Bill Clinton Decries Divide And Win Politics
Former President Bill Clinton:
He told his left-leaning audience of about 500 journalists to consider opposing views and appreciate the value of working with people who differ with them. He urged them not to turn public figures into “two-dimensional cartoons.”While he doesn’t agree with much of the Bush administration policies, Clinton said, he has come to understand President Bush better. Clinton said Bush has “an intuitive intelligence,” provoking laughter from the audience. But Clinton said he meant that seriously.
What concerns him more, he said, is a particular strain of the Republican Party that he said has gotten control in Washington. Reminding his audience that he grew up in the South as a native of Arkansas, Clinton said right-wing ideologues and “ultra-conservative, white Southerners” have “demonized” those who think differently from them.
Their “divisive” approach has made it more difficult to make substantive change, he said.
“My problem is I don’t think this way of doing politics and making policy is good for America,” he said. “We’ve got to find ways to get back to evidence-based politics.”
The politics of demonization (which is also practiced by some Democrats as well) has infected the content and tone of national debate, the tenor of generally-polarized radio talk shows and, most definitely, the blogosphere where some think that if someone writes a differing idea they MUST be the Enemy.
There was even a case of a progressive blogger being driven from posting because his anonymous identity was exposed (see here and follow up here). It’s quite notable that you don’t see bloggers exposing the identities (or running the private phone numbers on their blogs) of people they AGREE WITH. Just why do you think that’s the case?
FOOTNOTE TO READERS: I met this same progressive blogger who wanted to protect his identity at a Stanford University conference on blogging last year. How? Another progressive blogger at the conference made a blanket statement swiping at conservative bloggers and THIS progressive blogger got up to DEFEND the integrity of conservative bloggers on the panel and some others associated with them as people who seriously debated issues in good faith.
And, indeed, later I was invited to drinks at a table that included that same anonymous blogger on the left and several bloggers on the right, who proceeded to energetically discuss political issues but but weren’t out to destroy each other — and who didn’t feel that just because someone disagreed they were the enemy and that they would not read or link to them or would de-link them.
So there are thoughtful, constructive people with different ideas out there in politics and the blogosphere. Will the political and blog cultures drive them away?
18 Responses to “Bill Clinton Decries Divide And Win Politics”
Sorry Joe. The republicans started this hate rhetoric crap 16 years ago with talk radio. It won them some gains, it will be their undoing. If they had only been content with losing elections based on ideology, the world would be a better place today. But no, greed speaks for the repub. in more ways than one can count.
Hate? You betcha! We are going to gut them from their crotch to their necks over and over again until they learn HOW to feel the pain.
Sorry, Sal- Bill and Joe are way ahead of the curve on this one, blazing a third trail that some of us recognize is reasonable and necessary. The truth doesn’t reside in a single political party. Keep up the good fight, Joe.
No third trail. That would only be taken as an attempt to divide the Democrat vote this year. If you want a third trail, may I suggest a third trail within the conservative fifth column? You have a much greater chance rationalizing with Democrats than republicans.
You can have fifty parties if you like, it will not change the fact that the neo-cons are your enemy. You will only be dividing yourselves.
When the political atmosphere becomes so polluted that desperate media whores like Ann Coulter show up on cable tv as political pundits, you know things have gone too far. When Larry Johnson says about Karl Rove-”No wonder his mother committed suicide” , and it is not immediately condemned by right and left, you know things have gone too far. Does it really matter how it all started?
Clinton is right, we should condemn the vitriol whether it is from the right or left. If someone runs a vicious campaign in your county or state, e-mail them that you will not be giving them your vote. Register independent and let the candidates work for your vote. Only way to stop it.
I agree with Pres. Clinton that this crop of Republicans is the most narrow-minded in recent history. Don’t really see that they have anything in common with Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt or even Eisenhower. They proclaim the high moral ground, but then act without principle.
I agree completely that demonizing eachother does not work at all.
Off topic: a good friend of mine bought me Clinton’s biography (for my birthday): highly interesting.
YES it matters how “it all started”! Do you realize how many people suffer today because of this hate rhetoric?! The right STILL practices hate far worse than the left. That alone should tell you something. However, we are catching up.
Why? Because the right started a war and people are dying. Something the right never cared about and something the left has ALWAYS cared about.
This is serious business, not a game. Pick a side. Trying to play referee is a cop out and makes you look silly.
Sal, you are practicing hate rhetoric far more than most of us. It discredits only yourself.
