60s&70s Excesses - Vietnam, Watergate, 21% Int. Rate, gas lines, energy crisis, Iran Hostages, Drugs

[FrenchieCat]

Losing the Vietnam war started our down spiral.

Watergate only added insult to injury.

Carter's unfortunate ME crisis, gas lines, and 21% interest rates and a recession sealed the deal.

People were dejected, disallusioned, and depressed. They were looking for a way to feel good again, and that is what Reagan offered.

He didn't deliver, but it took too long for folks to figure it out.

Instead, he delivered an agenda that ushered the conservative revolution.

but truth be said (as Obama tried to, but folks want to have their fingers in their ears), the reason that Reagan was able to attract so many voters was because of the times as they were.

Ya'll are wasting my time attempting to make every statement of fact that Obama has uttered in the video as though he was endorsing it. Shame!

[Skidmore]

1. Absolutely, Frenchicat.

Sometimes, I think that we Boomers can only navel gaze. Obama gets it. That to move forward we need to let go of trying to solve the same old problems in the same old way and to meet those issues and the new ones coming down the pike with forward looking solutions. He also gets that politicians of this generation have been clutching those old issues tightly and not solving them so they can continue those same old fights. I'd like to think that my entire generation did not have to die out so that the next generation and that of my grandchildren could maybe see some light at the end of the tunnel for them--a future.

[FrenchieCat]

2. That interview is actually a superb one....for those who have 50 minutes...

prior to judging Obama's character.

It got me fired up and ready to go....and change the shit as it is now.

Hillary's political machine are amazed that Obama is not down for the count yet. I don't think they figured he'd be around this long. I'm glad he's got the bodyguards.....he might need them. :scared:

[Skidmore]

4. I think they've grossly underestimated the power of his message.

We went to see him when he was here in Iowa. We live in a fairly conservative county in this state, where there have been times when a Dem candidate came through and only had a handful of people show up (Mitt's problem this time--only 5 showed up and 2 were staff, I heard). Obama attracted an overflow crowd at our community hall, which holds 400. People came from all over on a cold day to sit in a poorly heated hall and listen to him. He took many questions and gave thoughtful and incisive answers to them. One old guy, whom I know to have been a staunch R, stood outside later with tears in his eyes and told a neighbor, "We need that young fella."

I'm glad he was willing to step forward and challenge the conventional wisdom that says there are only limited ways to achieve political solutions. He clearly understand that this cannot be a top down process.

[JDPriestly]

5. What message?

What I have heard is either vague talk or borrowed from Edwards. Except of course for Obama's stance on nuclear energy and liquid coal -- which he apparently adopted in order to pander to his corporate sponsors.

Check out John Edwards' 80-page book of policies if it's ideas you want.

[sandnsea]

10. Inspiration - build it and they will come

One of these days you'll look up and ask 'when did all those ball players get here'.

[JDPriestly]

11. That's what the '60s and '70s were about.

So, that approach was excessive in the '60s and '70s, but Obama thinks it's OK now. Yeah, sure.

[sandnsea]

12. The 60's and 70's are over

It's time to set the country on a new path. Say goodbye to the old. It's time. Trust the young generation to take us the rest of the way.

[JDPriestly]

13. But I'm telling you. If there was a problem in the '60s and '70s

it was that we were big on hope and short on real plans. Seems to me Obama is just a repetition of that.

Edwards, on the other hand, is big on plans and realistic. Check out Edwards 80-pages of plans on hish website.

Edwards, the guy with the ideas the other candidates steal.

[Skidmore]

15. Have you ever read any of Obama's proposals? Try going over to his website

and reading some of them. I've never trashed anything Edwards said. I think he's a good man with a good heart and firm desire to do right. I have a copy of Edwards booklet at my house. I just don't understand this need to whine that has developed in the Edwards camp. It wasn't something we saw in Iowa. He came and spoke to us and we heard him out. The ticket I hoped would evolve would be an Obama-Edwards or Edwards-Obama one. I think we need them both. I'm hoping that the primary season will not result in so much bloodletting that the different factions of this party can't come together later to work.

