Letters to the Editor
-
Read Seth Godin
"The 'problem' for Obama (or any other candidate in the New Age) is that they can no longer control the message through traditional means. The answer is that they have to 'be the message'. And that means either telling nothing but the truth, or lying a lot more effectively than anyone has ever had to at this point in history...."
Heh, that line was funny...and so right.
"...If it wasn't the internet it would have been the collapse of civilization through one mechanism or another, but we were always going to return to relatively small, internally logical yet transitive social structures at some point...."
Sounds positively Gibsonian. Despite the despair of seeing Ridley Scott trump, on the screen, the advent of his vision three years before "Neuromancer," "Johnny Mneumonic" and "Mona Lisa Overdrive" fleshed out the type of world Scott glimpsed and you and Godin say we're heading for, Gibson's lived to see how it's all beginning to turn out.
-
Oh, It's happened....
"...I particularly hate that at least some Obama supporters keep harping on "the partisan politics of the last 20 years" as the fault of both the Republicans AND the Clintons. I know you're running against Hillary, but do you really want to discount the legacy of the ONLY Democrat that has been elected presiden in the past 20 years, and the most successful Democrat since FDR (arguably)?..."
But, the point has to be at least recognised: FDR made his share of mistakes [eg. packing the Court] but he left the Party in great shape...at a time when it was a big tent that included progressives, intellectuals, populists and--unfortunately--the hidebound racists from a region of the country that would go on to fuel the growth of the GOP a generation and a half, later.
Truman took over and was able to beat back Dewey...the Dems retained both Houses of Congress and, after the interlude of Ike, snatched the Presidency right back for another eight years. Contrast that with Clinton, who, upon handing the matter deemed important by nearly all, Health Care, to his wife, botched it which led, almost immediately, to Republican control of the Senate and the House. Throw in the fact that the '94 Congressional Repubs can at least argue that they forced Clinton to act fiscally responsible--leading, in their eyes, to the boom of the late nineties--and his inexcusable dalliance with Monica Lewinsky and you can see how some might see the Clintons as having contributed to the bitter partisanship of the nineties [yes, we all know the lunatic fringe--of course, I'm being charitable using this particular descriptive--was gunning for the Clintons since Arkansas but it hasn't been as if they've not handed some of the ammunition to their enemies] and left the Democratic Party, nationally, in worse shape than they found it.
Anyway, Mansooh's article isn't particularly about the campaign as it is about how a technology is shaping us...Obama is almost an aside but, regardless of how you or I may feel about the worth of his candidacy, you've gotta admit his campaign has more of a feel for the new technology Shirky and Mansooh are discussing than the Clinton campaign which, up until March 4, had been getting its proverbial clock cleaned.
-
@ rocky57
Arguably the fatal mistake with the Clinton health care plan is that it gave away too much to the insurance companies--which then went on and attacked it anyway. A second point could be that Americans are more comfortable with divided government in the long run. And finally, that the congressional Democrats weren't doing themselves any favors either with the (similar to today) standard end of a long period in power petty scandals and whatnot.
I'm not arguing that FDR didn't leave the party in arguably better shape--I'm arguing that going back 60 years isn't a compelling message (particularly since that Democratic party also had a "solid South" of segregation focused Democrats). The only memory that the vast majority of potential voters hold of a reasonably successful Democratic presidency is the Clinton years--where real incomes rose, employment rose, etc. Bubble or not, why dismiss that as a horrible time that you wouldn't want to go back to?
Republicans have screwed themselves royally by being allowed to have a free hand and completely botched it--why run against partisan politics rather than against Republican incompetence?
Bush's policies have put our standing in the toilet and killed thousands. Is that really as bad as the indiscipline shown by Monica Lewinsky and allowing the Republican congressional takeover of 1992. Have we been brainwashed so much by the press taking Republican talking points at face value that we can't see that perhaps the message that "partisan politics is bad" isn't necessarily stronger than "Democratic Presidents do a better job than Republican presidents, look at the facts."
Republicans aren't sharing credit for Reagan with the Democratic Congresses of the time--why should they? If you feel like giving Newt Gingrich credit that's fine--but nuance doesn't play well in elections...
-
Rocky 57
"...Bush's policies have put our standing in the toilet and killed thousands. Is that really as bad as the indiscipline shown by Monica Lewinsky and allowing the Republican congressional takeover of 1992..."
Kev, I hearya but, if Clinton hadn't pissed his opportunities away perhaps we wouldn't have had a Bush, an Iraq War or a spiralling down the toilet, economically. The way the Clintons conducted themselves was, admittedly, due in part to the partisan warfare they faced, starting with the early days in Arkansas, from the regulars and crazies on the other side of the political aisle. But, they knew they were being gunned for and still Bill allowed them the one opportunity to put the kibosh on his successor by heedlessly lying under oath about yakahooling with Monica[whatever we think about the impeachment effort, it left a needless stain on the Party and the 2000 campaign]. At the end of eight years, even Gore was sick of Bill. We can argue the merits of health care until the cows come home [and, I suspect, I'm not too far from where you may stand on the issue] the fact remains Hillary's cloak'n dagger approach to the matter was just plain silly and led to Gringrich and the likes of Scarborough to make their ascendancy and advent, again to the detriment of the Democratic Party.
Look, Bill should be given his due, where he deserves it, but, let's face it, he--often through ineptness and witless behaviour--contributed to the partisanship and made things alot more difficult for his Party and those who would advocate for his Presidency than they needed to be.