Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

This White House is MINE

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 04:30 AM
Original message
This White House is MINE
Edited on Tue Mar-18-08 05:27 AM by DeadElephant_ORG

This White House is MINE

George W., Hillary, and McCain, and the Last Gasp of "The Me Generation".

March 17, 2008 by Jeff Goldsmith

Many Democrats feel dismayed, even betrayed at the unwillingness of Hillary Clinton and her supporters to step aside for the good of the party, and to better our chances of beating McCain. Clinton and her supporters, on the other hand, feel dismayed and betrayed by the lack of deference that Obama and his supporters have shown towards what they regard as Clinton's long-and-hard-earned right to lead our party. This intra-party death match is a classic generational succession struggle, akin to countless others through history. The fight is not about gender or race. At stake is a new "Generation Gap", this one coming on the trailing edge of the Baby Boomers.

The boomers are arguably the most idealistic and innovative generation since the founding of our nation. They brought us Civil Rights, Women’s Rights, Sexual Freedom, a revolutionary love for the planet as a whole - the Environmental Movement - and an entire culture of caring. These are profound contributions to the destiny of humanity.

As the boomers aged, America aged. When they were young and horny, America got "free love". When they were seeking their fortune, America got "yuppies" and gentrification. And when they were old and rich, and worried about staying that way, America got "welfare reform", and tax breaks for the wealthy.

Their massive influence upon, and dominance of American life is enabled by a single, simple fact: sheer numbers. Regardless of ideology, Americans born during the Boom share one trait in common - throughout their whole lives there have always been more of them than of their parents, or children. Thus they are in all things self-ratified.

Self-ratification has led to many, many excesses, including violent rioting, mass drug addiction, sex in the streets in some cities, rampant divorce, Rovian politics, and above any and all particulars, a culture suffused in a powerful sense of personal entitlement. They are "The Me Generation”. They’re not embarrassed at this because they feel entitled to their entitlement. Not surprisingly, the central ethic of a self-ratifying generation turns out to be greed. The Me’s turned a nation of citizens into a nation of "consumers".

Their ambitions have been hampered only by their own incessant sibling rivalry: between their Young Republicans, and their Vietnam War protesters. That in-focused hostility has mounted as they have aged. The Me's are fixated on their Me siblings, and are impervious to the claims of other generations.

The oft commented upon “Bush/Clinton dynasty” has an important asymmetry to it that is always brushed over. The two Bush presidents are cross-generational in the most explicit terms possible – George Sr. and George Jr. – whereas (if Hillary is elected) the two Clinton presidents will be intra-generational, again in the most explicit terms possible – husband and wife. There is no better definition of a generation than those examples provide.

So despite ideological differences, Bill, Hillary, George Jr., and John McCain, are generational “siblings” - the “Me Dynasty” – and they pushed the generation of Bush Sr. to the side.

Recall, if you can, the televised debate between George H. Bush, the father, and Bill Clinton – then at his prime at age 46 – in which the candidates were deprived of podiums, and given tall stools on which to sit. Bush, in his stiff, straight, presidential suit was obviously horribly ill at ease. Clinton, in contrast, slouched on his stool like he was at a bar, and frequently rose up deftly and reached out to individuals in the near-at-hand audience. He moved like he owned the place. When Bill was elected, much was made of the ascendency to power of the baby boomers. He was our third youngest president, knew nothing about foreign policy, but he was smart, and sexy, played sax on Saturday Night Live, and had a gift with words.

And if that sounds almost like a description of Barack, it should not surprise us. As Bill was then, Barack Obama is 46 now.

That was 1992. Eight years later, in 2000, when George W., the son, became President, W. was 54; exactly eight years older than Bill was when Bill became President. And eight years after that, in 2008, if Hillary becomes president, she will be 61; exactly 7 years older than W. was when W. became President. In short, the age at which a politician may be elected President has, miraculously, perfectly tracked with the aging of the Me Generation.

Until Obama.

Observing this, we can now more fully understand what Hillary meant by her infamous remarks that “I bring a lifetime of experience to the White House. I know Senator McCain will bring a lifetime of experience to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he made in 2004.”

