Bill Clinton Gets It Right — Almost
Like so many other convention watchers, I was much impressed by the performance of former President Bill Clinton. Beyond his superb presentation, he actually hit the content buttons. He moved beyond the ‘my grandfather was poorer than yours’ rhetoric, and the deadening dull sloganeering that’s largely been the basis of both parties’ campaigning. He actually got into issues, their meaning for voters, what specific programs would or wouldn’t do for specific groups of voters.
Well done, Mr. Clinton. Better than well done. Masterful. Except…
Except there was that one item he slipped into the middle of his talk. The one that was supposed to illustrate President Obama’s willingness to compromise with Republicans and the latter’s refusal to do so under any circumstances — Simpson Bowles.
A bipartisan commission headed by these two was supposed to come up with recommendations to check our endless national debt buildup. Alan Simpson, one chairman of this commission, was a former very conservative Republican senator. Chester Bowles, a former Clinton Administration official, was the Democratic-appointed head of the commission.
Was this group bipartisan? Sure. In the sense that both parties had representation at the top. But ideologically and fiscally, it was heavily big money and Wall Street weighted. Bowles, the Democrat, is also a former Wall Street bigwig, and part of the Clinton-era, Wall Street-friendly, so-called ‘centrist wing’ of the Democratic Party.
And surprise! The Simpson-Bowles commission came up with a plan that cut programs for the poor and middle class on a 2 1/2 times to 1 ratio with revenue increases that might hurt the rich and Wall Street.
Elizabeth Warren, who spoke just before Bill Clinton last night, is now the voice of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. She called the financial system facing middle class Americans these days “rigged” — something that’s obvious to anyone who bothers to consider the matter seriously. Bill Clinton, his economic mentor Robert Rubin, and the Rubin gang that included Chester Bowles, played a big part in this rigging.
So…
So Bill Clinton’s speech last night got it mostly right in distinguishing what separates the Obama-Democrats from the Romney-Ryan-Tea Party-Republicans. But Clinton is still a decade behind when it comes to acknowledging a middle class rigging to which he contributed mightily.
Otherwise it was a great speech.
LEGAL NOTICE ON CARTOON: The above copyrighted cartoon is licensed to run on TMV. Reproduction elsewhere without licensing is strictly prohibited. See great cartoons by all the top political cartoonists at http://cagle.com. To license this cartoon for your own site, visit http://politicalcartoons.com
Share This
Related Posts
-
Obama Must Face Up to Post-Assad Syria Now! (Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, Saudi Arabia)
Posted on Apr 11, 2013
-
Jay-Z Releases New Track “Open Letter” Mocking Republicans Outrage Over Cuba Trip
Posted on Apr 11, 2013
-
Cheney vs. Clinton in 20xx?
Posted on Apr 9, 2013
-
For Himself and Palestine, Obama Must Now take Historic Risk (Al Hayat Al Jadidah, Palestinian Territories)
Posted on Mar 24, 2013
He also didn’t mention the repeal of Glass-Steagal.
dduck: I think that Mr. Silverstein included that in the rigging part (it may have been the central piece, actually)
I noticed that and as it’s such an important part of promoting and re-nominating President Obama I for one just don’t understand how he overlooked it.
Thanks for bringing up this important and major SNAFU.
I still pin the Gramm-Leech-Bliley largely on the GOP even thought Clinton signed it and a lot of dems agreed as well. The dems wrangled a lot of things to get their support for that legislation that was pushed very aggressively by the GOP. Also at the time the right was really going all out to push the narrative about how big govt regulations have been hamstringing the private sector. The dems were holding out for a few things, namely the expansion of the loan assistance to low income people that wanted to buy homes. So basically, although yes it was a bi-partisan vote at the end, the GOP was clearly out to assist the financial sector, but huge pressure on the dems to deregulate, and the dems were holding out to help poor people. At least, this is what it looks like to me.
Speaking of water over the dam regrets: April 2010 Fox News!!!
["There's no question that, in 1999, when they 'deregulated' by getting rid of Glass-Steagall — something that was done with a Republican Congress and a Democratic president — I think we really went too far in saying there are banks and there are non-banks and they can own each other," Issa said Monday during an appearance on "Imus in the Morning" on the Fox Business Network.
A Republican-controlled House, with strong Democratic support, voted in late 1999 to repeal Glass-Steagall, while the Senate voted 54-44, with only one Democratic vote in favor, to support the repeal.]
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/94281-top-republican-says-1999-glass-steagall-repeal-went-too-far
Absolutely slamfu.
Phil Gramm has done more damage to the American economy that anyone else… EVER.
The Dodd Frank Act passed in 2010 before the Tea Party took over in 2011. 27 Democrats voted against it including Dennis Kucinich and all the Republicans voted against it in the House.
In the Senate it passed 60-39 with Republicans Snow, Brown and Collins for and Feingold against (because it didn’t go far enough in regulation).
Had they tried it in 2011 or today…
I’m going to go out on a limb and contend that should the current legislation not be aggressively enforced, we will have another melt-down. That melt-down will cause such catastrophe that real regulation will bet passed–and kept, for another 60+ years.
Here’s another idiotic idea: http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/30/business/la-fi-hedge-fund-advertising-20120830
Dodd-Frank won’t help this one and is regarded as another Frankenstein idea.
http://www.economist.com/node/21559657
Amen Steve. Amen. re old phil