[JDPriestly]

58. Most of them are watered down versions of Edwards' plans.

I have spent quite a bit of time at Obama's website. Thank you. I'll take read the plans in the original -- in Edwards' 80-page book of plans. I suggest you spend some time on Edwards' site.

[sandnsea]

16. Check out Barack Obama's Illinois record

If you want to know about someone with plans and who has actually gotten them implemented.

The problem with the 60's and 70's is that some people went too far and started promoting things like oh, complete decriminalization of drugs, adult sex with teens, teens having legal privacy rights in the home, no discipline, no grades, an array of "plans". McGovern wanted to guarantee everyone a base income. Some people just went too far. And it wouldn't have been so bad, I imagine, if it weren't for the cities falling into ruin, crime rising, and the economy imploding.

So "the plan" ended up being Reagan conservatism. Now if Edwards was the antidote to that plan, I think he would have rallied more people to him by now. He just hasn't. Obama can. It's time.

[eShirl]

33. just don't forget to learn from the old generations' mistakes

("Trust the young generation")

[sandnsea]

35. Time for us to be the advisers

Explain why things are the way they are, but let the young begin to decide what needs to stay and what needs to go. They see the world through different eyes. I think Obama is right, we boomers have not respected that at all.

[Skidmore]

36. Yes, indeed. Fresh eyes and fresh ideas for a new century.

We're all in varying stages of shuffling off the mortal coil. It is time to pass on the torch.

[Skidmore]

14. I would hardly compare the type of community involvement to which Obama is calling this next

generation to the drop-out radical reactionary movement that took place in the 60s. People need to feel ownership of their nation and the solutions to the problems they face.

[amandabeech]

53. "Drop-out radical reactionary movement . . . in the '60s"?

Are you referring to the use of heavy psychedelic drugs in the late '60s?

What "reactionary" movement are you referring to in the '60s? Nixon's "silent majority?"

I'm not following you at all. Please be more specific.

[JDPriestly]

57. I worked for a homeless project for 8 years -- writing grants

and in other aspects of administration.

You have to have large amounts of government funding to do anything meaningful for the homeless. After many years of working in that capacity (and growing up in a home in which my father was involved in social work and the ministry). You also need mental health and other health care for the indigent. People cannot have ownership when they cannot work because they are sick or have chronic physical or mental conditions. Reagan put the mentally ill out on the streets with virtually nothing to live on. He made it nearly impossible for them to qualify for SSI. Reagan brought the country down.

Reagan was elected on propaganda about the crime problem and welfare queens. And guess what color the welfare queens and criminals he invoked always were. Obama is not a progressive. His words about Reagan betray his true feelings about the progressive movement. Reagan had no problem spending like a drunken sailor on the military build-up. He just had trouble funding the very programs you are describing. Don't talk condescendingly to me about community involvement. I know it from the inside out. How long did Obama work as a community organizer? I have not been able to figure that out.

[JDPriestly]

56. You are joking of course.

That's not how CIGNA or IBM or Toyota was built.

[sandnsea]

9. I'd like to hear the youngsters' cultural frames

What are the key moments that shaped their cultural, social and economic outlook. Obama is right, we boomers have been way too involved in our quest to change the world to give any other generation an opportunity to express what they wanted. Our kids are adults. They need to be heard now too.

[ellisonz]

17. In brief, White House sex scandals and Iraq.

Oh, and the economy sucks, wealth his highly concentrated among the top, and the vast majority of us are looking up drowning in debts, inflation, and an outdated economy. It's really funny, because I'll go to political forums (I went to a PDA candidates forum with my father the other night) and the majority are raving for Kucinich and unable to get beyond their hatred of "the other half." They fail to realize that we are all in this together. That requires cooperation and not simply trying to get 50% +1 at the ballot box. We're much less polarized than our parents and we're more involved in our community. We don't have any sense of the former quaintness of America.

I'm 21. I'm also an American history major.

[Skidmore]

18. Thank you, ellisonz, for that perspective.

The need to move beyond the polarization is great. The nation cannot stand much more of it and survive. I, for one, welcome your participation. You are a little younger than my son. We need you all to be involved.

