Clinton Stumps for McCaskill
Excited, and vocal, Democrats eagerly lined up early to see former President Bill Clinton this morning. Clinton is in St. Louis to help raise money for State Auditor Claire McCaskill in her bid for Republican Senator Jim Talent's seat. He is also helping raise the spirits of the lucky ticket-holding Democrats jockeying for position at The Pageant.
Former Missouri Governor Roger Wilson emceed the event. A who's-who of Missouri Democrats took the stage to prime the audience.
McCaskill and Clinton took the stage together, waving to the crowd and shaking hands with the assembled politicians.
McCaskill's comments were short, but to the point. In Missouri, she said, people use plain language.
"Well," said McCaskill, "I smell change."
McCaskill waxed nostalgic as she set the stage for Clinton saying the country had prosperity, jobs and better health care under Clinton. She added that the U.S. was also looked to, "as a country that has strength and the high ground."
Clinton did not disappoint his eager audience.
Riffing on the "Show Me State" motto, Clinton said that Republicans, while in control of all three branches, have shown voters how they govern.
"Their rhetoric doesn't match what they are doing, but we have had 6 years of their doing," said Clinton. "We should show them the door."
Reaching back to his time in office, he compared Republican performance at the wheel with his administration's handling of the economy, education, health care, crime and foreign policy.
Focusing on the economy he talked about the need to bring back spending restrictions enacted when he was in office and end the tax cuts that have helped drive the ballooning national debt.
He linked the issue to U.S. foreign policy, saying, the country is going "hat in hand" to China, Saudi Arabia and Mexico to ask for money. That money, he said, pays the country's bills, including the cost of the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
On the domestic economy, Clinton talked about the wage growth that occurred during his second term from 1996 to 2000. Something that, despite increasing stocks, higher corporate profits and growing productivity, has not happened during President George W. Bush's time in office.
Clinton did not take on Bush personally, mentioning that the two had a good personal relationship. Instead he took on what he saw as the Republican "ideology".
"They are in the grip of an ideology," said Clinton. "We have a philosophy."
Clinton said their ideology provides what they need, so they have no need for answers to questions. The result, he said, is that questions are responded to with attacks, and questioners are accused of being subversive.
"If we had that thinking for the last 200 years, America would not even exist," said Clinton.
He went on to add that Democrats should expect attacks on McCaskill that say her election would somehow "imperil" the country.
Clinton said that some Republicans, such as President George H.W. Bush with whom Clinton has developed a close personal relationship, genuinely see the world differently. They are not bad, he said, just incorrect, and Democrats should avoid playing the game some Republican activists play.
In moving on to national security Clinton noted the upcoming anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, calling the day, "one of the worst in American history, but also one of the most magnificent," for the outpouring of support and sympathy that came from all parts of the country, and the globe. A good will, he said, that spoiled all to soon.
He criticized what he called the politicization of national security in the 2002 and 2004 elections, and the attacks on veterans like former Sen. Max Cleland. Democrats, he said should be the party to elevate the debate.
Clinton urged Congress to pass all the recommendations of the 9/11 commission, saying the Republican-controlled body was more interested in cutting taxes than in national security. As an example he pointed to the billions in tax savings that went to the wealthy while an $800 million program to scan shipping containers was brushed off for fiscal reasons.
Joining Clinton and McCaskill on stage were County Executive Charlie Dooley, U.S. Rep. Russ Carnahan, Attorney General Jay Nixon, State Senator Maida Coleman, State Rep. Jeff Harris, Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, candidate for State Auditor Susan Montee, and State Rep. John Bowman.
McCaskill's family, including one of Missouri's most famous mothers, Betty McCaskill, joined them on stage before she spoke.
This rally was truly invigorating. The synergy that was created by the elected officials, organizers, and participants of this morning's rally was simply phenomenal.
I'm sure Nia enjoyed this one if she went; which I'm sure she did since she knows every freakin' thing anyway.
Did Jeff Smith get in?
Posted by TimR on Sat., Sep 9, 2006 at 2:46 PMApril:
Come on now don't start hatin' on the Sistah. Nia conveys heartfelt messages supported by factual evidence. She has truly enlighntened me on several occasions.
