What follows isn’t about journalism, it’s about the sad state of the Democratic Party:
Yesterday I heard John Wertheim, leader of the New Mexico Democratic Party ( and Governor Richardson’s mouthpiece) ruminate on the party’s internal debate. It was blather. Wertheim offered the classic Clintonian approach to winning elections –triangulation and marketing.
Today’s New York Times reports, however, that former President Clinton himself said New Orleans highlighted the Bush Administration’s tilt toward the upper class. Yes, he talked "class."
In another story, the Times reported that Cindy Sheehan challenged Sen. Hillary Clinton to oppose the war in Iraq.
Forget the Clintons. My point is that the Democratic Party’s problem is not how it expresses itself nor is it specific stands on issues. It must believe in something.
Imagine, for example, the Democrats taking up the cudgels for the middle class and poor against the corporate state. And vowing to end the Iraq War, not just because Bush mismanaged it but because it was ill-begotten
That would distinguish the parties, wouldn’t it?
Of course, the Democrats (think Hillary, Bill Richardson) won’t run against corporate power; they are almost as beholden to it as is the GOP. Of course, the Democrats won’t stand tall against the war; they are too fearful of looking wimpy, even unpatriotic.
No, they will continue to poll, identify positions that lie between what they secretly believe and what the Republicans espouse. Finally, they will poll again to find the right way to couch those sentiments. Voila, Clintonism!
Unless, of course, Bill Clinton’s comments mean he is abandoning Clintonism.
Naaah.