Boogie Man: The Lee Atwater Story

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
If you are interested in learning the history behind the GOP's generation of 'gutter politics' you must start with Jesse Helms' National Congressional Club and Karl Rove's protege - Lee Atwater.

The Lee Atwater Wiki.

Atwater on the Southern Strategy

As a member of the Reagan administration in 1981, Atwater gave an anonymous interview to Political Scientist Alexander P. Lamis. Part of this interview was printed in Lamis' book The Two-Party South, then reprinted in Southern Politics in the 1990s with Atwater's name revealed. Bob Herbert reported on the interview in the October 6, 2005 edition of the New York Times. Atwater talked about the GOP's Southern Strategy and Ronald Reagan's version of it:

Atwater: As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry Dent and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South. Now [the new Southern Strategy of Ronald Reagan] doesn?t have to do that. All you have to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues he?s campaigned on since 1964? and that?s fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster...

Questioner: But the fact is, isn?t it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps...?

Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, ?great person, *****, *****.? By 1968 you can't say ?*****??that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.

And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me?because obviously sitting around saying, ?We want to cut this,? is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ?great person, *****.?

From the Frontline press release ...

In 1989, Lee Atwater was a political rock star. After masterminding George H.W. Bush?s presidential victory over Michael Dukakis, the colorful, blues guitar-playing Atwater was relishing his new role as chairman of the Republican National Committee as he redefined the role of the political operative.

Two years later, the political strategist would be dead from a brain tumor at the age of 41, cast aside by the Washington power players he?d helped create, and wracked with remorse for the tactics he'd employed in his political ascent.

In Boogie Man: The Lee Atwater Story, airing Tuesday, Nov. 11, 2008, from 9 to 10:30 P.M. ET on PBS (check local listings), producer Stefan Forbes reveals new information about the meteoric rise and tragic demise of a man both admired and reviled for the controversial, sometimes racially-charged political tactics that helped elect George H.W. Bush president and inspired protégés such as Karl Rove. Through a wealth of compelling, never-before-seen footage and photos as well as interviews with boyhood friends, elite Republican strategists and political adversaries, the documentary examines Atwater?s impact on the way modern political campaigns are waged.

?[Lee Atwater] mattered in American politics,? Newsweek political writer Howard Fineman says, ?because of the man he got elected, because of the party he shaped. He was very important not only to George H.W.?s victory, but to his son?s victory.?

Boogie Man traces Atwater?s political rise from his early days masterminding political victories in South Carolina. Among his triumphs was a fiercely contested battle for Chairman of the College Republicans between Karl Rove and Robert Edgeworth. Atwater lost, but mounted an appeal of Edgeworth?s victory which was ultimately decided by then Republican National Committee chairman George H.W. Bush, who gave the election to Rove.

?That was a pretty early lesson for Karl Rove from Lee,? says Joe Conason, a journalist for The Nation and Salon.com, ?that you could play the hardest of hardball and get away with it.? ( continued ... )





 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
Here is an online chat with the guy who made the movie.
http://crooksandliars.com/nico...efan-forbes-boogie-man

It is pretty obvious that he is a partisan Democrat.

There is saying "Success breeds contempt"
And Atwater was amazing successful.

But to act like he is architect of everything wrong with our system or even a small part of it is completely dishonest.

Smear politics have been around since the start of our country.

"Ma, Ma, where's my Pa?" was used to attack Grover Cleveland in the 1880s.

And the guy goes all over the Willie Horton thing, but seems to ignore the fact that Horton was first brought up by Al Gore.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Yes, Lee Atwater was the guy who turned the Republican party away from the 'party of Lincoln' to the party of lynchings, racism and segregation.
And while it worked for quite a while, and still works in part of the US, the changing demographics and integration of minorities is now starting to work against the Republicans.
It will be hard for them to distance themselves from the racists they so eagerly courted for 40 years.
Maybe a name change?
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Here is an online chat with the guy who made the movie.
http://crooksandliars.com/nico...efan-forbes-boogie-man

It is pretty obvious that he is a partisan Democrat.

There is saying "Success breeds contempt"
And Atwater was amazing successful.