[sandnsea]

19. "the former quaintness of America"

Yeah, that's one area I'm talking about. I'm 50 and it's hard for me to imagine your generation. I don't remember the 50's first hand, but my grandparents lived a "quaint" lifestyle and I sure remember that. You guys had... US... for better or worse. Two generations that always had technology, no ice box and outhouse stories. I don't even know what you "see" in your future.

What about Rush Limbaugh, Fox, etc. How do all of you interact with the people who are devotees of that nonsense?

[Skidmore]

20. sandnsea, we must be of similar vintage.

I share many of the same memories. Something occurred to me after replying to ellisonz's post. I was thinking about his/her references to excesses perceived by the younger generation and your list of our generation's excesses. Then it occurred to me that one of the reasons I haven't been able to gravitate to the Clinton camp in this election is that they represent the excesses of the past. All of those angst-ridden overblown hot house BS we dragged with us into our middle ages. The culture, political and social, we created with all that baggage is collapsing, and it needs to. I want to help tear down it down to the important foundations that we were able to get into place. Get rid of all the frou-frou and gingerbreading. There are core principles on which all generations must build. I'd like to help get my kids of to a good start on theirs.

[FrenchieCat]

21. And Obama wants good government......government that can be cool again....

and he means what you just said. Get to the core and build it back up the right way.

Hell yes....I'm fired up and I'm ready to go!

[sandnsea]

22. I don't know what to keep and what to tear down

But I do know that I don't think it's particularly our decision anymore. I think we can kind of advise, remind them why some brick or other is in the wall, but in the end, it's their choice of what to keep and what to remove. In the last week or so I have just come to believe it is morally wrong to throw a fit and insist we be able to fulfill our youthful dreams if it's at their expense. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by hot house BS, except to say I've never been a Big Chill, 30-Something type of boomer anyway. Although I love the Big Chill and Thirty Something, lol.

[amandabeech]

51. What core principles are you espousing?

What BS did the boomers drag into middle age?

Please, I'm having trouble following your train of thought without specifics.

[ellisonz]

27. From Korea to Vietnam.

The world is changing rapidly, and dramatically. Not only are we facing global warming but also a burgeoning world population (6.5 billion to likely 10 billion within the next 50 years) that will strain food and water resources. Theoretically we should either hit Mathusian catastophe or have significant socio-political revolution as late capitalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_capitalism) errupts.

Globalization will likely produce both new economic and political orders as China and India emerge as great powers. What is interesting if you look at the last ten years and the accelerated distancing from old colonial orders is the weakness of many of the new political orders in these states. Thus we are looking at a world with exaggerated demands for resources, labor, and products in the face of great unavailability of space. Capitalism has shown itself able to adapt to an extend and so we're likely to see greater urbanization alongside greater blight. A planet of slums.

Domestic politics will reflect much of this new turmoil (just look at the symbolism of NAFTA and the China trade in the elections) and that there will have to be a good deal of reconciliation or else we are in for a long bumpy ride. Imagine that we don't solve the energy problem, what will happen? The good news perhaps is that we will still be able to dominate a good deal of supply of world capital, but we will loose significant ground. Basically, it is vital to national security to shut up about our petty politics and get the hard work done. The world now could be described as largely unipolar (previously bipolar), it is becoming multipolar and that will affect everything from how we live to how we politic.


The 1993 article that is the basis of this book was tremendously influential on Bill Clinton (along with Kaplan's book on the Balkans): http://www.amazon.com/Coming-Anarchy-Shattering-Dreams-Post/dp/037570759X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200740407&sr=8-1

Which makes you wonder how he got Rwanda so wrong...

It all really depends on how fast we can advance the development and spread of technology.

[sandnsea]

30. A defining moment for me was the Cuyahoga River fire

I was still in high school at the time and will never forget my complete shock that a river could burn that way. It became clear to me that environmental clean-up was a challenge for my generation. We've succeeded in some areas, we really have cleaned up some rivers, saved some animals, etc.; missed completely with the bigger picture.

So does your generation look at the world and see third world countries and the need for new technologies to advance everyone's standard of living? Does Rwanda loom large the way the holocaust loomed large for us?

[ellisonz]

32. Well there is a great deal of apathy and denial, and that won't go away.

But I think people are becoming aware of the general situation as can be seen in the popularity of more nihlistic, apocalyptic pop culture.

Of course Iraq outshines Rwanda and Darfur. But most "involved" people consider AIDs and global warming to be serious global crisises.

I suppose one good thing that could be said about Bush despite the fact that he's wasted 8 years of potential progress is that he has expanded political awareness in the US (turnout and registration has increased). I think in large part, that much of the dinner table discussion is in dark humor. Still many are stuck in the old ideologies, consider the flap in the GOP Michigan primary over whether or not good jobs are going to come back to Michigan. We're very much still in the planning stages. I don't believe that 9/11 was the defining moment that it is made out to be. It is much more a general fear as can be seen in the polling that suggests 75% believe the US is on the wrong path.

I think an Obama presidency (assuming it is what it is made out to be) would be the defining moment of the last 50 years. They killed the Kennedy's but they haven't got our man yet! The election of a black President in terms of American history is much more symbolically powerful than that of a female President. There was no massive civil war over the basic freedoms of women (not to dismiss feminism), see Margaret Thatcher or Indira Ghandi or Benazir Bhutto. For a country with our history, to elect a minority individual as President is incredibly profound. The mass alienation that Bush has caused would be largely reversed. People just might have hope in government, and especially if the results are delivered.

[sandnsea]

34. That's really interesting

So you guys already have a much more global outlook than we did/do. How funny, "quaint", do you think it is to hear people believing auto jobs are going to come back to Michigan? I think it's just mean to tell those people that, is it so far out of your realm of reality that you don't even understand why it's being discussed? Maybe you guys think more along the lines of just getting with the next wave of technologies?? I'm asking, just trying to figure out how you tick. Do you just totally accept globalization and global corporations? What about foreign labor exploitation, how does that fit into the concerns of AIDS, disease, wars, etc.? If you're very globally minded, I can see why Obama is the favored candidate. If it were a more peaceful time, with more of a homefront focus, maybe Hillary would be seen more favorably.

[ellisonz]

37. Of course we're more global...

Almost everything we use is made in Asia or Latin America. We watch movies that are extremely globalist. We're very techno savy, see the Internet. Many of us have grown up in very diverse, almost "globalized" cities in America. We have some of the most diverse cities in histoy. I went to school with Armenians, Filipinos, Mexicans, African-Americans, and whites. We don't particularly see ourselves as Americans per see, we see ourselves as global consumers.

Honestly, most of us don't view it as a matter of "fighting corporations" or slowing globalization, or even really in terms of labor exploitation. We have no choice but to accept global corporations. Disbanding the WTO, repealing NAFTA, and placing sizble tariffs on China would not stop globalization one bit. We know that the page can't be turned back.

We see the road ahead it in terms of living a good life and having a sustainable, wealthy future. We are the most broadly educated generation in history! The distance which technology and science has traveled in the last 30 odd years is unprecedented. We don't view issues in isolation, which is why talking about hope and change in the true sense is very profound. We don't generally think in terms of the old politics, we are not issues voter. We vote on character and on leadership.

And it is well past my bedtime...;)

[sandnsea]

39. One comment

I went to school with Armenians, Chinese, Mexicans, African-Americans; but I didn't translate that to a global culture, I translated that to an integrated and inclusive USA. That's the kind of differences in outlook I'm thinking about, and how old ideas may be getting in the way. anyway... goodnite.

[amandabeech]

54. What will you do if an economic downturn reduces or eliminates your income?

If you consider yourself a "global consumer" rather than a citizen, whether that is of the world or of a specific nation, do you think that you may have an identity problem when you simply do not have any cash OR credit to consume?

Do you think that being a consumer is an adequate existence?

I am particularly surprised at your pessimism with respect to changing the negative effects of globalization.

Historically, and I believe that you are a history major so know this, the young have been the ones who will not accept their fate. Your generation is unusual in that at an early age you are affected with the ennui and nihilism usually associated with older people.

