|
Nice words are great.
Do you picture politicos sitting in a room, with their handlers besides them, crossing words off speeches because they are too strong?
Dean shouldn't use the word "warts" because its an unpleasant word and it has an "eww" factor. Kerry needs to move his arms more and use colloquialisms, being the wine sipping academic liberal he is.
My concern is this. The democratic party is a party of loosely bound factions with their own interests. I am a democrat essentially for two reasons. One, I'm an ecologist. Two, I'm pro-choice.
My problem with the democratic party in general, and the academic democratic party in particular is the fact that they love protesting, invoking long dead names, and using buzz words. On the "campus" of NYU, everyone is a radical. Whats a radical? Can you be a radical when everyone is a radical? Bush is evil incarnate and everyone loves Dean or Kucinich, despite the fact that their records are more conservative than the other candidates.
We protest. We scream and yell, but do we viscerally feel?
College students, four years ago, supported Nader and gave him a good national 5%. The reason Mr. Nader didn't get it is because when students had to put on pants, a jacket, and actually leave to vote, it was too much. Academics love to think and argue, and yell and rant, but they rarely do.
This election cycle we are seeing something new, and something very hopeful.
The democratic party is no longer a party of loosely associated interests. We are one single party. A party in opposition to the administration.
Turnout is a record high in nearly all states. The candidates are incredibly strong and incredibly liberal.
Ladies and gentlemen, the fire is in our bellies. Lets burn Washington down with it.
M
|