![]() |
|
| |
|
The 2000 Election All Over AgainPosted on Jan 2, 2008By Marie Cocco WASHINGTON—“Powerful forces and powerful interests stand in your way,” the candidate said, “and the odds seem stacked against you—even as you do what’s right for you and your family.” He would fight these powers, and take on in particular “big tobacco, big oil, the big polluters, the pharmaceutical companies, the HMOs.” Sometimes, the candidate declared, “you have to be willing to stand up and say no—so families can have a better life.” John Edwards, 2008? No. Al Gore, 2000. The campaign trail is ablaze now with fiery populism, with just about every Democrat—and Edwards in particular—railing against the forces they say have eroded the economic well-being of the middle class, diminished Americans’ access to health care and threatened the roofs over their heads as the subprime mortgage crisis is transformed into a foreclosure calamity and credit crunch. Even Republican Mike Huckabee, breaking from his party’s orthodoxy that there’s nothing really wrong with the economy, has been chanting the populist mantra, to the chagrin of the party’s pro-business wing. Has something changed since Gore delivered his populist manifesto during his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles—and was ridiculed by much of the political class and the media as a phony making a fraudulent argument? Well, yes. Much of what Gore warned would happen if George W. Bush won the presidency has come to pass. The Republican president did try to privatize Social Security and carve out private accounts from the government-guaranteed benefit. “Social Security minus,” Gore called it then. The Republican president and a Republican Congress did, indeed, pass a Medicare prescription drug benefit that “tells seniors to beg the HMOs and insurance companies for prescription drug coverage,” just as Gore predicted in his speech. “Big tobacco” turned out to be one of the biggest winners of the past legislative session, even with Democrats in control of Congress. The White House and a core group of House Republicans refused to go along with hiking tobacco taxes to pay for an expansion of health insurance for needy children. That was even after Democrats stripped out a proposal to pay for the kids’ insurance by reducing billions in subsidies the Republican Congress had lavished on the managed-care industry. As for “big oil,” who needs more than a visit to the gas station? With the price of oil reaching $100 a barrel, and industry profits already having set records in 2006, does anyone wonder what kind of year “big oil” will turn out to have enjoyed when it posts profits for 2007? Gore could not have foretold the stagnation in wages that has been the dominant, if little discussed, economic trend of the past seven years. With the focus on HMO outrages during the 1990s, the former vice president can be forgiven for not having predicted a worse development: the number of Americans without any health insurance has grown by 8.6 million since 2000. Middle-class concern about the economy has deepened since then, as jobs and pensions have become less secure. The anchor of middle-class life—homeownership—now seems threatened. Unease that was buried beneath the rubble from the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and obscured by the bloodshed in Iraq has become a full-blown fear of falling backward. Still, the anointed commentariat is likely to dismiss the populism that rises up from the campaign trail as lacking substance, political staying power, or both. Among those who sneered at Gore were Peggy Noonan, William Safire, George Will, Michael Barone and various other pundits who, while sometimes giving the vice president points for delivery, declared his us-against-them speech to be a sure-fire turnoff. After the campaign, Gore’s running mate, Joe Lieberman, said populism was “ineffective” and that Americans reject “us-versus-them” rhetoric. But the populist Gore, whose support surged after the convention, managed to win the popular vote. Lieberman now supports Republican John McCain for president. There’s no mystery about what will happen in 2008 once the nominees are known. Some sort of economic populism will remain central to the Democrats’ message—otherwise they’d be guilty of political malpractice. Republicans will decry this as “class warfare” and hew closely to the Bush economic prescriptions of tax cuts for the well-off and willful blindness to other economic pressures burdening families. So we are doomed to go back to the future, facing much the same choice we did in 2000. Marie Cocco’s e-mail address is mariecocco(at)washpost.com. © 2008, Washington Post Writers Group Previous item: Musharraf Still Stands Next item: Hollywood's Thumbs-Down on Abortion Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
By Conservative Yankee, January 7, 2008 at 5:31 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Frank, Although I agree with much of what you have stated, there is the “individual responsibility” piece.
The Tobacco industry is thriving Despite the common knowledge that cigarettes kill. In a free country people have the right to make “unpopular” choices.
Many people voted for GWB, and then re-elected him, and even given that the voting machines were rigged, the 2000 election was stolen, and GWB is the biggest crook since Myer Lansky, where is the majority outrage, the French revolution style reprisals, and why is the incredibly vapid commentary from a lap-dog press/media accepted by “we the people”?