George W.’s invasion of Iraq - with it’s unutterable rational, “God damit, that’s our oil” - was the penultimate criminal excess of Me-ism. Which is why it is significant that Hillary and McCain both signed on to Bush’s war, with it’s incomprehensible toll of lives, damage to our economy, and lost international good will. And why it is significant that Obama did not. Obama staked his political future to oppose that war - yes, by making “a speech in 2004”.

Hillary comments amount to a summary dismissal the claims of any generation but her own. It appears that she would prefer any Me-Generation President, rather than cede power to Obama.

All of which explains why Hillary’s supporters have sought to demean, rather than to embrace the younger voters whom Obama has brought into the Democratic Party in such large numbers. They deride Obama supporters as “cult” members and “Kool-aid drinkers” who mindlessly follow their “rock-star super-guru” candidate. This critique is particularly rich, coming from the generation which invented the concepts of rock star and super guru. Remember them screaming non-stop all the way through the Beatles’ concerts?

Hillary’s supporters complain that younger voters, who are engaged in the electoral process in numbers never before seen, cannot be relied upon to vote in the fall. So the Me’s have turned on it’s head that old maxim which they coined to justify themselves, and now we must never trust anybody under 30. How convenient. And the only demographic group among which Hillary consistently polls ahead is those over 60.

In contrast, inclusivity, rather than identity, marks the generation that followed the Me’s. Obama’s generation rejected both bigotry and identity politics, and chose instead to “celebrate diversity.” Who cares if we have a black President, or a woman President ? We just want a great President. Part white, part black, Christian with Muslim roots, Obama physically embodies multiculturalism. Inclusivity is also reflected in Obama’s extraordinarily broad base of small donors.

Moreover, the two campaigns are each rallied by directly contrary ideas regarding the proper locus of political action. Hillary promises “I’ll fight for you”, which casts both herself and the citizenry in the singular form: “I” and “you”. For it’s lack of inclusiveness, this stands in marked contrast to Barack’s assurance to us that “Yes we can”.

In Hillary’s refusal to step aside, despite the impossible math, despite the destruction of our party, despite risk to our country, we see again the exemplar of Me-ism. Let’s face it. The Me Generation has never had to concede anything. So they are not likely to cede control of the body politic before their physical bodies give way to decrepitude.


Digg this here


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
democrank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 04:37 AM
Response to Original message
1. Thank you, DEO.
~PEACE~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
32. thank YOU
Edited on Tue Mar-18-08 03:43 PM by DeadElephant_ORG
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flor de jasmim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 04:38 AM
Response to Original message
2. the fly in the ointment...
Generation Me describes anyone born in the 1970s, 1980s, or 1990s --
so, strictly speaking, you're off by several decades, but you are absolutely right that they have been self-absorbed, self-righteous, etc.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txaslftist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #2
20. The "Me" generation is the boomers. 1944-64, more or less.
Obama is at the tail end of that generation, but seems to have most of his support from the "clean up the mess" generations; those that come from 1965 on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #2
41. the "Me generation" is not to be confused with "Generation Me"



Baby Boomers were the "Me generation".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ContinentalOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
51. I think Boomers coined "Generation Me" to try to make people forget that they were the Me Generation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Utopian Leftist Donating Member (204 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 04:40 AM
Response to Original message
3. Very interesting
Edited on Tue Mar-18-08 04:41 AM by Utopian Leftist
and adept analysis of the Me Generation.