As to living the good life and having a sustainable, wealthy future, I suggest that you visit the Environment and Energy forum here for an alternative view. Your good life and sustainable future will take lots and lots of hard work now to erect some means by which sufficient energy may be transmitted to your workplace and home. sandnsea alludes to that in his/her posts concerning sustainability, which is in reality a very quaint idea associated with the '70s phenom, the "Club of Rome."

Voting on perceived character and leadership is not new. I suggest that you ask your history professors or teachers for some reading on our presidential elections and your psychology professor or teachers on messianic leaders.

[amandabeech]

50. Where are you studying?

What books are you reading? Which courses are you taking? Which professors are teaching your courses?

I graduated in '77 with an honors degree in history from a reputable institution, and, frankly, I don't understand your perspective and that of Sen. Obama at all.

Please be specific and help us oldsters out.

[jackson_dem]

28. 9/11 and the Iraq war were the two big moments for everyone in our generation

For those of us who are progressives the selection in 2000 and what happened in 2004 are also major events. There is a general sense we are heading in the wrong direction and change is desperately needed to right things. Disastrous foreign policy and the ongoing specter of terrorism, disconcerting economic changes are major issues that resonate across the political spectrum (except for the few extreme right-wingers who still believe in neoconservatism).

[JDPriestly]

3. Face it. Reagan won because the racists voted for him.

He benefited from Nixon's southern strategy which drew bigoted white Southerners who had previously voted for the Democratic economic agenda into the Republican Party. If you think it was about anything else, you deserve what Obama is going to bring you.

Here is the key:

George Corley Wallace Jr. (August 25, 1919 – September 13, 1998), was a United States politician who was elected Governor of Alabama as a Democrat four times (1962, 1970, 1974 and 1982) and ran for U.S. President four times, running as a Democrat in 1964, 1972, and 1976, and as the American Independent Party candidate in 1968. He is best known for his pro-segregation attitudes and as a symbol of bigotry during the American desegregation period, which he modified after the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by arguing that it was better that he be governor while the schools were being desegregated than for someone else to be in authority.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Wallace

Here is the story on the Southern Strategy:

Although the phrase "Southern strategy" is often attributed to Richard Nixon strategist Kevin Phillips, he did not originate it<1>, but merely popularized it<2>. In an interview included in a 1970 New York Times article, he touched on its essence:

From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats."<3>

While Phillips was concerned with polarizing ethnic voting in general, and not just with winning the white South, this was by far the biggest prize yielded by his approach. Its success began at the presidential level, gradually trickling down to statewide offices, the Senate and House, as legacy segregationist Democrats retired or switched to the GOP. The strategy suffered a brief apparent reversal following Watergate, with broad support for the racially progressive Southern Democrat, Jimmy Carter in the 1976 election. But with Ronald Reagan kicking off his 1980 presidential campaign proclaiming support for "states' rights" in Philadelphia, Mississippi, the site of the murder of three civil rights workers in 1964's Freedom Summer, the Southern Strategy was back to stay. Although another Southern Democrat, Bill Clinton, would twice be elected President, winning a handful of Southern states, he did better outside the South, and would have won without carrying any Southern state.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

So, you see, Obama's awe of Reagan is actually awe of a man who capitalized on racism.

[sandnsea]

6. Vote for Edwards cuz we aren't ready for a black man

Uh huh, and your solution to getting those racists back is to really pander to them. Maybe not yours specifically, but there have been enough posts around here about voting for Edwards because this country won't elect a black man, that I think you all need to take responsibility for actually contributing to the frames of the past and 20 more years of the southern strategy.

Break from the past. Vote for Change.

[jackson_dem]

24. He said the truth about 1980, not 2008

The modern Republican majority was built on racism. Fuck Reagan and Nixon.

[JDPriestly]

55. The question is not whether to vote for a person based on race.

The question is Obama's explanation for why so many people supported Reagan. And the statistical fact is that Reagan won because he got the racist vote in the south.

Nixon won a lot of the racist vote. In 1976, George Wallace ran and won a lot of the southern racist vote. In 1980, when Reagan ran, the only white southerner who ran against him was Jimmy Carter, and Jimmy Carter was a Democrat and clearly for civil rights. So, his southernness was not enough to draw the racist vote.

Reagan, a popular TV figure, ran on racist fears using euphemistic language and images about welfare queens and criminals. So, Reagan won the racist vote. True, the economy was bad. But Reagan cleverly blamed the problems of the middle class on the cost of welfare -- (which is code to racists for people of color). Reagan played on fears about crime (which is also a racial code). Racism was the key factor that put Reagan in the White House.

Obama's statements show that, in spite of his intelligence and education, he has swallowed the Republican Kool-Aid.

It also says to me that Obama either does not talk to progressives of the '60s through the present or does not listen to what they say. The progressives of that period are the leaders in my community with regard to Democratic politics. So it makes me wonder who Obama is talking to. He just would not have the view of Reagan that he has if he were a true progressive. I do not trust Obama.

[Skidmore]

7. Reagan won because Democrats had forgotten how represent the

interests of the average person and Reagan capitalized on that deficit by presenting an alternate, but deceptive solution to move people to back the Rs.

[jackson_dem]

26. Al From is that you? In what ways did Democrats forget to represent average folk?

[Skidmore]

40. You wouldn't recognize that DLC creep if he walked up and slapped you

upside the head.

[FrenchieCat]

8. It wasn't just the racists that voted for Reagan......

which is why you don't get any of what Obama is saying.

Actually, I just don't think that you want to understand anything that he is saying.
If you did, it might turn you into a supporter.

[jackson_dem]

25. Goldwater won 39% of the vote in 1964. The rethugs became a dominant majority 16 years later

Look at the electoral map's change during this period and you will see where most of the rethug's gains came from. Anything happen in 1964 that would cause something like this?

[noiretextatique]

47. what he is saying is nonsense

reagan kicked off his campaign playing the white supremacy race card. that he enticed a lot of people with his symbolism of a change to a better, whiter past, is precisely why he won.
i have respect for the honest obama supporters who concede this fact, vs those who are still trying to spin it.

[jackson_dem]

23. When did Obama say this? You want us to believe he had interest rates in mind?

[FrenchieCat]

29. When someone can change ideas to mean "good" ideas,

why should I quote anything verbatim to you? :shrug:


Like interest at 21% made folks feel good and satisfied? Reagan was elected because the nation was down and out in many ways. I believe 21% to be "excess" by any measure.

[jackson_dem]

31. The election was close until 2 weeks until the end. Why was this so if Carter sucked so much?

Reagan wasn't elected for who he would appoint to the Federal Reserve. I have a hard time believing the "excesses" Obama referred to had to do with interest rates. ;)

[noiretextatique]

42. these people believe reagan won in a landslide

don't confuse them with the facts.

[Perry Logan]

38. Apparently, Republican talking points go down well with Obama supporters.

[Usrename]

41. I guess if you want to believe in Ronnie the Savior, that's ok.

But I sure don't know why you would want to hang out here.

Obama's FACTS about Reagan are just another rehashing of the same old Republican LIES about Reagan's presidency. Nothing more.

If you refuse wake up from your little Reagan fantasy, and the whole right-wing myth, the one that blames liberals for everything bad, then all I can say is: dream on.

It just isn't true, that's the problem here, it isn't a FACT at all. It's all a big LIE. Reagan made a back-door deal to ensure that the Iranian students did not release the hostages. G.H.W.Bush is the biggest drug-dealer I know of. You're just regurgitating the same old LIES. Why not face up to the truth?

[eridani]

43. My life was actually pretty good back then, better than it is now in relative terms

If you were not a borrower, but saved in those money market accouts that you could sometimes get 15-20% interest on, the 70s look good. It was in 1973 that inflation adjusted income for average people hit its all-time high. It's been downhill ever since.

[noiretextatique]

44. the reagan years = dejected, disillusioned and depressed

reagan democrats are desperately trying to make themselves feel better with this revisionism. you bought his snake oil and contributed to the decline of the country, in a way that was far worse than the "excesses of the 60s and 70s". tell yourself it was all about hope and change all you want, but i didn't and don't buy it. reagan was worse than bush, and you were fooled, and you were fools. and you learned absolutely nothing.

obama has some good ideas, but his framing, and yours, is pure horseshit. invoking reagan as some sort of model of positive change is simply ludicrous, and no amount of revision can change that.

