Tag Archive: Bill Clinton

Donald Trump is running Bob Dole’s campaign from 1996

Bob Dole, seated in wheelchair

Besides their obvious policy differences, one of the most striking contrasts between the presidential campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Governor Tim Walz on one hand, and Donald Trump and J.D. Vance on the other hand, is the difference in tone. Specifically, Harris and Walz are running a campaign full of joy and positivity, to the point where Republicans are trying (desperately, and unsuccessfully) to make fun of Harris for — get this — smiling and laughing. Trump and Vance instead are going with false doom and gloom.

These difference were apparent in last Tuesday’s presidential debate between Harris and Trump. In her very first answer (regarding the economy), Harris set the tone for her approach, stating, “I believe in the ambition, the aspirations, the dreams of the American people.” Accordingly, Harris outlined her plans for what she called an “opportunity economy,” including tax cuts to young families with children and to small start-up businesses. Harris often says that, her whole career, she has worked “for the people.”

In contrast, Trump began by lying that “we’ve had a terrible economy,” and then launched into his theme of the night, fear-mongering about immigrants. According to Trump, “Our country is being lost. We’re a failing nation.” Likewise, Trump said:

[W]e have millions of people pouring into our country from prisons and jails, from mental institutions and insane asylums. And they’re coming in and they’re taking jobs that are occupied right now by African Americans and Hispanics and also unions. Unions are going to be affected very soon. And you see what’s happening.

And this time, bizarrely, Trump launched a new attack against immigrants:

In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs. The people that came in. They’re eating the cats. They’re eating — they’re eating the pets of the people that live there.

Not coincidentally, most reviews and polls from across the political spectrum indicated that Harris trounced Trump in the debate.

NBC News fails political test with Ronna Romney McDaniel

NBC’s peacock, now with ruffled feathers

NBC News a/k/a NBCUniversal News Group (which includes NBC News, MSNBC and CNBC) suffered an embarrassing setback this week, as it was pressured into letting go former Republican National Committee (RNC) Chair Ronna Romney McDaniel just days after hiring her at MSNBC. A swift outcry from the public and, incredibly, some of NBC News’ well-known anchors, made it clear that McDaniel’s position at the company was untenable. These events also provide some lessons into what a television or cable TV “news” network should and should not do when it comes to politics.

First, we can stipulate that it is not out of bounds or even unusual for a TV news network to hire political people. Unfortunately, TV and other news media now largely focus on politics, something for which we often criticize them. No sooner do we see coverage of some news event (for example, the recent Francis Scott Key Bridge accident in Baltimore) than the coverage turns political, with TV panel discussions (or politicians’ statements in print or social media) about how the role of government or the current administration is somehow involved, and with the political folks at these media outlets retreating to their predictable political camps and talking points. Accordingly, those who watch broadcast or cable TV news will see familiar political faces such as James Carville, George Stephanopoulos (both from Bill Clinton‘s 1992 presidential campaign), Nicolle Wallace (George W. Bush‘s White House Communications Director), Michael Steele (former RNC Chair), Jen Psaki (Barack Obama‘s White House Communications Director), etc. on a regular basis, in addition to a bevy of guests with political jobs.

The difference here with Ronna Romney McDaniel is that, as RNC Chair during Donald Trump‘s White House term, including before, during and after the 2020 presidential election, she actively participated in the Trump/Republican attempt to nullify, overturn and steal the election. That is what triggered the immediate backlash from the public and from very prominent NBC News and MSNBC hosts such as Chuck Todd (who is NBC News’ Chief Political Analyst), Joe Scarborough, his Morning Joe co-host Mika Brzezinski, and Rachel Maddow. As Brzezinski stated on-air last Monday:

To be clear, we believe NBC News should seek out conservative Republican voices to provide balance in their election coverage. But it should be conservative Republicans, not a person who used her position of power to be an anti-democracy election denier. And we hope NBC will reconsider its decision.