In my lifetime we have NEVER had a worse slate of candidates.. The best of the bunch make Dan Quayle look presidential. Why do the US Citizens not DEMAND better? Around the world other peoples are throwing off their chains….why are we importing them?
Report thisBy Frank Cajon, January 6, 2008 at 10:07 pm #
I just missed the memo about how Gore, and now Edwards, were great populist saviors. True, had Nader and Jeb not delivered the Chancellor his crown in 2000 we would not likely be in the hell that hath been wrought by God’s chosen emissary, but in 2004 we as a people reupped the bastard. Now, the cardboard cutouts being run on both sides (the front-runners in particular, I admit that Paul and Kucinich are running largely grass-roots efforts) are fronts for big tobacco, big oil and its SUV culture, pharmaceuticals, and HMOs-they aren’t raising their war chests on $20 donations from the vanishing middle class. Gore made a good movie and if he ever uses green energy on his mansions he’ll be a role model for the battle on global warming, but the rhetoric cited in this piece doesn’t make him a prophet, merely an observer. And Edwards? Come on…does anyone here think he is going to make the tobacco industry pay the price to pay for the health costs their poison shit causes to the children that suck the second-hand fumes of his home state’s top cash crop? Dream on.
Report thisNow, as Bush/Cheney Reich has brought down the American economy, it would be refreshing to hear some candidates that have a plan to address the worsening recession. One very astute observation made in the piece is that Herr Bush’s idiot plan to have private Social Security investment accounts getting nixed is a blessing, since those investments in a year would be worthless with the dollar diving to peso level.
By Jacks, January 5, 2008 at 9:09 am #
Using children (girls) as a smear? Bigoted fool. My God, girls and women are natural to our damn species. They’re human!
Report thisBy Conservative Yankee, January 5, 2008 at 5:58 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
martin weiss, January 4
“Bush is the best thing that ever happened to Democrats—now everyone can see the true nature of the GOP—abolishing the Bill of Rights, forcing Americans to work for peanuts and no benefits, lying again and again, and co-opting media to echo those lies.”
Well pardon me if I disagree. As the Public broadcasting ad states;
George W Bush & ideas brought to you by the Republicratic Party, and courtesy of voters…like you!
Report thisBy martin weiss, January 4, 2008 at 9:51 am #
Message to the terrorists, foreign and domestic:
Report thisWe Americans are not scared.
Not scared of Bush and his corporate henchmen who are running scared behind a new law absolving them of all crimes going back to 1997. Gosh, why did they need absolution?
Not scared of a few thousand “terrorists” in foreign countries whose own people do not, cannot support policies that kill women and children just as effectively as Bush’s “shock and awe”.
Not scared of the House Bill, 1959, making some thoughts illegal, like believing in Justice, Democracy, etc.
Bush is the best thing that ever happened to Democrats—now everyone can see the true nature of the GOP—abolishing the Bill of Rights, forcing Americans to work for peanuts and no benefits, lying again and again, and co-opting media to echo those lies.
Sorry George, but a rich boy bully will never understand what the Constitution is. Those of us who made our own way in life agreed to live by rules that enable us all to be free—a freedom you’ll never know. We don’‘t need five thousand troops to provide security so we can visit foreign countries, or even go “home” to Texas, which we suggest you do before you’re indicted for what is, according to the Nuremburg Tribunals, “the supreme international crime”—a war of aggression. Maybe Paraguay won’t extradite you?
By weather, January 4, 2008 at 3:50 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
PatrickHenry, you are my hero. Not because I often agree w/you, its what I’ve learned from you.
Report thisBy cyrena, January 3, 2008 at 8:12 pm #
So, CY, let me first see if I understand correctly, since Im not experienced in the prices of foreign oil
Are you saying that the $100.00 a barrel price for oil, that is plastered all over the news, (at least on my newsreader) is the price that Saudi Arabia, Mexico, and Venezuela, are charging for THEIR oil?
And, does that further suggest that Exxon-Mobile, is NOT selling their oil for that much?
How about Chevron? Do you think theirs is cheaper as well? If so, do you have an idea about how much Exxon-Mobile is selling THEIRS for? (presumably, they DO get some profit from the sale of their PRIVATIZED oil, just as you suggest these others get from their nationalized oil sales).
So, Im just curious.
Meantime, I suspect Marie will probably get over the fact that you cant trust anything she says. Its not much likely to change her income, or the price of tea in India.
