« McCrery's ridiculous Social Security jargon | Main | CBPP: Bush's plan fails on solvency »

May 13, 2005

Comments

Clinton's 1992 campaign themes--hope, opportunity, responsibility--amounted to an affirmative statement of largely nurturant values that nonetheless vanquished the image of Democrats as moral relativists, permissive liberals, and effete cultural elites, everything strict fathers detest.

This makes a point against Lakoff's "move left" strategy, but it sounds like it supports his "buzzwords" strategy.

If you read the full paragraph, I think Scheiber makes clear that Clinton backed up his rhetoric with policy, both in terms of so-called "nurturing" policies, which included "support for education spending and national health care," and tough centrist policies such as "support for welfare reform," a "tough stance on crime," and "rewards, such as college scholarships, to people who 'work hard and play by the rules.'"

You make the argument that Lakoff has no ideas about remaking or developing ideas for the Democrats, yet at the same time you attack his leftward leaning ideas and desire to take the party to the left. Is this not a bit inconsistant?

The comments to this entry are closed.