List of culprits in the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade

Republican U.S. Senator Susan Collins, not looking too good

On Monday night, the explosive news broke that the Republican-majority U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) is about to overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision granting a constitutional right to abortion, and indeed, that a draft of the decision is already being circulated on the Court. The likely result of this imminent decision will be to leave abortion to the states, where it is estimated that at least half of them (primarily the ones with Republican governors and/or legislatures) will outlaw abortion completely, even in the case of rape, incest, and possibly he health or life of the mother.

To many observers, the news about this decision is shocking but not surprising, given the Court’s 6-3 majority of conservative Republicans. These Republican justices were put on the Court for the very purpose of overturning Roe, and perhaps many other decisions granting rights to women, blacks, LGBTQ Americans and other minorities; as well as protections for consumers, workers, the environment, wildlife, etc. However, the list of culprits that led us to this day goes well beyond the six current Republican SCOTUS justices and the Republican presidents who put them there. Here are some additional parties who share responsibility for the impending loss of a woman’s right to choose:

Sarah Palin loses gun scope court case as Republican shoots at Gabby Giffords’ husband in ad

The Palin/violence connection runs deep

As we have mentioned on multiple occasions, one of the lowest points in Republican Death Culture politics was Sarah Palin‘s 2010 ad which placed gun scope crosshairs on nearly a score of U.S. Congressional districts, one of which was Arizona’s 8th district, then served by Democratic Rep. Gabby Giffords. Palin introduced the ad to her Twitter followers with the gun analogy “Don’t retreat, instead- RELOAD!” Several months later, Rep. Giffords was shot in the head, six others were killed, and another 12 were wounded at Giffords’ outdoor political event in Tuscon.

While it has not been proven that the Arizona shooter was directly prompted by Palin’s gun scope ad, many people made this connection, and felt that the shooting was a natural result of Palin’s ad. Of the numerous pieces written about this, one was a New York Times editorial which stated that “the link … was clear” between Palin’s gun scope ad and the subsequent shooting of Giffords. Palin sued the New York Times for defamation over the editorial, but on Tuesday, she lost her court case. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the Times after the judge in the case ruled that Palin had failed to prove that the Times had acted with the required element of “actual malice” towards her.

At the same time, however, Republican U.S. Senate candidate Jim Lamon, who is running this year in Arizona against Gabby Giffords’ husband, Democratic U.S. Senator Mark Kelly, has been airing an ugly, violent TV and social media ad. The ad features Lamon shooting at lookalike actors portraying President Joe Biden, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senator Kelly. The dangers here are obvious and almost too ominous to think about.

The speech that set off the MAGA terrorists — in 1992

Right wing terrorists erect gallows and noose at U.S. Capitol, Jan. 6, 2021

If you do not recognize the name Patrick Buchanan, he is the right wing Republican extremist who years ago helped motivate the MAGA types whose successors are harming America and threatening U.S. government officials today. Buchanan’s long background in Republican politics encompasses work for GOP presidents from  Richard Nixon to Ronald Reagan. This work included writing speeches filled with red meat for the Republican base, and coining the term “Silent Majority” for Nixon, a white power dog whistle. In between these White House stints, Buchanan was the co-host of CNN‘s Crossfire (note: the author worked on the Crossfire program), pioneering the “food fight” format that is so prevalent on cable TV news today, where Buchanan bullied many liberal guests. When Buchanan went to work for President Ronald Reagan, he caused controversy by criticizing Israel “and its amen corner in the United States,” and continued a long-running apology campaign for Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. The Buchanan Nazi apology tour reached its nadir when Buchanan encouraged Reagan to visit a cemetery in Bitburg, Germany where members of the Waffen-SS were buried, and to say that these Nazi soldiers “were victims, just as surely as the victims in the concentration camps.”

