind a total rebate of $150 billion. As the government's budget is already in deficit, the money will have to be borrowed. As the U.S. saving rate is about zero, the money will have to be borrowed abroad. Foreigners are already concerned about the U.S. government's indebtedness, and foreigners are bailing out some of our most important banks and Wall Street firms that foolishly invested in subprime derivatives.

Under pressure from budget and trade deficits, the U.S. dollar has been losing value against other traded currencies. Having to borrow another $150 billion abroad will further erode the dollar's value.

Meanwhile, Congress passed a $700 billion "defense" bill so that the Bush administration can continue its wars in the Middle East.

Our leaders in Washington are out to lunch. They have no idea of the real challenges our country faces and America's dependence on foreign creditors.

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS served as Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury in the Reagan administration.

There is a lot of interest in the Democratic primary and it's not just Democrats. Republicans are chiming in, cheering for some democratic candidate and jeering the other ones.

Maybe they know what everyone is thinking, the Republican nominee in '08 has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the election.

Will it matter who the democratic party nominates? That's not to say I don't have a preference, it's just to say that Democrats have three good candidates and the Republicans have none.

Eight years ago McCain would have been a formidable adversary, no longer. While he can attract the independent vote, 70% of the country want to end the war on the Iraqi people, having come to the conclusion the WMD threat never was.

Romney never had chance, ever since he ran to the left of Ted Kennedy for Senate in 1992.

Huckabee is courting the Gomer Pyle vote. All that talk about changing the constitution to fit God's law and the earth being 5000 years old elimintes him from any serious consideration becuase of the "electability" factor. Americans have had enough of the faith-based Presidency. Even the faithful have lost faith in the faith-based president.

Ron Paul used to be a racist. That would be problem ni the general election. he's also a bit of a crackpot when it comes to economic theory, although the populist message is inspiring a following.

Guiliani? He won't make it to Super Tuesday unless he wins Florida.

Reagan. He deserves a lot of credit for negotiating with his enemies and winning the war without firing a shot.

While seeking the endorsement of the editorial board of a conservative newspaper, Obama indeed waxed poetic about Reagan. But that was not the reason why Democrats, the Clinton's, Edwards, and liberal blogs took such offense.

Rather, it was Obama's apparent willingness to denigrate the hard-fought, yet unwon battles of the '60's, '70's, and '90's while throwing his party under the bus in order to prop up the GOP as the party of ideas for his own personal gain.

It was unseemly, and remains a sore spot among Democrats and accounts for Obama's difficulty in securing the support of the base of the party, even as the media and pundit class rallies to his defense.

Barack Obama's Democratic Insurgency: Poised for an SC Victory?

If the state's pundits, pollsters and politicians are right, Obama's message of hope and change will draw people from across the usual dividing lines.

The Illustrated President

[…]

The president of the United States has identified closely with a man he sees as a mythic, heroic figure. But in fact he’s a wily criminal one step out in front of justice. It perfectly reflects Bush the man. . . and Bush the president.

******

Poetic justice or just fate?

I've also heard Obama say that Reagan was a trajectory that needed to be corrected, so I don't take his comments as an endorsement of Reagan at all.

Of all the labels hung on George W. Bush, the hardest to shake may be the comparison with Hitler.

Only if you're a Bush hating, bigoted, 7th grade level moron~

Brattleboro to vote on arresting Bush, Cheney

[…]

Daims had no compunction in comparing Bush and Cheney with one of the most notorious people in history.

"If Hitler were still alive and walked through Brattleboro, I think the local police would arrest him for war crimes," Daims said.

*****

You can't make this stuff up!

Let's say Obama wins the nomination, I wonder if Bill will then campaign for Barack for the good of the party?

"will the Clinton Attack Machine--starring Bill Clinton!--continue to fire away?"

So far the attack machine seems to be helping BO.

A pox on all their houses. Except Edwards since somebody has to be Prez...

Average Pollster Error in South Carolina’s Democratic Primary was 16.6 points.

Obama quote:
"I think they felt like 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."

Obama is basically speaking out against and anti-poverty programs of 60's and 70's. He adds praise for Reagan (later in the same statement) which clarifies that this is an attempt to attract Republican voters.