Kim,
Comparing Larry Johnsons over the top comment on the web with media whore Ann colter is a diversion. Johnson has a partisan bias, but speaks as an imformed ex-CIA operative. Ann Coulter goes from talk show to talk show pimping her books and inflating her ego. Maybe if Coulter ate a little humble pie she wouldn’t be the vicious harpie she claims liberals to be. Coulter is like t dunk tank clown at a carnival, as a liberal I don’t believe she actually believes half of what she says and try to ignore her. When hate goes from obsure bloggs to MSM then is the time to worry. (Holly – lighten up)
Rove is deserving of Larry Johnson’s scorn. His methods have been to use proxies to use racist and devisive tactics. I suspect that Rove had something to do with the phone calls in SC hinting that McCain had a “nigger love child”. This was a sickening slander to a man who adopted a child from Sri Lanka(I think). What was just as disgusting was Bush not attacking or immediately denoucing this attack. Bush allows Rove to do evil with a clever wink-wink.
Holly you were discreditied when you were born.
Michael van der Galien
You are wrong there! Hate put the republicans where they are today.
It ain’t ever going away. You might as well tell advertising companies to stop using sex to sell things.
Negative campaigning and smearing has proven affective at winning elections and as long as voters can be swayed by such tactics (ie. forever) they will continue to be utilised. The right has pioneered it, and the left is catching up. It will only get worse.
Kevin- I totally agree. Maybe it finds an audience for the same reason that Americans watch violent movies and play violent video games-a need for excitement. Discussing details of policy during an election can show you have a grasp of the issues, but it no longer makes headlines.
If you don’t believe that’s true, look at how much attention (and how many books sold) Ann Coulter got in a three day period for her remarks about the 9/11 widows. Look at how effective a tool Karl Rove has been in Republican campaigns, by twisting and spinning remarks made by the opposition. Unfortunately, hate speech works as an effective political tactic.
I choose to reject it when I see it from BOTH sides. I don’t care which side originated its use or which side uses it more-we are sliding down that slippery slope. I am old enough to remember civility and diplomacy in government. It may soon disappear, and we won’t be able to get it back.
How on earth do you expect to fight terrorism if we are at each others throats constantly here?
Maybe that Unity ’08 movement is something to look into.
Rudi- I’m not defending Rove(was actually hoping he’d be indicted)- but I thought Larry Johnson crossed the same line of decency that Ann Coulter did. Hate speech in the political arena is hurting America, because it divides us when we need unity.
Kim,
It was over the top, but like Valery Plame he risked his neck for the CIA. What did Rove and W do to face injury or death? Johnson is a partisan and is OK by me. The depth of his attack has a way to go before he catches up to “man-woman” Coulter. It was uncalled for but so was Roves supposed racist SC attack of McCain. The Dem’s have along way to go before they are in the slime pit with Rove and Coulter.
One reason I mostly vote Democratic is because I feel that they more often hold the moral high ground. When they get down in the mud like Rove, Coulter, Savage, Limbaugh, Hannity and others it just gives the other side more ammunition against them. I’m not critiquing Larry Johnson’s whole life -just that one comment.
If its wrong when Republicans stoop that low, its also wrong when the Democrats do it-and it damages our ability for reasoned debate between the parties. Just because “they do it” shouldn’t be reason for us to do it.
Its like the torture debate-because jihadists stoop to torture and cut off heads of the opposition-should the U.S.? Or should we hold ourselves to a higher standard?.
I’m trying to hold the Democrats to a higher standard-so we don’t just get finger-pointing out of our politicians. I’m supporting Clinton’s centrist position 100%.
Is anyone denying that both sides do it?
Given that, there is no argument for “we are better than them because we do it less” because both sides are just as bad by taking part in it at all. There is no argument for “we are better than them because they started it” because the other side saw how well it worked and copying it, instead of seeing how inappropriate it was and taking the high road.
Any argument of “we are better than them” because “they” do it more or “they” did it first is childish. The only people who are better than “them” are those who refuse to take part in such actions. Clinton seems to be taking that road. It looks like some others aren’t willing to follow his lead. What a shame.
Basic Prisoner’s Dilemma, Ryan. Everyone would benefit if they would co-operate and refuse to engage in divisive politics. But, if only one side engages in it, they gain the advantage at the expense of others that refuse to play the game. So, any question of asking one side to stop and take the high ground isn’t going to go anywhere, because you’re asking them to enter a 100m sprint with a 50m handicap.
With as many people who are so frustrated about these practices, I have to wonder if taking the high road couldn’t be an advantage. I know anyone who would take the high road would get more consideration from me. Of course, they would still have to have a stance compatible with mine to get my vote but, if two candidates both had stances compatible with mine and one took the high road, I know who I’d vote for.
PING:
TITLE: Uh-Oh alert: The President is claiming to have another one of those infamous ‘gut feelings’ again
BLOG NAME: The Gun Toting Liberal
Presiding over the country from a fascinating frightening mixture of the “gut” and and the Old Testament has pretty much defined President Bush’s “legacy” so far. Remember this?
President Bush on Russian President Vladimi…