As for the decrease in oil company profits that you predict, Im guessing theyll still be able to eat and send the kids off to college. Well know for sure though, if Condi only gets to buy 500 pairs of shoes in Italy, as opposed to the standard 1,200 every year.
Jeeze, hard to believe its even getting tough for the oil barons. Maybe we should take up a collection or something.
Report thisBy cyrena, January 3, 2008 at 7:53 pm #
Well David,
Maybe YOU should run, and form an independent party of ‘sissy girls’.
Then we won’t have to be depending on ‘just our luck’ for an opposition party.
Report thisBy cyrena, January 3, 2008 at 4:22 pm #
OMIGOD,OMIGOD…
Outraged, you’ve made my day!! This is just too hilarious!! There ought to be a law against laughing this hard. My head hurts. My stomach hurts. And now I think I’ll watch it again!!
Patrick Henry,
I love the ‘whack a mole’ fashion.
Report thisBy PatrickHenry, January 3, 2008 at 4:15 pm #
We need Carter!
Yes, we need former President Carter to step in to certify the results of this next election and to restore much needed confidence currently lacking in our voting system.
Armed with computer science majors from the main universities to monitor these paperless voting machines which the RNC and DLC refuse to have fixed and law students to monitor exit polls, any fraud perpetrated by any parties would be dealt with in a severe whack a mole fashion.
Report thisBy Ga, January 3, 2008 at 2:45 pm #
I’d amend it to, Are we better off now?
Is there any other decade in modern history that demonstrates that we all, the entire world, are dependent on each other, economically, spiritually?
We have had more war, more suffering, more pain, more fear, more fear-mongering, more want, more needs…. since 2000 than any decade since 1930; all since a Christian Fundamentalist Whitehouse Administration came to power on the shoulders of Christian Fundamentalist Foreign Policy makers and on the backs of the American and Middle Eastern people.
And there are still 2 more years. One of which will still be under control of delusional, apocalyptic leaders.
If you happen to be among the 1 percenters, though, things are just great!
Report thisBy BlueSRM, January 3, 2008 at 2:14 pm #
Obama vs. McCain for reality-based voters.
Report thisBy Outraged, January 3, 2008 at 2:13 pm #
Well, after the events of the past several days I’ve come to the conclusion that it has to be Jackie in ‘08.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxQSmN2B_5Q
Report thisBy David, January 3, 2008 at 1:19 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
The Dems will lose. They ALWAYS lose. They LIKE to lose. You just wait. If a Dems does get appointed unitary executive you will see the Republican minority in Congress direct every move the Dems make including the UE. Remember, it is not that the Dems fear Republicans, they are just deathly afraid of what Repubs will SAY about them. Things like ‘soft on terror’, ‘tax and spend’, defeatocrats etc. Just this country’s luck to have such a bunch of sissy girls as our only opposition party.
Report thisBy purplewolf, January 3, 2008 at 11:58 am #
Remember what Ann Landers would tell readers who were faced with a problem and they didn’t know which way to go? Ask yourself: Are you better off now than you were in 2000?
If you answer yes, then stay where you are, but if you are like most of the population I have come in contact with in the last 7 years, you are worse off now, especially since the 2000 stolen election.
Report thisBy hazmaq, January 3, 2008 at 11:29 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Doomed? Geez you guys must be hanging around Rudy and Joe Lieberman too much.
Thing are drastically different in this one HUGE favorable sense:
The Schumers and Reids and Hoyers and Emanuels of the party who, through the use of our campaign donations for the last 10 years, stuffed Republican-like Congressional candidates down everyones throats so much so that now everyone is disgusted with their votes and their leadership.
All this time Hoyer, Emanuel, Reid, Pelosi and especially Harmon and Rockefeller, catered so much to the whims of the Right and joined in the Rights parade of fear mongering thinking it would strengthen their own positions, when the entire country -including the Right - are, in fact, running in the opposite direction.
No one’s buying the crap Congressional DLC Democrats are trying to sell, anymore.
So in the next Congressional election -expect some big leadership changes. (Every pollster predicts big Democratic gains to our weak kneed Senate.)
Hillary and Rudy -the experienced frontrunners -are being stomped on by a stampede of nationalistic Americans of ever race, creed and color.
And I’m really proud of all of them.
And personally, I believe Obama’s rise will help put real Democrats back in control of the Democratic Party in Congress.