But to act like he is architect of everything wrong with our system or even a small part of it is completely dishonest.

Smear politics have been around since the start of our country.

"Ma, Ma, where's my Pa?" was used to attack Grover Cleveland in the 1880s.

And the guy goes all over the Willie Horton thing, but seems to ignore the fact that Horton was first brought up by Al Gore.

Atwater himself confessed to being a gutter skunk, Johnnie, and sought redemption.

You can whine and complain all you want - your revisionist history simply fails.

From push-polling and robo-calls, the politics of hate, division and fear, voter suppression and 'wedge' politics - - - it's the legacy the GOP has to bear.

Until you admit it and move on, learn how to govern, drop the Goebbels-like propaganda and develop a future inconsistent with VooDoo Economics, the GOP is destined to permanent minority status and the banner of fascism.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
There is an old saying, the best way to defeat your enemy is teach him a bad habit. The Rove and Atwater brand is the bad habit the GOP taught themselves, it might even work infinitely, except the GOP lost sight of the fact they had to deliver good governance to seal the deal.

And non Prof John is correct in mentioning the GOP attack line against Grover Cleveland was Ma Ma where my pa, gone to the white house ha ha ha! What he forgets is the simultaneous Democratic attack line of
Blaine, Blaine, James G. Blaine, the continental liar from the State of Maine! And in an election of responsible sexual pecadillo vs. a solid record of corruption, PJ's hero Blane, lost to Cleveland. And here we are,
124 years later and Obama wins easily against McSame. Its not like the GOP did not launch any swift boats, its that the American people ignored them because the GOP delivered terrible governance.
 

robphelan

Diamond Member
Aug 28, 2003
4,084
17
81
glad you reminded me about this. set my htpc to record.. I heard the interview with filmmaker Stefan Forbes on the Bob Edwards show this morning, but forgot about it by the time I got home.

Yes, US dirty politics existed for a hundred years or more, but Atwater redefined and elevated the term.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
G-d willing, this influence may be waning. The GOP is going to end up marginalizing itself and becoming a regional party.

link

For South, a Waning Hold on National Politics

VERNON, Ala. ? Fear of the politician with the unusual name and look did not end with last Tuesday?s vote in this rural red swatch where buck heads and rifles hang on the wall. This corner of the Deep South still resonates with negative feelings about the race of President-elect Barack Obama.

What may have ended on Election Day, though, is the centrality of the South to national politics. By voting so emphatically for Senator John McCain over Mr. Obama ? supporting him in some areas in even greater numbers than they did President Bush ? voters from Texas to South Carolina and Kentucky may have marginalized their region for some time to come, political experts say.

The region?s absence from Mr. Obama?s winning formula means it ?is becoming distinctly less important,? said Wayne Parent, a political scientist at Louisiana State University. ?The South has moved from being the center of the political universe to being an outside player in presidential politics.?

One reason for that is that the South is no longer a solid voting bloc. Along the Atlantic Coast, parts of the ?suburban South,? notably Virginia and North Carolina, made history last week in breaking from their Confederate past and supporting Mr. Obama. Those states have experienced an influx of better educated and more prosperous voters in recent years, pointing them in a different political direction than states farther west, like Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi, and Appalachian sections of Kentucky and Tennessee.

Southern counties that voted more heavily Republican this year than in 2004 tended to be poorer, less educated and whiter, a statistical analysis by The New York Times shows. Mr. Obama won in only 44 counties in the Appalachian belt, a stretch of 410 counties that runs from New York to Mississippi. Many of those counties, rural and isolated, have been less exposed to the diversity, educational achievement and economic progress experienced by more prosperous areas.

The increased turnout in the South?s so-called Black Belt, or old plantation-country counties, was visible in the results, but it generally could not make up for the solid white support for Mr. McCain. Alabama, for example, experienced a heavy black turnout and voted slightly more Democratic than in 2004, but the state over all gave 60 percent of its vote to Mr. McCain. (Arkansas, however, doubled the margin of victory it gave to the Republican over 2004.)

Less than a third of Southern whites voted for Mr. Obama, compared with 43 percent of whites nationally. By leaving the mainstream so decisively, the Deep South and Appalachia will no longer be able to dictate that winning Democrats have Southern accents or adhere to conservative policies on issues like welfare and tax policy, experts say.

