Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 14 Share on Twitter 3 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEdNews:
OpEdNews Op Eds    H1'ed 7/21/20

How Do You Spell "Democratic Party" in 2020? Without the Letters C-L-I-N-T-O-N in the Name: Responding to Commentaries

By       (Page 1 of 2 pages) (View How Many People Read This)   13 comments
Author 50778
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Steven Jonas
Become a Fan
  (19 fans)


"Either this nation shall kill racism, or racism shall kill this nation." (S. Jonas, August, 2018)

Jill Biden official portrait. Nothing artificial here.
Jill Biden official portrait. Nothing artificial here.
(Image by (From Wikimedia) Ralph Alswang, White House photographer, Author: Ralph Alswang, White House photographer)
  Details   Source   DMCA


My previous OpEdNews column, "How Do You Spell 'Democratic Party' in 2020? Without the Letters C-L-I-N-T-O-N in the Name," drew more Comments than any I have ever written for OpEdNews (or for any of the several other political webmagazines on which I have published over the last 20 years or so either). A number of well thought-out and very important points/observations were raised in them. Rather than deal with them individually, in responses in the "Comments" section for that column, and/or in individual correspondences with their authors, I decided to deal with them in my OEN column for this week.

Before I get to them, however, let me just summarize what last week's column was about, that is what, in my view, was the damage that the Clintons (mainly Bill) have done to the Democratic Party and what, with certain exceptions, it had stood for from the time of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal. (Let me make it clear here that I am under no delusions that the Democratic Party, the New Deal or not, is anything other than a product of a capitalist state and its ruling class. But due to splits over time in the capitalist ruling classes over how best to retain its control of the state apparatus and in turn the means of production, transportation, and exchange, some ruling parties happen to be better in terms of outcomes of their policies for a nation as a whole than others.) But on to the Clintons-damages list.

It includes, for Bill: the massive cuts to the Depression Era Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program; "prison reform" which, combined with a massive renewal of the "Drug War" has led directly (in the Federal penal system) and indirectly (through the state penal systems) to the amazing Black/brown incarceration nightmare which the U.S. has now faced for many years; his agreement with the repeal of the New Deal legislation known as the Glass-Steagall Act (1934); in foreign policy, one of his major "achievements" (and I am not dealing with either the disaster of the former Yugoslavia or that of Afghanistan) was securing the Russian Presidency for the drunk, Boris Yeltsin, which then led directly to Vladimir Putin and the Oligarch state Russia has become (see the new book Putin's People: How the KGB Took Back Russia and Then Took on the West, by Catherine Belton); the permitting of advertising for prescription medications on TV; the legislative debacle that was "The Clinton Health Plan;" and finally, for his pronouncement in one of his State of the Union Addresses that "the era of big government is over." (This, by a supposed Democrat, was the book-end to Ronald Reagan's Presidential campaign theme that "government is not the solution to your problems; government is the problem.")

As for Hillary, in 2016 she ran the worst-possible campaign for President, along the way in the primaries tilting the table against Bernie Sanders within the Democratic National Committee. As I said at the end of my column on her defeat (paraphrasing here):

"Clinton lost because of the emails, and the Clinton Foundation, (the CIA operation at Benghazi not-so-much), and Trump's constant 'Crooked Hillary' mantra, and the existence of the legacy-of-slavery Electoral College and James Comey's 20-year prosecutorial pursuit of the Clintons. But still, if she hadn't at heart still been a centrist Democrat, and thus could have mounted an effective counter-attack against Trump and the Republicans in general, it is very likely that she could have won anyway."

And now, as to the commentaries on my column.

David Bright liked my thoughts on the Clintons. In his view, this election is Biden's to lose. Contrary to what Biden is supporting in terms of health care policy, that is building on and expanding the coverage of the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"), he thinks that Biden and the Democrats should be running on Bernie's "Medicare for All" (which, going back to Teddy Roosevelt's 1912 "Bull Moose Party" campaign for the Presidency used to be called "National Health Insurance.") NHI was also proposed by both FDR and Harry Truman (killed both times by the American Medical Association) and, believe it not, Richard Nixon. (He put it forth in 1974, just as the original "Watergate" was coming to a head. If it had not been for Watergate, since the 1970s the U.S. very likely would have had some sort of NHI, most likely based in the private health insurance companies, as it is in much of Europe).

"Private Citizen" noted that Hillary Diane Rodham was her class President at the Main South High School, Park Ridge, IL. "PC," who presumably still lives in Illinois, also advised readers to vote early and often.

"Kappie" noted that the "Clintons . . . were the puppets of the industrialists and corporate Joe is their first choice." As I noted above "I am under no delusions that the Democratic Party, the New Deal or not, is anything other than a product of a capitalist state and its ruling class." In this election the real battle is between that ruling class sector which thinks that it can best maintain control of the State apparatus through moderate social and economic policies and that sector which believes that the time has come for the installation of frank fascism. (As for Trump/Barr's current exercise with unmarked troops and vans, without any kind of Congressional authorization or any other form of legal basis for what these troopers are doing, he has ex-Cathedra created his own Secret State Police [literal German translation, Geheime Staats Polizei, abbrev. Gestapo]).

(As one Trude Hassberg of Flushing, NY said in a letter to Newsday, July 22, 2020: "I am a refugee from Nazi Germany, and President Donald Trump's agents' lawless behavior in Portland, Oregon, painfully reminds me of Adolf Hitler's Gestapo ["Portland Mayor. Get Feds. Out," "Nation and World", July 18, 2020]. And I thought that this could not happen in America.")

"gentry cooper" liked the column but does not agree that the Democratic Party has even a moderately progressive platform, primarily because Joe Biden is the nominee. (I certainly agree that hardly, over the course of his career, can Joe Biden be considered a "progressive," even in the Democratic Party sense of the term. I knew of him and did not like his policies from "Anita Hill" through drug policy/mass-incarceration, to the Iraq War and beyond.) I used the term, understanding its relativity, because through the Biden-Sanders Unity Task Forces he and Bernie have come to agreement on a lengthy set of principles and program proposals which have in them a significant element of "Bernie-ism" (that is social democracy, or what I have called the "New Deal on steroids"). I pointed out at the beginning of the column that "Senator Sanders said of former Vice-President Biden that with the platform to which that roadmap leads Biden would become 'the most progressive President' since Franklin Delano Roosevelt."

Next Page  1  |  2

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).


Must Read 2   Valuable 2   Well Said 1  
Rate It | View Ratings

Steven Jonas Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Steven Jonas, MD, MPH, MS is a Professor Emeritus of Preventive Medicine at StonyBrookMedicine (NY) and author/co-author/editor/co-editor of over 35 books. In addition to his position on OpEdNews as a "Trusted Author," he is a Senior Editor, (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Pope Francis and Change in the Roman Catholic Church

Limbaugh, Santorum, Sex, and the Origins of the Roman Catholic Church

The "Irrepressible Conflict" and the Coming Second Civil War

Gay Marriage and the Constitution

The Republican Party and the Separation of Church and State: Change Does Happen

What the Gunners Want: What's in Rick Perry's Pocket, Unlimited

To View Comments or Join the Conversation: