The Choice of the Democratic Party

The BBQ Pit
61

[QUOTE=Purgatory Creek]
I’d just like to point out that if those Baby Boomers (and many others before them) hadn’t fought those “ridiculous” fights, there would be no presidential hopes at all for Barack Obama, or for Hilary Clinton. You might want to read up on those “stupid struggles in the 60’s.”

Frankly, as a Baby Boomer, were I less strong-willed and more on the fence, your petulant little diatribe just might convince me not to vote for Obama. I’m still considering him–on those days when I can think at all at my age–but you really haven’t done much here to advance his cause.
[/QUOTE]

Fuck you.

Name one great Baby Boomer? Your generation came to power in the 80’s. Those such as Martin Luther King, JFK, etc… were NOT baby Boomers, they just happened to be the leaders at the time. So no, your generation had fuck all to do with it. I know exactly what the fuck happened in the sixties and the people who were 20 years old were in San Francisco if anywhere. I know what happened in the South and that sure as hell wasn’t your generation. So again, you’re getting ahead of yourself in the importance game. Nobody owes your generation another fucking second of attention.

Here’s what you get. Pre-baby boom was MLK. Your baby boom “me” entitlement generation is Jessie Jackson. Sorry if I’m “petulant” but I’ve got a lot more years to live in this country than you do and I’d rather shed off the legacy of selfishness and idiotic politics sooner rather than later. I’d not like to be electing 80 year old presidents in 20 years discussing who did what in the goddamned sixties. Fuck off and do something new with yourselves.

62

[QUOTE=Justin_Bailey]
Obama also leads the overall delegates 38 to 36 too.

[/QUOTE]
Actually, overall, Clinton leads Obama at the moment by 87 delegates, not just 2.

63

[QUOTE=BobLibDem]
The Clintons are running a filthy campaign against Obama…
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, but I’m just not seeing that. Compared to today’s Republican campaign tricks, the battle of the Democrats looks like tea and crumpets on a sunny Sunday afternoon in spring.

Merkwurdigliebe, have you considered the possibilty that we boomers all hate America, and want it to fail? That would explain our intransigence re Obamamania.

64

No, it’s just being completely self-centered.

Then you have her surrogates suggesting he’s a muslim, swore his oath of office on the Koran, went to a Madrassa.

Clinton mentioning past drug use…

Clinton simply can’t compete on any fucking level without bringing him down with lies.

THAT’S what pisses me off. And the fact that nobody else sees this is what pisses me off. You aren’t seeing the dirty tricks because the campaign hasn’t come to you yet. I’ve been following it closesly.

65

[QUOTE=Merkwurdigliebe]
Fuck you.

Name one great Baby Boomer? Your generation came to power in the 80’s. Those such as Martin Luther King, JFK, etc… were NOT baby Boomers, they just happened to be the leaders at the time. So no, your generation had fuck all to do with it. I know exactly what the fuck happened in the sixties and the people who were 20 years old were in San Francisco if anywhere. I know what happened in the South and that sure as hell wasn’t your generation. So again, you’re getting ahead of yourself in the importance game. Nobody owes your generation another fucking second of attention.

Here’s what you get. Pre-baby boom was MLK. Your baby boom “me” entitlement generation is Jessie Jackson. Sorry if I’m “petulant” but I’ve got a lot more years to live in this country than you do and I’d rather shed off the legacy of selfishness and idiotic politics sooner rather than later. I’d not like to be electing 80 year old presidents in 20 years discussing who did what in the goddamned sixties. Fuck off and do something new with yourselves.
[/QUOTE]

Give them credit, though. They’re great followers.

66

[QUOTE=BobLibDem]
I’d prefer her to Chucklebee or Romney, but I refuse to cast a ballot for her.
[/QUOTE]
I just wondered if you believe the reasons that justify that position for you were valid for other Democratic voters as well.

67

[QUOTE=Merkwurdigliebe]
Name one great Baby Boomer? (…) Fuck off and do something new with yourselves.
[/QUOTE]

Uh oh.

68

[QUOTE=The Flying Dutchman]
Actually, overall, Clinton leads Obama at the moment by 87 delegates, not just 2.
[/QUOTE]

But that list is including a poll of “superdelegates” that don’t officially count until the convention.

Among delegates won in just primaries and caucuses, Obama is ahead by 2.

69

[QUOTE=Terrifel]
Uh oh.
[/QUOTE]

Jesus Christ,

Do you think I’m not aware of the fact that Barack Obama is “technically” a baby boomer? We’re talking about culturally. Obama is culturally not a part of this generation.

I could go on and own about how this generation has screwed us over, but this article does a good enough job here…
http://www.viceland.com/issues/v12n8/htdocs/the_vice.php

I won’t vote for hillary and might vote for McCain. Why? Because McCain might actually fix some things although I disagree with him on a lot of other stuff. Hillary doesn’t deserve a thing the way she is running and the way she and her husband have been behaving themselves for the past 16 years. It’s always about them and always has been. I say it’s time John Kerry stands up for Obama and makes some noise about the shit they’re kicking up.