As a Black man, I deem her as being an asset to the political and educational arenas.
Posted by Jaidigg on Sat., Sep 9, 2006 at 2:50 PMTimR.
Ha, Ha. Did Jeff Smith have a ticket? If he didn't than more than likely, he didn't get in. This country is governed by rules. The rules for the meeting last Tuesday were simple:
1. Entrance by invitation only.
2. Only ELECTED OFFICIALS allowed.
Jeff Smith won the August primary; he has not been sworn in yet. Once he is and he has meetings I wonder will he allow uninvited guests to attend?
April:
Yes, of course my beautiful face was in the place. More to come.
Jaidigg:
Thank you for the compliment. It's good to know that a man is paying attention and not attempting to insult, harass, or humiliate me. Smooches!
Posted by Nia on Sat., Sep 9, 2006 at 2:59 PMTim is a convert republican trying to start trouble. But by the same token Nia why was Jamilah Nasheed let into the meeting...........
Posted by DontThinkLikeAnElephant on Sat., Sep 9, 2006 at 3:26 PM". . . Secretary of State Jean Carnahan . . ."
Shame on you, Matthew. The Secretary of State's name is Robin. Jean's her mom."
Also, considering that McCaskill spoke at the event, I wonder what you mean in your next post about Susan Montee's speech, where you noted, "the other speakers [which would include McCaskill] aren't in the midst of a hotly contested race." So if McCaskill's race isn't highly contested, are you saying that she has it in the bag, or that she's toast?
On a more general note, Republicans have opened the door for the Dems, but the Democrats need to stand for something more than just "we're not them" in order to win. Clinton's admission, noted by Matthew above, that Democrats don't really have an ideology, just a philosophy, inadvertently spotlights the problem. Sure, I'm biased in favor of the new Progressive Party, which DOES have an ideology and which is NOT beholden to Big Business, but Democrats and Republicans are creating exactly the environment in which we can establish ourselves. Thanks for the opportunity!
Posted by St Louis Oracle on Sat., Sep 9, 2006 at 5:04 PMOracle,
Thanks for catching that, I fixed it in the story. I think I re-wrote that section after mentioning McCaskill's mom. I must have been thinking of some of Missouri's other famous moms, I would say that Senator Jean Carnahan is definitely one of the most well-known.
Matthew
Posted by Matthew Murphy on Sat., Sep 9, 2006 at 5:11 PMOther than the handful of disorganized protesters, the entire affairs went off without a hitch, was well organized, and energized the participants. Complaint one was not heard from the crowd.
Nia:
I wish you had come over and introduced yourself. I'd like to put a face with the name sometime.
Posted by travis reems on Sat., Sep 9, 2006 at 5:27 PMActually, Oracle, Clinton gave a lot of policy specifics - universal health care, universal college education, an energy policy that centers on clean, renewable energy, and implementing all of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations.
Clinton's discussion of ideology vs. philosophy revolved around the idea that philosophy is anchored in inquiry and critical thinking, while ideology provides its own answers, and in ideological thinking, the ideology is always right, no matter what the evidence.
Posted by Clark on Sat., Sep 9, 2006 at 6:15 PMAll of you player haters out there, Nia, you know who you are, here is the bottom line: President Clinton is the best campaigner EVER! Don't you people get it. Clinton takes shots from all walks of life every minute of every day, WHY? THE haters are constantly mystified by the Clinton game. Oracle, I feel you about the New Progressive party ideology. Nia and all of you player haters, SENATOR Jeff Smith is a major player in the new Progressive Party and as all of my colleagues have heard me say about Sen. Smith, buckle your seat belts, the ride is only beginning.
Posted by Bubba on Sat., Sep 9, 2006 at 7:29 PM"Oracle, I feel you about the New Progressive party ideology."
Uh, have I just been sexually harassed? I saw Deliverance.