"Me" fits the boomers much better than "us" ever did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 04:48 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Yeah right. You've been so damn effective politically.
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluerum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 05:01 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Don't think so. But go ahead and keep saying it,,,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
better tomorrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 05:04 AM
Response to Original message
6. and those same old baby boomers gave us that.....
"ME" generation......as their grandchildren.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barack the house Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 05:25 AM
Response to Original message
7. As much asI see where th article is coming from attacking a whole generation ain't helping te caus
Edited on Tue Mar-18-08 05:26 AM by barack the house
I distance myself from this article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 05:47 AM
Response to Original message
8. More evidence that Obama is a divisive figure.
More UNITING I see
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txaslftist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #8
19. He's not the one kicking the black vote to the kerb.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #8
21. merely pointing out where unity already exists: between George W., Hillary, and McCain
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #8
43. pointing out racism does not make one a racist. And pointing out generationalism...


does not make one a generationalist. I'm not advocating that we should not vote for "them". In fact I've voted for them throughout the political careers. I'm advocating that they should not persist in voting only for THEMSELVES.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 05:48 AM
Response to Original message
9. it's my Party and i'll cry if I want to
It's my party and I'll cry if I want to
Cry if I want to, cry if I want to
You would cry too if it happened to you

Nobody knows where my Johnny has gone
But Judy left the same time
Why was he holding her hand
When he's supposed to be mine

It's my party and I'll cry if I want to
Cry if I want to, cry if I want to
You would cry too if it happened to you

Then all my records keep dancing all night
But leave me alone for a while
'Til Johnny's dancing with me
I've got no reason to smile


Lesley Gore


Modify lyrics for the ooccasion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #9
22. that captures it. yes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tyler Durden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 05:53 AM
Response to Original message
10. I have a question for you.
Does the candidate that you support plan, as chief executive, to defend, protect, and execute the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution as the Oath of Office will require?

For reference, Here is The 14th Amendment, Section 1:

"Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

This apparently does not have any exclusions, such as "This does not apply to atheists, Muslims, the mental or physically challenged, or male/female homosexuals, bisexuals, transexuals or transgendered persons," and does not let states off the hook.

So, seeing as a failure now or in the future to support the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, fully and without reservation, will violate US law and the Presidential Oath of Office, does the candidate that you prefer support the 14th Amendment, and if they do not, do you support their immediate impeachment once they take the Oath of Office as the law demands?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #10
62. Does your question have ANYTHING to do with the this post?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perry Logan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 05:54 AM
Response to Original message
11. Now the generation card. Is there no card the Obama people won't play?
Edited on Tue Mar-18-08 05:55 AM by Perry Logan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Since Obama is a baby boomer, himself, his playing the generation
Edited on Tue Mar-18-08 07:32 AM by Benhurst
card borders on the theater of the absurd.

The U.S.Census defines baby boomer as "the generation born between 1946 and 1964." Obama was born in 1961, making him a somewhat youngish baby boomer; but a baby boomer, nevertheless.

If there is going to be a torch passed on January 20, 2009, meaningless as that gesture may be, it will be from one baby boomer to another, unless, of course, John McCain wins the election.


http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/facts_for_features_special_editions/006105.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. Obama isn't playing any card here. I am.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txaslftist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. And good for you.
Hillary's refusal to either acknowledge current electoral reality or to pay any respect at all to Obama embodies the worst traits of the me generation. You hit it on the head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 07:39 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. Bill already played that card in NH when he had his buddy Murdoch
print the cover "She's so Yesterday" and Bill Clinton saying "I can't make her younger - which was played out again and again in the media."

The amount of FREE ads the Clinton campaign has received this year from the media is huge. I'm sure in many states the "actual" ad buys for Clinton would far exceed Obama if the free ad spots were factored in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #11
38. Yeah, the Loser card. That's in Hillary's hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
13. We need someone in there that knows and acts like
The White House is OURS!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txaslftist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
16. WOW! K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
18. K & R
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
23. Wow.. After Obama's SELFLESS speech, the selfish entitlement of Hillary is stunning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sloppyjoe25s Donating Member (664 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
24. thanks for a great article...
good read...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elixir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
25. Other than community work, show me how Barack Obama represents the poor south side of Chicago.
I find it fascinating that people don't take Obama and Rev. Wright to task for creating the image that he's a poor boy from the south side of Chicago and lacked "priviledge". Obama attended Punahou School, a private college preparatory school, from the fifth grade until his graduation.

After high school, Obama moved to Los Angeles, where he studied at Occidental College for two years. He then transferred to Columbia University, not an inexpensive school, in New York City, where he majored in political science with a specialization in international relations. Obama received his Bachelor of Arts in 1983. In 1988 he attended Yale University, another high priced Ivy league school.

