(random interviewee) indicated that to young people, "change" means less a shift in priorities than the end of a political era marked by qualities - confrontation, self-righteousness, the struggle for reccognition - that many associate with baby boomers. (note this is editorializing, not quotation)
- Peter S. Canellos "Young voters resist politics of baby boom era", Boston Sunday Globe, February 3, 2008.
Obama's failure to connect effectively with Latinos is driven less by historical tensions between black and Latino communities than by the fact that Latinos know and like Clinton and have had little contact with the Illinois senator.
- Susan Milligan, "Latinos poised for key role in primaries", Boston Sunday Globe, February 3, 2008.
Gee, how many fights can the media start? Young vs. old; blacks vs. Latinos; black women vs. black men. Come the elections, its going to look like Kenya around here.
These two stories were the major political stories in the Globe today. What a bunch of irrelevant, spun, horseshit. "Let's you and him fight." Remember when political reporters used to cover issues and platforms instead of personalities and insults? Apparently not many do. They've spent too much time watching Survivor.
Great, Mr. Canellos. Let's not
confront the crooked, murderous regime of George W. Bush. Forget about all the hypocritical,
self-righteous moralizing of the GOP and the lunatic religious right. Let's not
recognize that a class war is raging in America.
There is no way to deal with this toxic media garbage except to avoid it. But, the majority of voters seem to be buying into this tribalism. Vote for a woman, ignore her policies. Vote for a black man, ignore his policies. Vote for the man or woman my tribe supports.
American politics has been reduced to high school taunting and being with the "in crowd". The majority remain resolutely unaware that unless someone undoes what Bush has done, the Constitution is over - we already have an executive dictatorship. The majority remain unaware that we are already bankrupt and that the current "rescue package" is throwing a boat anchor to a drowning man.
I'd love to hear from fanatic supporters of candidates that they do recognize the perils of this kind of polarizing politics. Have you read this article?
But this isn't 1992 - or 1988, or 1984. A better year for Democrats to remember is 1968. Lyndon Johnson, who led an unpopular war, was forced to resign after Eugene McCarthy ran a surprisingly strong second in New Hampshire. Soon the party found itself choosing between Humphrey - seen by many as a representative of "old style" politics - the insurgent but cerebral McCarthy, and Bobby Kennedy (whose candidacy many McCarthy supporters initially viewed as a betrayal.
Humphrey, McCarthy, and Kennedy were viewed by their advocates as more than just politicians. Supporters saw them as extensions of themselves, a reflection of their own personalities, values, and beliefs. Humphrey seemed to be the avatar of traditional Democratic experience (and courage, too, back when he faced down the Dixiecrats and Strom Thurmond at a 1948 convention. That was before the young activists' time, giving some older Democrats one more reason to be irritated with them.)
- RJ Eskow, "Warning: This Party May Self-Destruct in Ten Months"http://www.smirkingchimp.com/print/12571/
Right now, its a pretty dark night in the Democratic Party. All I can hear is the sound of tribal drums.
arendt
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