"SENATOR Jeff Smith is a major player in the new Progressive Party"
Maybe we're not talking the same language here. The Progressive Party is a new political party certified for the Missouri ballot on Aug. 22. While Jeff Smith had the support of several members of the Progressive Party (including myself) and the Progressive Party is not running a candidate of its own against Jeff in that district, he is not a Progressive Party candidate; he is a candidate of the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is not the Progressive Party, or even A progressive party. If it were, there would have been no need to do all of the backbreaking work (e.g., collecting about 15K signatures) to form the Progressive Party and get it on the ballot.
Yes, Bill Clinton is a helluva campaigner, but his unprogressive presidency was the reason and inspiration for formation of the national Green Party (of which the Progressive Party is a part) and the candidacy of Ralph Nader in 1996 and 2000. (By 2004 Ralph's ego had taken on a life of its own.) Working with Newt Gingrich to pass NAFTA, ending "welfare as we know it" and bombing Iraq or some other helpless country whenever he needed to divert attention from a personal scandal, that's the Clinton legacy that sent thousands of progressives packing and leaving the Democratic Party.
And Claire? Well, this week I was fixing a salad with my back to the television when I heard the audio of this commercial. It talked about fighting terrorism, supporting our troops, a tough law-and-order prosecutor, fighting meth, being endorsed by some police group. I thought it was a Republican commercial, but then Claire came on and said it was her and that she approved that message. So, what do we get if we elect Claire, Jim Talent wearing a skirt and less seniority? People who ask why the Progressive Party is running its own candidate for senate aren't paying attention.
More info about the Progressive Party (including links to candidate web sites) can be found at:
http://www.ppmo.org/
DTLAE
I have been called a pompous loud mouthed blow hard many a time. But have never, ever been called a trouble maker.
By the way, your attempt to disparage what I said does not work when you, in your second sentence, bring up Jamilah Nasheed.
Now, don't split the vote and run a fair and clean smear campaign.
Don't Think Like An Elephant- Think For Yourself
Posted by TimR on Sat., Sep 9, 2006 at 9:25 PMYes, the "Progressive Party" is not Jeff Smith and the progressive Democrats. They will work to split the Democratic vote and ensure the election goes to Talent. We need to get all the voices back at the table of the Democratic Party, or we will continue to have Republicans elected.
Posted by travis reems on Sun., Sep 10, 2006 at 8:41 AMJeff Smith was in the crowd.
Having volunteered and attended many events and been very disappointed in organization and other aspects, this one went very smoothly. My one complaint was the low level party officials who insisted on cutting the line despite being told to wait in line like everyone else.
Posted by Matt B on Sun., Sep 10, 2006 at 11:44 AMI caught most of this speech quite by accident when just trying out CNN's new Pipeline feature, and saw Clinton speaking on one of the feeds. It was a very inspiring speech, that frankly he should be taking on a national stage where everybody can see. It really hammered home to me the difference between our 2 most recent presidents. His "they have an ideology, we have a philosophy" observation fits today's political environment perfectly. Does anybody know where I can find a transcript of this speech? I'm disappointed that I can't find it or a video anywhere online, I want to share it with everyone I know.
Posted by Dan on Sun., Sep 10, 2006 at 12:15 PMTravis, I thought you were smarter than that. You're taking the tired old establishment Democrat line that is based in the assumption that the Democratic Party owns all black votes and all progressive votes, and that anyone who does a better job at appealing to those voters is stealing them. Learn a couple of truths:
1. Parties don't own voters. Voters select the candidates that appeal to them most.
2. Ideologically-based third parties primarily appeal to voters who otherwise wouldn't vote, not to voters who were otherwise going to vote for someone else.
If you want Progressive Party leaders and voters "at the table of the Democratic Party," as you put it, the Democratic Party needs to put something on the table that appeals to us. Claire's Talent-Lite act doesn't cut it. Making us the scapegoats for your own party's failures is certainly not the way to appeal to us. To be picking scapegoats this far in advance evidences a high degree of lack of confidence in your party's chances.