David: I've noticed that states in which voters must declare party affiliation favor Clinton. I speculate that so-called independent voters are wolves in sheeps' clothing (aka Republicans against Hillary), and not really Obama supporters (recall Lieberman election). Republicans prefer to run against Obama because he is more beatable than Hillary. My question to you: is this an organized effort (conspiracy) or is it informal? I don't listen to conservative talk-radio often enough to know!

"Obama is basically speaking out against and anti-poverty programs of 60's and 70's."

How do you figure?

Have you read that specifically? Obama did not specify what he believes those "excesses" were.

Do you have a source to support the conclusion?

Obama comes to bury Reagan, not to praise him

I found it painful to read yesterday's diary regarding Barack Obama's comments about Ronald Reagan. Seeing such obviously sincere people completely misinterpret Sen. Obama's comments and misunderstand the rare opportunity that Obama offers to the progressive community prompted me to attempt an explanation of that opportunity. Many Kossacks appear to be missing the possibilities for the generational change to progressivism that Obama is trying to achieve. Only by winning the kind of mandate that Reagan won can major change be accomplished.

Far from agreeing with Reagan, Obama instead is attempting to reverse Reagan's legacy. He is doing so by following Reagan's successful battle plan for winning a complete generational realignment of politics in this nation. He cites Reagan not for his policies, but for the man's undeniable political prowess. Reagan achieved a generational shift toward conservatism, still the dominant philosophy in the nation. Simply put: Reagan won, and we lost (as did America).

Now, because of the incompetence, stupidity, and sickeningly vicious politics of George W. Bush, we have a chance to overthrow not just the Bush/Cheney junta, but to completely overturn Reagan's victory. Only Obama, because he attracts the crossover votes necessary to achieve a powerful mandate, can do it.

******

Another take on the comments about excesses.

To read Obama's position on poverty:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/poverty/

Capt: The goal of Reagan and both Bushes has been to keep spending until there is nothing left for social programs. This was a stated goal of David Stockman, Reagan's budget director, who has a book out that describes his work under Reagan. This includes the so-called "trickle down" ecomonics that was termed "voodoo economics" by Bush no. 1. Ever since Reagan, the Republican's have followed suit because they want to eliminate social security, medicaid, medicare, Headstart, "welfare," etc., now Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and any other programs that were designed to improve the economic circumstances of non-rich Americans. The current president and vice have been very persistent in their efforts to tear down these programs. They took us from surplus to deficit, and created a war to lock us in.

We need to elect someone who can get us out of this mess, and it won't work to elect someone who admires Reagan's ideas!!!

Also, Obama and his team are not so naive [as you] as to believe that the Republicans will support a black candidate!!! But Obama is in the position where has to explain why he is getting their votes and dollars. Although Obama chooses to put a positive spin on it, he knows that Republicans are actuallly supporting him in order to eliminate HIllary.

I haven't seen any vicious politics. If Obama can't take the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. He needs to take responsibility for statements he makes, which he has so far refused to do.

Tina,

There is no reason for the personal attack, I am no more naieve than then next guy and I have not posted a thing about republicans voting for BHO, that is a piece from Kos? Go call them naieve.

Other than that, do you really think the GOP are in total lock-step?

Now can you answer my question or are you just able to insult?

Once more:

"Obama is basically speaking out against and anti-poverty programs of 60's and 70's."

How do you figure?

Have you read that specifically? Obama did not specify what he believes those "excesses" were.

Do you have a source to support the conclusion?

*****

Thanks

Did you read Obama's site on poverty? Which of his ideas sound remotely like Reagan?

Spend some time at Obama's site. His fiscal and economic policies are the opposite of Reagan and Bush. Nothing even close.

It just goes to show why Regean was the greatest President of last century.

The blog comment equivalent of a fart.

Although Obama chooses to put a positive spin on it, he knows that Republicans are actuallly supporting him in order to eliminate HIllary.

Eh, I dunno. The Republican base loves to hate them some Hilary, that is true...but I think that is exactly why most of the neocons and establishment corporocrats secretly want to run against Hilary: they know the base will turn out big-time to vote against her. Maybe it's some kind of weird Texas hold'em double reverse psychology voodoo shit; you know, wingnut media (and MSM, for that matter) rant and rave against Hilary, that brings out voters for her, she wins nomination, and idiots who don't normally vote come out in landslide number against Hitlery and the Clenis. Is there any other way to consolidate the base after eight years of the worst president ever?

Of course, I've been an Edwards supporter, so what the fuck do I know?

"The blog comment equivalent of a fart."

*snort* tee hee!