Soap Opera Politics: It’s the Nineties All Over Again

Soap Opera Politics: It’s the Nineties All Over Again

Soap Opera Politics: It’s the Nineties All Over Again

The right-wing noise machine that flourished during Bill Clinton’s presidency is back with a vengeance under Barack Obama.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

The nineties came roaring back with a vengeance last week. No, I’m not talking about Nirvana, flannel shirts or Reality Bites. I’m referring to the lurid and preposterous “scandals” that marked so much of the Clinton era, making that decade’s politics feel more like a never-ending soap opera than an age of relative peace and prosperity.

Barack Obama defeated Hillary Clinton by rallying the country around the idea of a new kind of politics that explicitly repudiated the petty skirmishes of the Clinton years. "I don’t want to spend the next year or the next four years re-fighting the same fights that we had in the 1990s," Obama said at the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson dinner in November 2007, one of the most important speeches he gave during the entire campaign. Obama was going to be about big ideas and bold policies, bringing the type of transformational change ushered in by Reagan, not Clinton.

Unfortunately, that’s not how Obama’s presidency has played out thus far. Sure, he’s successfully tackled some major undertakings—most notably healthcare reform—but during the past year and a half the right-wing noise machine has once again dominated the debate. Turns out Matt Drudge and Rush Limbaugh are as powerful as they ever were—and now have potent new allies in Andrew Breitbart, Glenn Beck and Fox News. Case in point: last week, in the midst of 9.5 percent unemployment, two wars and the passage of long-awaited financial regulatory reform legislation and the overdue extension of unemployment benefits, virtually the entire chattering class discussed only two stories: Shirley Sherrod and Journolist, both fueled almost entirely (and inaccurately) by the right-wing media.

Given the president’s stated distaste for the freak show nature of the nineties, one expected the Obama administration to aggressively combat the Breitbarts of the media. Instead, too often, Obama’s team has naïvely strengthened them. According to Politico’s Ben Smith, White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina actually praised the “speed” of the administration’s disastrous response to the Sherrod fiasco, even though her swift firing was based solely on an incomplete and out of context video unearthed by Breitbart. If this is how Obama’s team plans to respond to future “scoops” peddled by Breitbart and Beck, then the president is facing a whole lot more trouble.

There’s a lesson here, which Obama’s inner circle should have learned from studying the Clinton era: capitulating to the right out of fear will only embolden them. “I think we ought to stop being afraid of Glenn Beck and the racist fringe of the Republican Party,” Howard Dean told Fox News yesterday. In the wake of l’affaire Sherrod, Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus decried the frenzied 24/7 new media atmosphere by calling for a “slow blogging movement.” Until such a utopia comes to pass, maybe the Obama administration should take a few boxing lessons and learn how to aggressively, and accurately, hit back. 

Ari Berman’s new book, Herding Donkeys: The Fight to Rebuild the Democratic Party and Reshape American Politics, will be published in October by Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x