Obama Returns U.S. Politics to 1995

[alp227]

The names have changed, but this week’s competing Democratic and Republican budget proposals have brought the United States back to 1995. We again have an incoming Republican House majority demanding deep spending cuts, and resistance from a Democratic President and Senate majority. The difference, of course, is that the past fifteen years tested each Party’s approach: President Clinton brought economic growth and eliminated the budget deficit, while President Bush brought stagnation and record budget shortfalls. Yet the American media and much of the public have apparently forgotten the success of post -1995 Clinton economic policies. As a result, Republican policies that drove the U.S. economy into the deepest ditch since the Great Depression are given equal credibility with Obama’s. It is as if the past fifteen years and the 2008 elections never occurred. How did this happen?

It’s 1995 All Over Again

If a modern day Rip Van Winkle went to sleep in 1995 and woke up today, he would think that the Republican Party never had a President or Congress willing to implement its policies regarding spending, taxes and deficits.

President Bill Clinton’s success at boosting the economy, and eliminating the budget deficit without slashing domestic spending or giving tax cuts to the rich? Never happened.

The Republican Party’s squandering of the deficit through tax cuts, a massive military build-up and wars, and its failure to stimulate domestic investment, all of which led to an economic meltdown in 2008? Never happened.

This is where we find ourselves today.

How did this happen? How has the actual impact of competing economic strategies been so quickly forgotten?

The most common answer is that the corporate media promotes Republican policies, that the November 2010 elections showed voters have changed their priorities since 2008, and that Obama and the Democratic Congress failed to get the economy out of the ditch during 2009-2010, thus restoring economic credibility to Republicans.

Full story: http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=8910

[rucky]

1. If only the economy were back to 1995. n/t

[sofa king]

4. The only reason it was that way was because of the stimulus package.

Which passed with not a single Republican vote and Al Gore's tie-breaker in the Senate. All that prosperity was generated by us alone, with great and thankless effort. By raising taxes on the wealthy, among other things.

This time, it's both easier and harder. It's easier because the President is focused on generating overwhelming public support in the next election, so that it never gets close enough to steal. That support should also be enough to return the House to us and maybe even bolster our majority in the Senate.

Once that happens, we get to actually do what needs to be done.

But it's harder because until then we have to put up with all this malicious Republican obstruction. The young, connected, and motivated electorate such as we're going to enjoy this time around is also impatient, vocal, and unafraid to organize themselves, perhaps before it is wise to do so. The President is going to have to find a way to keep them on the page.

The biggest danger to success is ourselves. Twenty more months of depression (for the 97% of the population that doesn't matter to the Republicans) will cause many millions of us to fall by the wayside while we wait our chance, and some of us won't wait, and many more simply won't understand. But others will understand much better as they see that while we suffer, the GOP is tirelessly working to take more away from us. Those who do will never go back to the Republican Party.

[ClarkUSA]

5. If only former DLC chairman Bill Clinton hadn't scrapped Glass-Steagall before he left office. nt

[RandomKoolzip]

2. We didn't know how good e had it back then.

Shit, I'd GLADLY return to 1995. The drugs were so much better back then.

[frazzled]

3. There's one huge difference, though

The preceding president had not left the government and the economy in total tatters and more than a trillion dollars in the hole. We always said Bush Jr. was purposely trying to wreck the government, and I think he succeeded. Bill Clinton had a very small, mild, and containable recession to steady; Obama inherited a country in total flames (not to mention at war on two fronts--a problem Clinton never had).

The only thing that is the same is that a bunch of right-wing nutters were elected to Congress to try to impede progress. Only they're even nuttier now.

[StarsInHerHair]

6. wow R +1=0

wtf?