70

[QUOTE=Fear Itself]
I just wondered if you believe the reasons that justify that position for you were valid for other Democratic voters as well.
[/QUOTE]

Let them decide for themselves. If nominating Hillary leads to President Hucklebee and his Taliban Party, then so be it.

71

[QUOTE=Merkwurdigliebe]
Do you think I’m not aware of the fact that Barack Obama is “technically” a baby boomer? We’re talking about culturally. Obama is culturally not a part of this generation.
[/QUOTE]
Just out of curiosity, what generation do you reckon this 47-year-old man is a part of, culturally?

He’s old enough to have voted for Jimmy Carter.

72

All your culture are belong to us?

73

[QUOTE=Merkwurdigliebe]
Jesus Christ,

Do you think I’m not aware of the fact that Barack Obama is “technically” a baby boomer? We’re talking about culturally. Obama is culturally not a part of this generation.

I could go on and own about how this generation has screwed us over, but this article does a good enough job here…
http://www.viceland.com/issues/v12n8/htdocs/the_vice.php

I won’t vote for hillary and might vote for McCain. Why? Because McCain might actually fix some things although I disagree with him on a lot of other stuff. Hillary doesn’t deserve a thing the way she is running and the way she and her husband have been behaving themselves for the past 16 years. It’s always about them and always has been. I say it’s time John Kerry stands up for Obama and makes some noise about the shit they’re kicking up.
[/QUOTE]

Oh my. He’s not “culturally” a Baby Boomer? What “cultural” requirements are there?

[QUOTE=Merkwurdigliebe]
Fuck you.

Name one great Baby Boomer? Your generation came to power in the 80’s. Those such as Martin Luther King, JFK, etc… were NOT baby Boomers, they just happened to be the leaders at the time. So no, your generation had fuck all to do with it. I know exactly what the fuck happened in the sixties and the people who were 20 years old were in San Francisco if anywhere. I know what happened in the South and that sure as hell wasn’t your generation. So again, you’re getting ahead of yourself in the importance game. Nobody owes your generation another fucking second of attention.

Here’s what you get. Pre-baby boom was MLK. Your baby boom “me” entitlement generation is Jessie Jackson. Sorry if I’m “petulant” but I’ve got a lot more years to live in this country than you do and I’d rather shed off the legacy of selfishness and idiotic politics sooner rather than later. I’d not like to be electing 80 year old presidents in 20 years discussing who did what in the goddamned sixties. Fuck off and do something new with yourselves.
[/QUOTE]

I’m not going to do your homework for you, li’l feller. You’ll note that I mentioned the many who came before our generation (mine and Obama’s). Social change is a continuum, and everybody who came along before you had a part in creating the world as it is today, good and bad. You and your generation will make it better and worse for those who come after, and someday you’ll probably be carrying on rather this same discussion with some young whippersnapper on your government-implanted brain chip.

Contrary to what you think you know, a rather large number of people of my generation were not in San Francisco in the '60s. As a matter of fact, during the “Summer of Love,” I was at YWCA camp with the rest of the entitled 4th graders, roasting marshmallows and singing Kumbaya. I think there were even some people in their 20s who were actually in other parts of the US–and even elsewhere in the world.

And as far as whether you’ll have to live here longer than I will, that remains to be seen. I come from a long-lived tribe.

Oh, this is the Pit, isn’t it? Bah, I’m too tired to edit, so feel free to insert the proper form of “fuck” every third word or so in the above.

74

Yeah, Merkwurdigliebe you’ve gone off the deep end if you’re claiming there aren’t any great Baby Boomers.

[QUOTE=Squink]
All your culture are belong to us?
[/QUOTE]
You have no chance to survive, make your time. Think about that, Baby Boomers. Great wisdom is contained in the words of C.A.T.S. if you even know who that is. :wink:

I know this kind of frustration comes across as petulance, and that young folks are prone to getting all starry-eyed. But…
[QUOTE=Stephen Colbert]
Cynicism masquerades as wisdom–but it is the farthest thing from it… Cynicism is a self-imposed blindness, a rejection of the world because we are afraid it will hurt us or disappoint us.
[/QUOTE]
So many Clinton voters, I feel, buy into this political cynicism. That because things are this way they will always be this way. Yeah, I’m idealistic. But I’m not ashamed of it.

So go ahead and pull the lever for whoever you must. Maybe this belief that someone can change the political tone is folly. Even if Obama can’t affect the way we talk politics, I still think he’s one of the most talented orators and organizers I’ve ever seen, and is simply a brilliant individual to boot. So he’s got no gray hairs and is not a bulldog political operator? That’s really just icing on the cake.

All of you who are complaining that Obama’s idealism about changing the process mirrors Bush’s–keep in mind that Bush’s presidency was characterized by the same kind of no-holds-barred politics that Clinton may practice if elected. We want to send that same vitriol back over the aisle? What did it buy the GOP ultimately? Those victories they won in the past 8 years–they were all Pyrrhic. They united the Democratic party and horribly splintered their own. The answer is not to reply in kind.