That could spell the end of the so-called Southern strategy, the doctrine that took shape under President Richard M. Nixon in which national elections were won by co-opting Southern whites on racial issues. And the Southernization of American politics ? which reached its apogee in the 1990s when many Congressional leaders and President Bill Clinton were from the South ? appears to have ended.

?I think that?s absolutely over,? said Thomas Schaller, a political scientist who argued prophetically that the Democrats could win national elections without the South.

The Republicans, meanwhile, have ?become a Southernized party,? said Mr. Schaller, who teaches at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. ?They have completely marginalized themselves to a mostly regional party,? he said, pointing out that nearly half of the current Republican House delegation is now Southern.

Merle Black, an expert on the region?s politics at Emory University in Atlanta, said the Republican Party went too far in appealing to the South, alienating voters elsewhere.

?They?ve maxed out on the South,? he said, which has ?limited their appeal in the rest of the country.?

Even the Democrats made use of the Southern strategy, as the party?s two presidents in the last 40 years, Jimmy Carter and Mr. Clinton, were Southerners whose presence on the ticket served to assuage regional anxieties. Mr. Obama has now proved it is no longer necessary to include a Southerner on the national ticket ? to quiet racial fears, for example ? in order to win, in the view of analysts.

Several Southern states, including Arkansas, Louisiana and Tennessee, have voted for the winner in presidential elections for decades. No more. And Mr. Obama?s race appears to have been the critical deciding factor in pushing ever greater numbers of white Southerners away from the Democrats.

Here in Alabama, where Mr. McCain won 60.4 percent of the vote in his best Southern showing, he had the support of nearly 9 in 10 whites, according to exit polls, a figure comparable to other Southern states. Alabama analysts pointed to the persistence of traditional white Southern attitudes on race as the deciding factor in Mr. McCain?s strong margin. Mr. Obama won in Jefferson County, which includes the city of Birmingham, and in the Black Belt, but he made few inroads elsewhere.

?Race continues to play a major role in the state,? said Glenn Feldman, a historian at the University of Alabama, Birmingham. ?Alabama, unfortunately, continues to remain shackled to the bonds of yesterday.?

David Bositis, senior political analyst at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, pointed out that the 18 percent share of whites that voted for Senator John Kerry in 2004 was almost cut in half for Mr. Obama.

?There?s no other explanation than race,? he said.

In Arkansas, which had among the nation?s largest concentration of counties increasing their support for the Republican candidate over the 2004 vote, ?there?s a clear indication that racial conservatism was a component of that shift away from the Democrat,? said Jay Barth, a political scientist in the state.

Race was a strong subtext in post-election conversations across the socioeconomic spectrum here in Vernon, the small, struggling seat of Lamar County on the Mississippi border.

One white woman said she feared that blacks would now become more ?aggressive,? while another volunteered that she was bothered by the idea of a black man ?over me? in the White House.

Mr. McCain won 76 percent of the county?s vote, about five percentage points more than Mr. Bush did, because ?a lot more people came out, hoping to keep Obama out,? Joey Franks, a construction worker, said in the parking lot of the Shop and Save.

Mr. Franks, who voted for Mr. McCain, said he believed that ?over 50 percent voted against Obama for racial reasons,? adding that in his own case race mattered ?a little bit. That?s in my mind.?

Many people made it clear that they were deeply apprehensive about Mr. Obama, though some said they were hoping for the best.

?I think any time you have someone elected president of the United States with a Muslim name, whether they are white or black, there are some very unsettling things,? George W. Newman, a director at a local bank and the former owner of a trucking business, said over lunch at Yellow Creek Fish and Steak.

Don Dollar, the administrative assistant at City Hall, said bitterly that anyone not upset with Mr. Obama?s victory should seek religious forgiveness.

?This is a community that?s supposed to be filled with a bunch of Christian folks,? he said. ?If they?re not disappointed, they need to be at the altar.?

Customers of Bill Pennington, a barber whose downtown shop is decorated with hunting and fishing trophies, were ?scared because they heard he had a Muslim background,? Mr. Pennington said over the country music on the radio. ?Over and over again I heard that.?

