White guys seem to be losing their touch, and it’s fairy obvious that white women never had one to begin with - at least, with other women.

When all God’s children defer to a different God, does God still exist?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/2/22/134458/142
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/12/7/22374/8663
http://www.akpmedia.com/partners/dplouffe.html
http://www.akpmedia.com/partners/daxelrod.html

If you are going to caucus in Nevada today, please take a good look at Hillary Clinton’s chief strategist Mark Penn and his wife.

Mark J. Penn is worldwide CEO of the PR firm Burson-Marsteller (B-M), a position he has held since December 2005. [1] He is also the president of the polling firm Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates (PSB), which he co-founded in 1975.

Penn is also U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton’s top presidential campaign strategist. A biographical note states that he “has worked with Mrs. Clinton for over six years, since he ran the polling and messaging for her successful election to the US Senate in 2000.” [2]

In mid-2007, the dual role of Mark Penn as the CEO of the PR firm Busron-Marsteller and chief strategist for the Democratic Party’s Presidential aspirant Hilliary Clinton, irked some labor leaders. The New York Times reported that labor leaders Bruce Raynor of UniteHere, and James Hoffa of the Teamsters union, wrote to Clinton expressing their concern about B-M’s anti-labor work. “He cannot serve two masters, working for a pro-union candidate and working for anti-union companies,” Teamsters President Jim Hoffa said. [6]

Take a look at the Third Way:

The Third Way, according to New Democrats Online, the Democratic Leadership Council’s online community, is “a global movement dedicated to modernizing progressive politics for the information age. Third Way politics seeks a new balance of economic dynamism and social security, a new social compact based on individual rights and responsibilities, and a new model for governing that equips citizens and communities to solve their own problems.” [1]

“The core principles and ideas of this Third Way movement are set forth in The New Progressive Declaration: A Political Philosophy for the Information Age.” [2]

Here are their principles (with my explications in bold):

“The Third Way philosophy seeks to adapt enduring progressive values to the new challenges of he information age. It rests on three cornerstones: [6]

* the idea that government should promote equal opportunity for all while granting special privilege for none; [no more affirmative action]

* an ethic of mutual responsibility that equally rejects the politics of entitlement and the politics of social abandonment; and, [no more welfare]

* a new approach to governing that empowers citizens to act for themselves.[Bush's ownership society and the privitization of Social Security]

“The Third Way approach to economic opportunity and security stresses technological innovation, competitive enterprise, and education rather than top- down redistribution [high margin tax rates, capital gains taxes, dividends taxes, corporate taxes] or laissez faire. On questions of values, it embraces ‘tolerant traditionalism,’ honoring traditional moral and family values while resisting attempts to impose them on others. [no gays in the military, no gay marriage] It favors an enabling rather than a bureaucratic government [ending big government as we know it], expanding choices for citizens [privitizing entitlements and services], using market means to achieve public ends [subcontracting to Blackwater and Kellogg and Root] and encouraging civic and community institutions to play a larger role in public life [charity, not hand-outs]. The Third Way works to build inclusive, multiethnic societies based on common allegiance to democratic values.” [7]

This is the basic philosophy of Clintonism when the Clintons are not trying to court Democrats that largely believe in none of these things. These are the solutions favored by New Democrats, the Democratic Leadership Council, The New Republic, and the vast majority of the veterans of Bill Clinton’s administration. If you do not support these policies then, for the love of all that is Holy, do not caucus for Hillary Clinton.

And I haven’t even touched on foreign policy. Bill Clinton implemented the eastward expansion of NATO and the aggressive military basing strategy in the Middle East and Central Asia that has caused all this blowback from terrorism. There is no indication that Hillary Clinton will do anything but fight tenaciously to maintain this costly and risky strategy. Yes, she will not run the government like a neo-conservative. But she will not make the changes that need to be made for the simple reason that it would repudiate one of the cornerstones of her husband’s foreign policy.

Bushism needs to be tossed on the ash heap of history, but Clintonism needs to be rejected as well. Clintonism helped pave the way for Bushism in many ways, and in foreign policy, they both share huge amounts of blame for our current predicament. Both the Bushes and the Clintons desperately need to be rejected and repudiated. It’s absolutely vital that neither of them occupy the White House ever again.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/19/3427/51766/17/439321

I think we can agree that many 20th century first ladies were influential in their husband’s administration to certain degrees. That does not entitle them to blanket credit for anything that happened at that time without recorded confirmation of that.