Donald Trump’s awful election season

Donald Trump speaks to reporters separated by social distancing, April 2020

The Coronavirus (COVID-19) emergency could have been a shining moment for Donald Trump. American voters really only need two things from their president in a major crisis: First, they need unity. Second, they need competence. Unfortunately, Trump has been unable to display either one.

Trump has utterly failed to unify America. Recall George W. Bush after the 9/11 attacks in 2001, standing on a pile of rubble at “Ground Zero” that, just three days earlier, had been the World Trade Center, telling the American people:

I can hear you! The rest of the world hears you! And the people – and the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon.

For a short time, at least, the country was unified, and Bush’s approval rating was a sky-high 90 percent (until he misused such unity, for example, to start an unrelated, disastrous war in Iraq).

Likewise, Bill Clinton gave us comforting words of unity after the 1995 domestic terrorist attack on the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, in both a speech immediately after the attack and a separate memorial prayer service four days later. Barack Obama also provided a unifying message of strength in announcing that U.S. forces had killed Osama bin Laden in 2011, after which crowds of young people gathered outside the White House to cheer President Obama’s action.

In Democratic primary predictions, media have no clue

Pete Buttigieg campaign truck in front of Iowa Democratic presidential debate

When it comes to the Democratic presidential nomination, our mainstream media are quick to make snap judgments and predictions without much reflection. Currently, the media are overemphasizing the results of the outlier Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primaries, to declare Pete Buttigieg and Bernie Sanders, respectively, the front-runners, while simultaneously declaring Joe Biden‘s moderate candidacy dead in favor of either Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar or Mike Bloomberg. The media likely are wrong in these conclusions. At minimum, their declarations are premature and lacking in evidence. For perspective, let’s take a look at the 1992 and 2004 Democratic presidential nominations, since that’s the last two times the Democrats were running against an incumbent Republican president:

No surprise as mainstream media fall short in Trump impeachment coverage

Protesters share their opinion on Donald Trump impeachment

While many mainstream media outlets have aired the Donald Trump impeachment hearings that began in the U.S. House on Wednesday, the commentary by some of the media afterward was cringeworthy. Special mention goes to NBC News and Reuters, who faulted the hearings for not being scintillating enough. According to NBC News:

Reuters followed up with “Consequential, but dull: Trump impeachment hearings begin without a bang.” Sadly, this is the kind of circus coverage that we have come to expect from our news media.

Democratic leadership and base talk Trump impeachment differently

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi

Much hay was made this week from Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi‘s answer to a Washington Post interviewer’s question about impeaching Donald Trump. Here’s the question and Pelosi’s response:

There have been increasing calls, including from some of your members, for impeachment of the president.

I’m not for impeachment. This is news. I’m going to give you some news right now because I haven’t said this to any press person before. But since you asked, and I’ve been thinking about this: Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.

Many Democrats took to blogs and social media to express their disappointment with Speaker Pelosi’s answer. For example, here’s author and MSNBC contributor Malcolm Nance:

However, what this episode really shows is that the Democratic Party’s base (including a few House members) and its leadership have different considerations that allow them differing degrees of freedom in what they can say publicly at this time.

Donald Trump’s Saturday Night Live Massacre

1938 political cartoon attacking Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt

Ever since NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” went on the air in 1975, it has made fun of the president of the United States. From Gerald Ford‘s absentmindedness to Bill Clinton’s philandering to Barack Obama‘s ultra-calm politeness, presidents have had to contend with their satirical SNL portrayals. Usually, presidents have laughed along with such send-ups, knowing that not only is this the price they pay to lead a free society, but also that, for politicians, a little self-deprecating humor can go a long way.

Now comes Donald Trump, however, who has no self-deprecating humor and, according to many people, no self-awareness. Trump also has the thinnest skin of any president (or just about anyone) in our lifetimes. After last Saturday night’s portrayal of Trump on SNL, instead of laughing along, Trump took to his favorite mode of communication, Twitter, and challenged the legality of SNL:

We can only say, good luck with that.