Mr. Obama remains an unknown quantity in this corner of the South, and there are deep worries about the changes he will bring.

?I am concerned,? Gail McDaniel, who owns a cosmetics business, said in the parking lot of the Shop and Save. ?The abortion thing bothers me. Same-sex marriage.?

?I think there are going to be outbreaks from blacks,? she added. ?From where I?m from, this is going to give them the right to be more aggressive.?
 

mshan

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2004
7,868
0
71
Just finished watching.

My take:
- slightly partisan perspective (I would agree with that)
- worth watching, nonetheless (absolutely)
- divisive / wedge issue politics only work when the economy is good enough that the average American can afford such a luxury. (are you better off now..., it's the economy, stupid)
 

dbk

Lifer
Apr 23, 2004
17,685
10
81
Isn't Chambliss employing a similar strategy when he says "our folks" and "the other folks"?
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: dbk
Isn't Chambliss employing a similar strategy when he says "our folks" and "the other folks"?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ding Ding Ding, give dbk a cigar, while Chambliss is a morally bankrupt sob and the worst of the Atwater legacy, he still faces a runoff election, while his spiritual sob sister, Libby Dole has already gone the way of the dodo.

Even if ole Saxbe survives, his wings are plucked, one of the last of Mohecans, a dying breed left to contemplate a former glory as a new reality leaves him behind as a shining negative example. The derision can only mount as a six year ignore him policy starts.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
I thought the show was well done. While you could certainly make the argument it was partisan, it relied primarily on interviews with Republicans (though obviously some of them, like Ed Rollins, are people Atwater burned). He was certainly an interesting figure, though I think his legacy as a whole is pretty much entirely negative.
 

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
I was listening to a show on NPR where they talked about this guy and how people liked him personally, just not his tactics.

Very fascinating indeed.
 

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
Originally posted by: Lemon law
There is an old saying, the best way to defeat your enemy is teach him a bad habit. The Rove and Atwater brand is the bad habit the GOP taught themselves, it might even work infinitely, except the GOP lost sight of the fact they had to deliver good governance to seal the deal.

And non Prof John is correct in mentioning the GOP attack line against Grover Cleveland was Ma Ma where my pa, gone to the white house ha ha ha! What he forgets is the simultaneous Democratic attack line of
Blaine, Blaine, James G. Blaine, the continental liar from the State of Maine! And in an election of responsible sexual pecadillo vs. a solid record of corruption, PJ's hero Blane, lost to Cleveland. And here we are,
124 years later and Obama wins easily against McSame. Its not like the GOP did not launch any swift boats, its that the American people ignored them because the GOP delivered terrible governance.

I almost felt that McCain didn't want to go there. A coordinated effort by GOP pundits to exploit racism associate Obama with Ayers, Wright could've sunk, or at least damaged him a bit. The country would've been deeply divided with either a McCain or a Obama victory.

McCain, even with his pandering to the right for votes, and his negative campaigning, didn't paint Obama as anti-Americado (Clinton strategist, Mark Penn suggested it in the memo). Clearly Hillary didn't want to go there, either.

I think we should all be grateful that both Hillary and McCain showed decency somewhat, that the age of do anything to win is at least taking a pause.

Until Obamabots try to get Obama reelected next time around. I feel like they're the ones wanting to win at all costs this time around.
 

OneOfTheseDays

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2000
7,052
0
0
The GOP represents a dying America.

Conservatives are fooling themselves thinking that their racist, divisive, and morally and intellectually bankrupt campaign strategies will ever work again in a National election.

America is changing, you aren't. Democrats are winning young voters and minorities by significant margins. The only voting block the Republicans have left are racist white voters.

Thank God, your party is dead.
 

OneOfTheseDays

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2000
7,052
0
0
You gotta love how the GOP has yet to change their dirty, disgusting, immoral politics even in this election. They tried the same ol' tactics and got beat horribly.