Report thisBy lib in texas, January 3, 2008 at 7:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I’m still waiting for outrage over the Valerie Plame
Report thisexposure a treasonous act if ever! More and more information coming out regarding the presidents involvement not so much as a passing comment.
By Conservative Yankee, January 3, 2008 at 7:37 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Marie Cocco likes to paint with a very broad brush. She speaks of “big oil” as if it were a cartoon name for a real oil company. She talks about $100 a barrel oil, and then talks about “oil company profits in 2006” when a barrel of oil sold for half that.
While this is not a big part of her argument, the oil business is a place where I have experience. I know the profits in 2006 came from an expanding market, and that Arabia, Mexico, and Venezuela charging $100 a barrel for their state-controlled oil will not increase ExxonMobil’s profits by one cent! In fact I look for a decrease in oil company stocks as production, storage, and insurance costs increase.
Oh, yes, my point… If Marie has no problem playing fast and loose with issues where I am familiar, how am I to trust her on any issues?
The answer is, I do not!
Report thisBy jackpine savage, January 3, 2008 at 7:10 am #
Mary makes a good point: everything was a great deal rosier in 2000. Today, a large segment of the American population sees things going downhill; they will be more open - regardless of the commentariat (great word, by the way) - to populism. Unfortunately, the Democratic Party is led by old warriors from the 90’s, still bruised and scarred from those political battles. They seem unwilling, at least so far, to embrace populism.
The other difference is who’s doing the talking. Al Gore is hardly an inspiring figure. (Ok, the Global Warming campaign has inspired many, but it is neither a campaign for office nor one with actual opponents. Moreover, his current success may well stem from a great desire to be inspired rather than inherent inspiration.)
If populism is going to be “us vs. them”, it will fall flat on its face so long as us is being led by someone obviously one of them. Consequently, Obama can rally the masses (particularly the young) because he can make himself seem more us than them. Clinton won’t be able to pass herself off as one of us because it is obviously not true.
The Dems will shy away from outright populism in the general election, but their candidate might be able to muster some success with it by indicating how they plan to structure the administration. For example, if the nominee suggests that they will appoint Edwards as AG, they might be able to harness some of the force of populism without embracing it wholeheartedly.
Report thisBy mary, January 3, 2008 at 5:47 am #
The difference is most Americans have felt the pressure of this administrations policies first hand. We all have seen our incomes affected in some way, either higher drug and medical costs, fuel and food prices, almost every aspect of our cost of living has been impacted, there’s no doubt of that. Most of us are painfully aware the national news media is not giving us the news, the greedy corporations are raping our pockets, our kids get the worst education, and we have politicians who try to control us with fear and hate and are the least “American” among us. I’m still waiting to hear some real outrage over the destroyed CIA tapes. The world is watching and this just might be the break point for our Country.
Report thisBy Jaded Prole, January 3, 2008 at 3:27 am #
Either in the slate of phony corporate “electable” candidates or in our ability to have legitimate national elections.
Report thisBy cyrena, January 2, 2008 at 11:28 pm #
Much better Marie. At least this one addresses the reality of our previous mistakes, with the hope that we might see this time, though admittedly, things dont look any better, based on that pundindtry that still influences far too many Americans.
On this:
With the focus on HMO outrages during the 1990s, the former vice president can be forgiven for not having predicted a worse development: the number of Americans without any health insurance has grown by 8.6 million since 2000.
This is because (I think) he couldnt have predicted 9/11.
I suspect that there is a considerable link between the losses of so many jobs, and the fact that there are so many Americans without health insurance now. My industry alone, (and there had to be countless others) lost nearly 100,000 employees. Along with that job loss, was the loss in health insurance. Add that to all of the other stuff, and we see how it has happened. Or, at least that helps understand a part of the reason.
Prior to the Coup of 2000, most Americans were insured for health coverage, via their employers. When such a substantial (formerly employed) portion of the population loses their employment, then they lose those benefits. Any replacement employees, (at least since 2001) have generally not been provided these same benefits. The corporations have drastically improved their own profits, by denying such benefits, and so there we have it.
Meantime, Ive often wondered what horrors may have come from an executive due that included Joe Lieberman. As much a populist (and as smart as Al Gore was and is) he had this snake as a running mate. Who could have known? Obviously, Al Gore didnt know he was such a snake either. Or, at least I didnt.
Report thisBy lee walthall, January 2, 2008 at 11:01 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
This is so depressing. I hope we can find a remedy this time. I fear for the future.
Report this