I would like to know how Barack Obama has been disadvantaged and poor? Now maybe he didn't have to pay for all of it, but, he's lead as "priviledged" life as Hillary, if not more so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
26. Isn't McCain too old to be a boomer?
The Boomers are named after the post WWII baby boom. While I understand that those born in 1944 and 1945 may have been socialized under the conditions of the boom, Being born in 1936 is a bit early for that. McCain probably has memories of the news of Dday, the atom bomb, and the end of the war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
27. Who is Jeff Goldsmith?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. speaking... what would you like to know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. oh okay....I was just curious and I like to know who the writers and sources are....
Edited on Tue Mar-18-08 01:04 PM by ElsewheresDaughter
:hi: Nice to meet you


Love your dead elephant logo!



.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Thanks! This post was entirely inspired by conversations here on DU.
This one from PatGund in particular:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5080788
entitled: "An honest question for Sen. Clinton's supporters"

I'm the "Instigator-in-Chief" of the DeadElephant.ORG campaign, which brings together the creative talents of a couple dozen activists, writers, marketers, and like-minded patriots.

I'll be very glad when our party's internal battle is resolved - one way or the other - so that we can all get back to unhorsing those God-damned neoFascists.

Which is what the logo is all about.

Nice to meet you too!

-Jeff
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PatGund Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #30
34. Thank you!
I was about to say "I posted about this, but nowhere NEAR as well", but this gave me an in to say just that :-)

Thank you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #34
58. I so glad you found this. I was gonna come looking for you. Thanks for your original post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neshanic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
31. So Obama is different. Is he really?
"Obama’s generation rejected both bigotry and identity politics, and chose instead to “celebrate diversity.”

Nice read, and nice tip of the hat to the generation that fucked up the planet,( I missed out on the orgies in the streets), and basically is the root of all the problems of the election situation we are in now.

He rejected bigotry? Seems to my recollection, he was very publicly warned of the gay pastor gig way before hand. He went ahead anyway. Also his speech very good as it is, is probably one he SHOULD of given when he entered the race, or after the gay pastor issue immediately. Is is he really the new best thing?

No, he is the student of what Bill Clinton did to get elected, and a student of a nasty preacher. He just got caught. They all do. All politicians will deny until pressed to the wall with the evidence. To blame a generation on Obama's mis-steps and overreaching, while trying to just get by without getting called on it is the name of the game, is a good stretch. Now if in that speech he said the word "gay" once, THEN it's a new ball game, and he would truly be the rejector of all things past, even though he is in his late 40s'. I think at the hospital when you are born, the "generational UPC code" is not tatooed on you yet, so he's got just as much explaining as averyone else, and there's enogh blame to go around. Generational politics is nasty and mean.

So Obama got caught. He believed his press releases a bit too much. This is the price he pays. This is the price we all pay, regardless of generations; the old person and the baby just born into a world where these stupid games to get elected are still played.

He's no differenet from any other politician running for office, and that will become more obvious has he dances around more issues when he is up against McCain.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Voice for Peace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-18-08 11:59 PM
Response to Original message
33. I really want to see the young people take over this country. REALLY
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 12:51 AM
Response to Original message
35. Correct. It is Monumental Selfishness, not patriotism or idealism, that keeps her in the race.
Edited on Wed Mar-19-08 12:52 AM by Stephanie

