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.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

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.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x