Obama represents a different kind of politics that can and will continue to defeat the Republican tried and true tactics of fear based politics. It took the Democrats quite awhile, but it appears that all the losing was not in vain. They have now set themselves up for a bright future while the Republican party, who sold its soul to win, is finding themselves to be a true minority in this country incapable of winning national elections.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
"The Republicans, meanwhile, have ?become a Southernized party,? said Mr. Schaller, who teaches at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. ?They have completely marginalized themselves to a mostly regional party,? he said, pointing out that nearly half of the current Republican House delegation is now Southern."

While there is some validity to the GOP becoming just a southern party, one must look at most of the American West as the other wing that flies the bird. And if one looks at a map of the USA overlain with its reds and blues, it pretty clear, on a square mile basis, America is mostly red. The rub is that on a population concentration basis, America went blue in 2008. And when various demographic are used, the only significant demographic the GOP held were the over 65 years old demographic. While the dems really picked up large gains in the minority vote and the young.

Even as a partisan democrat, I cannot share the optimism of OneOfTheseDays, what happened in 2006 and 2008 were more referendums on GWB&co IMHO. And if we look at the last three GOP Presidents, GWB is the totally I don't care about the quality of governance or the results odd man out. Anyone who watched the Reagan white house knew his inner circle obsessively watched the evening news, and if the press got on them, they were very swift to make the corrections. In the case of GHB, at least he understood, that he had to read my lips raise taxes for the good of the country, a box the sins of Reagan put him in.
By in large, the conduct of Gulf War one was a model of international consultation, the aftermath and the swift capitulation of Saddam caught everyone flat footed, and bottom line Saddam should have been forced out of Iraqi leadership, but otherwise, GHB was engaged in the area of international relations while the dems ran domestic policy. I can't hold out Clinton as a innovative or great President, he simply did not make horrible foreign and domestic blunders, and that paired with reasonable economic policies, was enough to see the country prosper, with four years of that ground work laid by GHB.

But if we look at things from a "Project for a New American Century" in realistic terms, and completely throw away the failed neocon version, ALL THE US TREND LINES ARE DOWN. Our overall balance of trade went south in 1980, and the deficit keeps accelerating, we are losing our manufacturing base, Wall Street, in a failed effort to create wealth out of thin air just had a giant ponzi scheme implode, we cannot compete on trade when we tack on the costs of serving as the world's unpaid policeman, and sad to say, in the last eight years, the quality of policing has degenerated to worse than useless. We failed to take advantage of the end of the cold war by taking a peace dividend, and now may well face new cold wars with Russia and or China, both flush with cash at a time we are deep in debt and living on borrowed time.

One party or the other, and hopefully both, must soon address those issues, or the USA is in very deep doo doo. We know that McCain could not have, I certainly hope Obama will start the long job of climbing out of the hole. If not, the old red state blue state maps are useless, if Obama or some future President and congress does meaningfully address our problems, totally new political alignments are likely to follow.

 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,163
136
EXCELLENT excellent PBS docu.
I will NEVER understand how so many can be fooled by these
guys, then and now. I guess I?m just immune.

Another great PBS docu on American experience was CRASH of 1929.
Just amazing how history repeats itself, 1929 then, and now today.
All the while we were told by the experts (then and now) "things are just great with the economy".

I didnt see this show airing again in the next few weeks.
Too bad. It was a must see tv. (its on today 11/12 on the PBS HD feed @ 9am EST)
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
I think it's a little too early to start throwing dirt on the casket of the (R) party. Obama and many (D)'s may have won in 2008 but if they don't perform they aren't going to get re-elected and given our 2 party system the alternative is the (R)'s.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
Originally posted by: Robor
I think it's a little too early to start throwing dirt on the casket of the (R) party. Obama and many (D)'s may have won in 2008 but if they don't perform they aren't going to get re-elected and given our 2 party system the alternative is the (R)'s.
Exactly.

After the Nixon disaster Carter entered office with 292 Representatives and 61 Senators.

By 1980 they had lost 50 house seats, 14 Senate seats and the Presidency for 12 years.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,837
2,621
136
While many of the supposedly core principals of the GOP are admirable, hopefully it is time to throw dirt on the casket of the divisive politics and single issue themes that have been the central theme of the GOP for over two decades now. I think this is a very real possibility, Obama has essentially reinvented the big tent of the Democratic Party.