75

[QUOTE=nameless]
All of you who are complaining that Obama’s idealism about changing the process mirrors Bush’s–keep in mind that Bush’s presidency was characterized by the same kind of no-holds-barred politics that Clinton may practice if elected. We want to send that same vitriol back over the aisle? What did it buy the GOP ultimately? Those victories they won in the past 8 years–they were all Pyrrhic. They united the Democratic party and horribly splintered their own. The answer is not to reply in kind.
[/QUOTE]
I think the problem wasn’t so much that Bush practiced “no-holds-barred” politics, but rather that he didn’t practice any-- he didn’t need to. With a Republican-controlled Congress and a public hypnotized by Fear of Iraq Planet, when did he ever need to act like a politician?

I don’t know whether anyone seriously believes that either Obama or Clinton has it in them to become another Bush. Either one would probably make an objectively fine president, given the chance-- not that it’s any too likely at this point. No matter how inspiring or politically savvy they may be, let’s face it; their supporters are mostly Democrats.

If Obama wins the nom, Clinton supporters might vote for him-- or they might be sick by then of rhetoric about how they’re so afraid of change and devoid of idealism, and decide instead to throw their support behind maverick Republican John McCain.

In the unlikely chance that Clinton wins, Obama supporters might deign to vote for her-- or they might be too horrified at continuing the Clinton-Bush Dynasty, and turn to the candidate who can inspire America with bipartisan appeal: plain-spoken independent John McCain.

Either way, my guess is that America’s big change from Bush will turn out to be another Republican.

76

[QUOTE=Terrifel]
Either way, my guess is that America’s big change from Bush will turn out to be another Republican.
[/QUOTE]

From your lips to God’s ears. :slight_smile:

77

[QUOTE=BobLibDem]
I voted for Bill Clinton twice and thought he was a pretty good president. Eight years of peace and prosperity and balanced budgets speak well for his leadership. But I will never say another good thing about him again and would not vote for his wife under any circumstance. It was Bill’s indiscretions that made the election, however rigged, of George W. Bush possible. If it wasn’t for Bill’s insatiable sexual appetite, we wouldn’t be in Iraq right now.
[/QUOTE]

Bwuh? I’ve seen this sentiment before yet it always confuses me. I might be one of the more anti-Clinton liberals on this board but I think you’re really wrong here. I’d like to understand the steps here. Clinton had extremely high approval ratings during his impeachment and when he left office and during the 2000 campaigns, right? So how did his getting his knob polished, even if only one out of a large host of many factors, lead to Bush getting elected?

[QUOTE=Bosstone]
On the upside, should Obama happen to be elected and turn out to be exactly like Bush, we can say godbye to the cult of personality in presidential candidates. Nobody’ll trust the charmers then, they’ll be more interested in the message and candidate’s stances.

Don’t kill my dreams!
[/QUOTE]

Sorry, dreams are tasty. If cults of personality were so easy to stamp out under the boot of actual real world evidence then why hasn’t this happened before? Why didn’t it happen, say, after LBJ and Nixon? Who do even some Democrat supporters still fawn over Reagan, given what he actually did?

78

[QUOTE=marshmallow]
Bwuh? I’ve seen this sentiment before yet it always confuses me. I might be one of the more anti-Clinton liberals on this board but I think you’re really wrong here. I’d like to understand the steps here. Clinton had extremely high approval ratings during his impeachment and when he left office and during the 2000 campaigns, right? So how did his getting his knob polished, even if only one out of a large host of many factors, lead to Bush getting elected?
[/QUOTE]
Because it forced Al Gore to distance himself from Clinton in order to look good to the electorate. I mean, do you think he would have had much of a chance at winning if his campaign slogan had been, “Just like the last guy, only with fewer blow jobs!”? :wink:

79

But this is the exact attitude young voters are fighting. Who gives a fuck about symbolic history? We have to actually live it.

Vote for Hillary because we need a shrewd politician to work the system. Vote for Hillary because her stance on key issues. Vote for Hillary because she’s a centrist who appeals to independents or whatever. But for God’s sake, don’t vote for her out of some misguided ideal of democracy. That’s not progress; that’s bullshit.

80

Indeed.

I don’t care that Obama is black. It’s not about a campaign for “firsts” If he were a white woman or a white man I could care less as long as he/she would be the same. I think the biggest goal for feminism or antiracism is the point where we don’t think of it as an issue any more. It’s the beginning of something great. People who vote for Hillary to be the first woman or Barack to be the first black president are stupid. It’s a nice sentiment, but really neither one is a milestone we should be proud of. It’s taken far too long. We need to get past it and move further. Not forgetting it obviously, but going around bragging that we got a woman prez? Hello! Welcome to 30 years ago. I’m not sure about the precedent for a minority leader but it wouldn’t surprise me if it’d happened way before too.