If she had a cause, if, say, she were fighting to end the war, or to end poverty or global warming, I could understand it. But what is she fighting for? She is fighting for HILLARY.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 12:53 AM
Response to Original message
36. What is Digg?
thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. Digg.com is a social media news site in which articles from across the web are promoted to view
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueStater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 01:05 AM
Response to Original message
39. McCain isn't the same generation as the Chimp and Hillary n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #39
40. he is 10 years older, and born before the boom, yes
But McCain, like many others who are not technically "boomers", is part of the "me generation" broadly defined to include those in the thrall of the central premise of me-ism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYPat Donating Member (25 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 07:01 AM
Response to Original message
42. Does Obama want the boomer vote?
McCain is not a boomer.
Obama is a boomer.
Many would take exception with this stereotyping piece.
Circulating pieces like this may reinforce your thinking
but it doesn't win the boomer vote for Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arugula Latte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
44. While I agree that Hillary's arrogant sense of entitlement to the presidency and
her alliance with John McCain against Obama are two of the major strikes against her, I do question painting an entire generation consisting of tens of millions of people in such broad-brush strokes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #44
45. So- "broad strokes" are OK if they're about blacks, women, or youth, but not about the "Me's"
Edited on Wed Mar-19-08 11:46 AM by DeadElephant_ORG
I find this sudden uproar in defense of this particular group of "10's of millions of voters" to VERY revealing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arugula Latte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #45
46. When did I ever say broad strokes about blacks, women or youths
were fine with me? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. to be fair, you personally did not. But there are posts on this board on those subjects daily
which receive no notice for their broad strokes. Hits against youth in general are a constant feature of response by Hillary supporters. This is the fact I found most dismaying, and that drove me to write this piece.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dhalgren Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #47
50. Where are the "broad-brush" posts that vilify blacks, that disparage
women, and blame both of these groups for all the ills of the world? I agree that too much "broad-brushism" permeates this board, but your disparagement of an entire generation of people of all faiths, all colors, all social positions and classes is just so far over the top that I am afraid I have to put you on ignore. You should know better...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #50
52. all over this board ! especially hits against youth. What do you think "kool-aid" means?


What's more, your comment lacks logic. Dividing any homogeneous group, such as our party, along any single attribute, such as age, clusters together people of all the remaining attributes. When one disparages youth, you disparage "people of all faiths, all colors, all social positions and classes". When one disparages "the rich" you disparage people of all those other attributes other than wealth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
48. oy vey...and like Obama doesn't want it as badly....give it a break
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #48
53. Obama's ambition may be real and personal, but it is far less RAW
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 12:14 PM
Response to Original message
49. Lumping people into convenient groups because of age is just as narrow
minded as lumping people of race or religious believe or ethnic identity...

Maybe I just expect too much from today's America...

And as far as inclusiveness in the generations that followed the boomers...

Music is far more segmented, cable TV has created cultural ghettos, cliches in high school, if you can believe all that is reported in the media, are far more severe, far more delineated than ever before...

So yea, that inclusiveness that we are all searching for...

It's a myth...

And by the so designated under 30's railing against the boomer's, aren't they behaving just as badly...

It's all about power...

Getting, retaining it, wanting it...

No "generation" is immune, no "generation" is pure...

And the mindless me toism is rampant across generational lines...

The more things change...

The more they stay the same...

I just wish so-called commentators would just stop with the battle ground scenarios and pop psychology and amatuer sociological musings and just look at the issues...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #49
54. other than this OP, show me the "under 30's railing against the boomer's". Doesn't exist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #54
55. Oh it sure does...
People are always complaining about Boomer this and boomer that...

And you know what, I just don't have all that time to research it...

But it is all really silly...

Because when you get right down to it, we are all in this together no matter when or where you were born...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #55
56. I haven't seen it. Agreed "we're in it together". So why don't Hillary supporters act that way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #56
59. Which is why I support Obama....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadElephant_ORG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #59
60. I LOVE your dad's advice, by the way. Even more so that you remembered it.

I'm a dad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #60
61. Feel free to use it....
It worked!!!

Only miscreants and ner do wells now...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
57. If hilary said "a speech he made in 2004" then
she was lying again..because The Speech Obama made was in Oct 2002.

October 2, 2002

"Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union, and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil. I don't oppose all wars.

My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain. I don't oppose all wars.

After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again. I don't oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism.

What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income - to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear - I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars.

So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the President today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings. You want a fight, President Bush?

Let's fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe. You want a fight, President Bush?"


The conclusion..
http://www.barackobama.com/2002/10/02/remarks_of_illinois_state_sen.php

This Speech give Obama the moral high ground that hilary could never claw her way to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 09:44 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC