Robert Parry: Stomping on Their Children's Dreams

[babylonsister]

Stomping on Their Children's Dreams
by Robert Parry | February 12, 2008 - 9:04am



One painful irony of the Obama-Clinton showdown is that it could end up with middle-aged women – who are determined to elect the first female president – stomping on the dreams of their own children, who have shaken off years of political apathy to rally behind Barack Obama.

What makes this dilemma particularly poignant is that many of these Hillary Clinton supporters themselves experienced the stomping on their dreams four decades ago in the pivotal election of 1968.

That presidential campaign took place before the backdrop of the Vietnam War, with half a million U.S. soldiers committed to the bloody conflict and with millions of young people across the United States protesting to stop the war.

Hoping to redirect the country through the electoral process, many anti-war students joined the campaign of Sen. Eugene McCarthy, who was making a long-shot bid to challenge President Lyndon Johnson for the Democratic nomination.

The anti-war cause was further galvanized by the stunning Tet offensive, which began on Jan. 31, 1968, as Vietcong and North Vietnamese troops launched ambitious – and even reckless – attacks across the length of South Vietnam, puncturing the Johnson administration's optimistic war rhetoric.

Then, on March 12, 1968, McCarthy shocked the incumbent president by closing to within seven percentage points in the first-in-the-nation New Hampshire primary. Four days later, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy jumped into the race, earning criticism from some McCarthy activists as “a Bobby come lately.”

Kennedy’s entrance, however, was the political death knell for Johnson. On March 31, faced with a growing insurrection within his own party and a growing casualty list from Vietnam, Johnson withdrew from the campaign to dedicate his remaining time in office to bringing the war to an end.

In those heady days of early spring 1968, everything seemed possible. Young Americans thought their enthusiasm and idealism could change the world.

more...

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/12776

[LisaM]

1. One of my friends told me an interesting story about her caucus

She said a young woman stood up at the caucus and said that while she understood that the older women there wanted to see a woman president, she herself was so confident that there would be one one day, she didn't care if Hillary made it or not.

My friend and I interpreted this two different ways.

She interpreted it in a positive fashion, saying: see? It will happen becuase younger women are more confident that they can and will succeed.

I interpreted it in a negative fashion. To me, this is saying, once again, just go sit down and wait. Your turn will come.

My friend said we've come a long way, because of Hillary and because of Ferraro.

I said, what? 24 years ago we had a VP presidential candidate, and now it's shaping up that we WON'T have a woman candidate this time?

I don't know who's right in this debate but it makes me very, very sad. I see the chances of MY ever seeing a Madame President vanishing. I can't see getting another viable woman candidate for at least 16 years. What cements this feeling for me is that Obama is doing so well in places like Idaho that are very, very conservative and are clearly more comfortable with a black man than a white woman, even though these are electorates that are pre-disposed to be prejudiced against both.

What's REALLY depressing is that there is clearly some level of women who are still not ready to vote for a woman candidate. I don't believe women in their 20s and even 30s understand how much work was done by those who came before. I am younger than Hillary (just a couple of years older than Obama) but I think that all those women who fought through the taunts and laughter in the 1970s and who earned us things like Title IX really deserve a place at the head of the table now.

[babylonsister]

2. I so don't agree with you. I just turned 52 and while I would love to

vote for a woman, this is not the right woman for me to vote for. I have so much more faith that Obama will do a better job and will have our interests at heart while I think Clinton is beholden to too many people and that will reflect in the job she does. She also has a history whether people want to admit that or not that might well come back to taint our party. Our party was tainted by the last Dem president and while that's not Hillary's fault, it will follow her.
Finally, for all her supposed experience, her vote for the war is the final deal-breaker for me.

As for the story you related, I think the young woman was feeling the power of what we have here. Whoever wins, it will be historic. I can't relate to the young woman having such a defeatist attitude towards woman in general. But I'm with her; a woman will one day be president, but I sincerely hope it's not this woman just because she's a woman.

[LisaM]

3. Fair answer and I respect it.

But let me ask you this: who DO you see as a woman you'd vote for? I have posed this question to my Obama voting friends and they shrug and say they don't know. While it may be true that they don't like Hillary because of who she is, the fact that they can't name a woman they WOULD vote for strikes a nerve (obviously!) with me.

[babylonsister]

4. Off the top of my head, women I respect at this moment

who could conceivably run are Maxine Waters, Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Boxer, Barbara Lee, and some women yet to be determined who might be getting their feet wet politically even as I type. I'm sure there are more, but I can't think of any at the moment. But I will consider and edit should I come up with someone I forgot and shouldn't have.

There are some very strong female governors out there, but not in my state so I'm not that familiar with them. The question would be, does any one of them have a fire in their belly to go to the effort of running. I'm awed at every person who submits themself to this grueling process.