Posted on 10/13/2018 6:09:07 PM PDT by TBP
Our politics today were molded by the tumultuous period leading up to the 2000 election, when the nation split right down the middle over Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore in the closest presidential contest in modern history.
Clinton, who campaigned as a centrist, entered the White House hobbled after taking only 43 percent of the popular vote in 1992’s three-way presidential race. That left him beholden to the powerful Democrat-majority Congress.
“With a Democratic Congress and no help from the Republicans, Clinton governed like a liberal Democrat,” Kornacki said. In his first two years, the new president stumbled into controversies over gays in the military, his wife Hillary’s health-care plan, and a massively unpopular tax bill.
Gingrich played up the ideological gap for all it was worth, issuing a conservative “Contract with America” in 1994 ahead of Clinton’s first midterm election. The GOP’s 54-seat pickup flipped the House into a Republican majority for the first time in four decades.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
No it a stupid “fake moral equivalency” being put out to hide the real root cause.
The rabid corruption and smash mouth politics of personal destruction are the legacy of the Clinton 1990s Political machine. Gingrich was effective in fighting back against that machine. He in no way created it, he merely had to try and find a way to fight it.
The political corruption of the Clinton machine will take generations to purge from our society.
Clinton may have “run as a moderate” but he never intended to be one. Most Americans saw through that guise and recognized him for a dope smoking draft dodging crook.
Gingrich was a hero of that era, crafting policies and legislation which were sound and truly mainstream. So successful was Gingrich’s efforts that Clinton ran for reelection claiming them to be his achievements.
Lie. Win in hours of being inaugurated, Clinton had all ready gone back on his primary centrist political promise of a "middle class tax cut".
He never was a centrist, what he was was a skillful liar who knew running as a traditional Democrat would of seen him beat like a drum in 1992.
Let’s see. When Obama heard about the Harvard professor being arrested in Boston; “I don’t know – not having been there and not seeing all the facts – what role race played in that, but I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two that he Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home,” Obama said in response to a question from the Chicago Sun-Times’s Lynn Sweet.”
To me, that started the great American divide.
What “moderate” campaigns on homosexuals serving openly in the military back in 1992? Never mind the failed attempt to push Hillarycare.
We even had a shooting war from 1861-65 we were so divided.
Now, if she wants to look at the modern divide look to the 60s. That's when liberalism really took off.
It’s the Left that has been going further and further Left.
The right is pretty much where it always was.
“Interesting analysis...”
No, I think it’s terribly slanted from the get go.
Example #1: Clinton wasn’t at fault, no, no, no. Circumstances forced him to act a certain way:
“Clinton, who campaigned as a centrist. . .hobbled after taking only 43 percent of the popular vote . . . left him beholden to the powerful Democrat-majority Congress.”
And there’s more:
“With a Democratic Congress and no help from the Republicans, Clinton governed like a liberal Democrat,” Kornacki said. In his first two years, the new president stumbled into controversies over gays in the military, his wife Hillary’s health-care plan, and a massively unpopular tax bill.”
See? None of it was his fault. It was everybody else. The closest the Post gets to assigning blame is “...Clinton... stumbled...” Stumbled?
Example #2:
“Gingrich played up the ideological gap for all it was worth, issuing a conservative “Contract with America” in 1994 ahead of Clinton’s first midterm election.”
Oh, I see. Gingrich was just an opportunist. That means he was mean spirited, a jerk.
The real change was conservatives were finding alternate ways of getting information and organizing.
There was talk radio and early email systems.
People all over the country were finding out how much they were lied to.
In addition, Clinton pushed gun control very hard, and Second Amendment patriots pushed back.
That was one big reason for the Republican revolution in 1994.
[He never was a centrist, what he was was a skillful liar who knew running as a traditional Democrat would of seen him beat like a drum in 1992. ]
Yup, the bogus Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) gave him cover.
B.S.
Gingrich and Clinton, despite differences, worked pretty well together. This great divide is the child of the Dem takeover in 2006 and after Iraq fell apart. It was then that this current chasm started. Pelosi and gang decided to turn from Bush and start opposing everything he did and use character assassination to get ahead. And then along came Obama ...
Smells like BS to me. This was coming whether or not Gingrich or the Clintons ever existed.
Gingrich didn’t “start” the great divide — but he was one of the first and most important to stop rolling over for the liberals, especially in Congress. I well remember how milquetoast nearly all Republicans were before him, and how much they let the Demagogues and MSM define all the terms of public discussion. Gingrich was/is great for tearing up the MSM rulebook and saying “Enough of your BS!”
NO ONE was arrested in that Cambridge incident. A neighbor spotted a man breaking into a home and called the police. It turned out the guy breaking in (he WAS breaking in) was a black Harvard professor (Henry Louis Gates) who had forgotten his keys. But when the responding police officers simply tried to establish the identity of the person breaking in, and whether it really was the homeowner, Gates had a total meltdown of “don’t you know who I am, a HARVARD BLACK IMPORTANT PROFESSOR” and turned it into an incident. But the police didn’t arrest anyone. They were simply trying to verify his identity before allowing him to retain possession of the premises he was breaking into.
Now, if she wants to look at the modern divide look to the 60s. That's when liberalism really took off.
I agree. In the 60s, we had the Supreme Court ruling which forbade prayer in school--very unconstitutional.
We also had forced integration through busing, which wrecked our cities.
Then in 1968 the Democratic convention was divided between the pro-war and pro-American Democrats and the anti-war democrats. George Wallace split off as a 3rd party.
Then in 1972, the Democrats went all anti-war with McCarthy. Since then, they have gone further and further from original American values.
The Republicans have drifted leftward as well, as has the whole country. But a remnant remain true to the rule of law and constitution, and in favor of a small government.
This idiot is blaming REPUBLICANS for Clinton’s first 2 years in office? That might be the dumbest crap I’ve ever heard.
Heck the Constitution was worded and structured specifically because of divisions that existed in the Colonies/States right at the founding.
This divide had been coming incrementally for decades.
They used to be called Liberals,then progressives,actually communists,now they don’t bother to hide itz
This divide had been coming incrementally for decades.
They used to be called Liberals,then progressives,actually communists,now they don’t bother to hide itz
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.