[Karmadillo]

45. A far more reliable DU guide to this issue can be found here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4107236&mesg_id=4107236

[robbedvoter]

46. The guy who called the Voting Rights Act "humiliating to the South" didn't

just bring people to the polls because of wounded national pride (although the warmongering nationalism was a component as MLK said of his earlier attempts to run:
"
"When a Hollywood performer, lacking distinction even as an actor, can become a leading war hawk candidate for the presidency, only the irrationalities induced by war psychosis can explain such a turn of events."

I know you consider Krugman the enemy, but he wrote this about Reagan BEFORE knowing the Obama connection:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/19/opinion/19krugman.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
These codes were understood by everyone at the time - just as we all know today "family values" is "anti-gay""anti-liberal"

[ProSense]

48. Edwards and the Clintons on Reagan

John Edwards on Reagan

The Clintons on Reagan

Obama Camp Hits Back At Hillary's Reagan Criticism

[unc70]

49. OP began with 1980 Repub talking points, same later

I get really upset when I see just how damn good the RW domination of media, message, conventional wisdom, and common "knowledge". Just look at the examples you use as examples of the failing leading to the election of Reagan -- and used in other threads arguing that is time to move past Boomers, etc. These were all the work of "The Greatest Generation", particularly the Nixon corporate Repub "gang" gaining the support of the Dixiecrats and "angry white males".

"Losing Vietnam", "Watergate", gas lines, inflation -- Boomers did not cause them, suffered because of them, fought against them, and tried to solve them. Even the words you used are the RW framing of the issue. The RW who think we could have "won" in Vietnam) if we had stayed longer and use an identical argument today about Iraq; they blame both on the Boomers. (We actually lost VN when we allowed France to reclaim its former colony after we had supported the fledgling independent government.)

The Washington establishment attacked Carter as the hillbilly peanut farmer, the first President from the South in over 100 years, despised his "preaching" about ethics, energy, environment, competence, human rights, and did everything possible to destroy him and is presidency. The inflation was mostly the result of budget follies (borrowing to fund an unpopular war), then deflating the dollar so foreign creditors were repaid with "cheaper" dollars. The gas lines were partially the result of the formation of OPEC and the manipulation of the markets by the usual suspects and much more, little of it caused by Carter. Nearly forgot the 1975 collapse of the housing market in Ford's last year. (I bought my first home that fall and received a $2000 tax rebate on a $43000 home.)

A later post speaks of Boomers who dropped out. I don't remember a single acquaintance from that period who dropped out. A few went for non-traditional things like organic farming, starting the first safe houses for battered women, inner city literacy programs, the Peace Corps. Most of us went to work and had to work particularly hard, facing massive unemployment, unbelievable interests rates, inflation, stagflation. We worked hard, raised families, and continued to solve problems that most now take for granted. For example, in the 70's most businesses expected a pregnant woman to quit work around the sixth month and not return to work. Not expected, required. This was traditional family leave -- no pay, no health insurance, no job to return to -- another woman had been hired at half what was paid a man with a family to support.

We didn't drop out, we have worked steadily against the same bastards on the other side, cleaning up their messes, paying off their deficit spending/looting, and trying to fix everything and care for everyone; all this while we continue to be the convenient scapegoat by people who weren't there and have only a cursory understanding of what happened and what is still going on.

A little knowledge is a dangerous think. In all most any field, the most dangerous phase is when they think they know but don't know what they don't know. Engineers are very careful when designing their first big project, prone to mistakes on their second.

When we hear Obama or his supporters using language they don't know is loaded, I fear they will accidentally shot someone.

[joeybee12]

52. I'm not getting into what he said, but if he meant what you say, then

he's right...Reagan got elected because things were so bad they were willing to take a chance.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

59. Gas lines at the pump - 2 or 3 hours to fill your tank in California

I remember those days. And you couldn't buy gas every day. You could only buy gas on odd or even numbered days of the month, depending on the last digit of your license plate. It sucked.

[merbex]

60. That's your itemized list - not his

It would be interesting to have HIM articulate what specific excesses he was refering to in that answer.