In Sunday’s Washington Post, art critic Philip Kennicott unloaded on images of American “fascism” in a new exhibit in New York featuring photographs of the unjust internment of Japanese Americans during World War II titled "Then They Came For Me." That’s somehow comparable to Trump if he deported “Dreamers.” That would be a "looming civic crisis." The online headline was “If America fails its people again, what will the catastrophe look like?” In the paper, it was simply "Images that provoke deja vu." In his 1,571 words, Kennicott never used these words: Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Or any reference to the Democratic Party.
WASHINGTON -- Labor Day weekend passed with soggy weather in Washington. It was not as soggy as in other parts of the United States, but it kept me indoors most of the time, so I decided to give some thought to the one American president who I associate with Labor Day, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. To be historically correct, I should associate President Grover Cleveland -- a conservative Democrat -- with Labor Day, for he was the first to make it a national holiday. For some reason, it is associated with FDR -- at least in my mind.
On Friday, the government reported that the economy added a seasonally adjusted 211,000 jobs, and that the unemployment rate dropped to a 10-year low of 4.4 percent. The day's press coverage had three noticeable highlights. The first was the headline at the Associated Press's coverage — "US JOBS DATA SHOW SOME SCARS FROM RECESSION FINALLY HEALING."
The story is a revealing look inside the liberal media bubble. Over here at Politico is this headline “The Strange Psychological Power of ‘Fox & Friends.’” But it’s the sub-headline that provides the real look inside both the liberal media bubble and the left-wing mind. That would read: “Unrelenting positivity has a powerful warping effect on your thinking. So how is that affecting Viewer No. 1?”
Next Tuesday, three days before the current POTUS becomes an ex-POTUS, Jonathan Chait’s Audacity: How Barack Obama Defied His Critics and Created a Legacy That Will Prevail will be published. On Tuesday, New York magazine, where Chait is the chief political pundit, ran an excerpt from the book in which he claimed, “The truth is that Obama enacted careful, deep, and mostly popular solutions to a broad array of problems to which his opponents have no workable response.”
As liberals began to pick up the pieces on Wednesday after Donald Trump was elected the next president of the United States, MSNBC host Chris Matthews provided a succinct embodiment of a liberal’s range of emotions over the course of a special two-hour Hardball from fear to downright strange behavior.
If you believe the Obama administration, the Hillary Clinton campaign and their apparatchiks in the press — and as we've learned during the past several weeks, all three work assiduously to sing from the same hymnal — the economy we've seen during the presidency of Barack Obama has been one of slow but still acceptable recovery and (yes, this word has been frequently used) "durable" expansion.
CNN International host Christiane Amanpour was at it again on Monday night in flashing her far-left ideology as she used her eponymous show to angrily maim critics of Hillary Clinton and (a select few) in the media as sexist for raising questions about her health and hiding the pneumonia diagnosis and unwilling to let “a girl have a sick day or two.”
Here is what presidential aspirant Sen. Bernie Sanders said: "I believe that health care is a right of all people." President Barack Obama declared that health care "should be a right for every American." The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops: "Every person has a right to adequate health care." President Franklin D. Roosevelt, in his January 1944 message to Congress, called for "the right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health."
In the present, liberals vehemently oppose what conservatives stand for (and vice versa, of course). But do liberals believe there was a time when conservatism was somewhat reasonable, or at least not appalling? Martin Longman offered an answer in a Friday post: It was “the reaction to FDR’s New Deal” that crystallized the suspicious, radical conservatism of today.
“Conservatism is supposed to revere institutions,” commented Longman. “But what institutions has Movement Conservatism respected?...Not Congress or the federal government. Not the Supreme Court. The Office of the Presidency is respected only when it is in the hands of a conservative…What characterizes the conservative attitude to our institutions isn’t respect but paranoia.”
Michael O’Donnell is eager to push back against the belief that Reagan ranks with Franklin Roosevelt as a great 20th-century president. In his review of H.W. Brands’ Reagan: The Life in the Washington Monthly’s June/July/August issue, O’Donnell wrote that “Roosevelt saved the nation from an existential threat (the Great Depression), while Reagan merely steered it out of a funk (the 1970s). Roosevelt enacted structural reforms to protect the most vulnerable members of society, [whereas] Reagan systematically set about dismantling those reforms.”
Moreover, argued O’Donnell, Reagan influenced today’s politics for the worse. O’Donnell calls him “the author of many of our current predicaments as a nation and a society…The government-is-the-enemy mind-set that pervades the right today comes to us from Barry Goldwater via Ronald Reagan. As our roads, bridges, and schools fall apart around us, we have them to thank.”
When it comes to the word “freedom,” liberals and conservatives long have told each other, in effect, “I do not think it means what you think it means.”
Take Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher of The Nation, who in a Tuesday Washington Post column urged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to endorse a “far more expansive” concept of freedom than the right’s “constrained notion” that’s held sway in America since the Reagan era.
Market-oriented, anti-government ideas about freedom, vanden Heuvel claimed, have brought about “an economy serving the few, and a politics corrupted by money,” whereas Hillary can become an ideological heir to FDR if she “take[s] on the economic royalists of this day” by calling for measures such as “fair taxes on the rich and corporations,” “vital public investments…in new energy, in infrastructure, in education and training,” and expanded Social Security.