Posted by St Louis Oracle on Sun., Sep 10, 2006 at 3:38 PMOracle, for the first time I sense some real anger from your posts. And not just because Travis or me 'didn't get our takes exactly right.' You ok chief? Hey, this cycle is turning out to be filled with shadow warfare tactics, aka candidate lite stuff as you mention. I agree that for the Dems to be successful we need a coherent message with a plan not just attacks and negativism. Our leadership is disjuncted albeit, and the bottom line is the voters, the citizenry, the independents (classify them on the spectrum anyway you want to) now are responsible for taking their country back. I ask you, is this scenario the hallmark of Democracy?
Posted by Bubba on Mon., Sep 11, 2006 at 9:03 AMDid anyone take any pictures? My wife and I were there up front on the very far left when he came down to shake hands. She said "Quick get out the camera". Well, I left it in the car. . . . ARRGH!
Desperately wanting a rememberance of the event.
Oracle:
I actually couldn't agree with you more in that no party owns votes or voters, and must continually strive to appeal to voters and thereby serve them. And, the Democratic party, being a coalition party, has rested on its laurels for decades, which partially accounts for the Republican revolution. Further, 3rd parties are great about raising issues, but they are horrible about running good candidates and getting them elected, which results in splitting voter segments.
The best option would be for the members of the 3rd parties to approach the table, offer up their solutions, work into the leadership, and see that their ideals are championed within an organization that actually has a chance of electing candidates. The best ideas and intentions matter not if the candidate cannot get elected. Again, I invite you all to join the chorus of voices at the Democratic table. Together we can return the party to its prime and move America, and the City, forward.
Posted by travis reems on Mon., Sep 11, 2006 at 12:34 PMHey, Fellas!
Don't Think Like An Elephant:
Thanks for asking, of course I know. When State Representative Jamilah Nasheed D-60th-Elect entered into the headquarters, Brandon Davis (with his fine, intelligent self) had his back turned towards the door as he was addressing the invited elected officials. He didn't even see Ms. Nasheed walk in.
Travis Reems:
I'll know next time. However, I didn't see you. Were you on the floor or in the balcony?
Don't Mean to Bust Your Bubble, Bubba--but of course I know who I am...Nia Newton. That's capital N-i-a capital N-e-w-t-o-n. Playa Hater--Unh- Uh, I don't think so. I have never hated on Jeff any and everything that I have ever said is FACT.
IN THE WORDS OF ANTONIO FRENCH OF PUBDEF...HATE THE GAME NOT THE PLAYAS...Furthermore, let me remind you if you didn't know. I ALWAYS make the the touchdown...CHECKMATE!!! (pick the game any game; and, I can roll with the best of 'em baby!
After all...Niaknows
Posted by Nia on Mon., Sep 11, 2006 at 12:37 PM
Nia my friend, who do you think developed the Pub Def slogan with Antonio? Do you know that? I will give you three guesses and the first two don't count...
Posted by Bubba on Mon., Sep 11, 2006 at 12:44 PMI invented that saying just after I invented the internet.
Posted by Prince Albert on Mon., Sep 11, 2006 at 3:03 PMPG, let's give kudos where kudos deserve then to my main man Stuart Scott of ESPN the original inventor of that slogan. But you and Nia knew that.
Posted by Bubba on Mon., Sep 11, 2006 at 3:25 PM===Brandon Davis (with his fine, intelligent self) had his back turned towards the door as he was addressing the invited elected officials. He didn't even see Ms. Nasheed walk in.
Did he miss Antonio's camera too? That's some high quality staff work--turning an off the record meeting into a national story by allowing the guy with the camera in while stopping a soon to be Senator from getting in. Maybe he can let Talent's camera guys into staff meetings next.
Posted by ArchPundit on Tue., Sep 12, 2006 at 11:38 AMArchPundit, Bubba says: AMEN to that brother! Things that make you go hmmmmmm.
Posted by Bubba on Tue., Sep 12, 2006 at 4:44 PMThank goodness someone asked that. I was bleeding to death from biting my tongue.
King me... FUMBLE!!!
Posted by TRouble on Tue., Sep 12, 2006 at 4:49 PM
Right a Wrong. Submit any tips or story ideas by using our anonymous email form. Confidentiality is guaranteed.