Blogger Jay Bullock (Folkbum), has a link in my National Conversation comments section that throws gas (or water?) on the "Was Martin Luther King, Jr. a Republican?" question. It's a great link and the debate will continue tomorrow on a special weekday edition of The National Conversation, which can be heard on News Radio 620 WTMJ from 12:00 - 2:00 p.m.
Do your homework and join the conversation!
Note: I'll be filling for Jeff Wagner all next week.
Black lawmakers oppose the merger of Sirius and XM because there aren't enough “set-asides” for minority-owned companies.
So, this is the brave new world of change? This is the change that Barack Obama is working for?
This is a bad omen . . . a sign of things to come.
Reparations.
The Congressional Black Caucus is comprised of a bunch of civil rights generation hacks. They shall never overcome and they won’t let the secular messiah either. “Set-asides” are nothing new but in light of Obama’s candidacy, the actions of the caucus now seem sinister, resentful . . . like payback.
If Barack Obama wants to be seen as the Affirmative Action President, then set-asides and quotas sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus will be par for the course.
Fine … but it doesn’t reflect hope and change, it’s just more of the same.
Hillary just dropped out of the race. Wow....
This is a blast from the past. I should listen to myself more often!
Two
weeks ago, while standing on stage in front of 300-plus people in the
Gaylord Hotel and Conference Center (located on the outskirts of
Nashville, Tennessee), I had an epiphany.
Hillary Clinton will lose in her bid to be America’s 44th president.
I saw it. I really did. It was on the faces of all the people sitting before me in the Governor’s Ballroom that morning. Before I even finished my opening set, the question in my head compelled me to stop and ask the audience if there was anyone in the crowd younger than 25.
“Is there anyone in this room who was born after the year 1981?”
The answer? Zero, zip, no one. Not a soul belonged to America’s second-largest generation, the Millennials. Now, in terms of full disclosure, this was a conference for financial institutions, and many in the audience were board members, owners and frontline managers. Maybe not where you’d expect to see young professionals in that age bracket, but still…zero representation of America’s rising powerhouse!
It gets better.
Upon further review, it was revealed that there were only a handfull of Gen Xers (1961-1981), a few more of the Silent generation (1925-1943) and two members of the G.I. generation (1901-1924). In other words the room represented larger society when it comes to power and influence and representation. It’s a Baby Boomers world, y’all. The rest of us are practically sitting on the sidelines. We’re waiting in line. (And by the way, while you are waiting…don’t speak…keep your mouth shut! It makes things easier.)
The Silent generation is the generation that precedes the Boomers and just like the old fading athlete, they still think they have a little left in the tank. They think they still have something to say. The reality is, they’ve done more than lost a step. They have one foot out the door! But many of them don’t even realize it.
There were a few vocal Silents in my audience. I tolerated them with the wry smile of someone who knows. No Silent politician has ever occupied the White House. Will Senator John McCain be the first? As I’m writing this, Senator McCain is the only Silent running -- unless you count John Kerry, who is borderline Silent/Boomer. (I don’t count him.) If McCain were to win the Republican primary, I believe it would spell the end of the Republican control of the White House. Conservatives would never back him and liberals wouldn’t trust him. He may make a good president but he doesn’t inspire generational confidence in any of the other voting generations, not even his own. It’s difficult to get excited about compromise, no matter how much politicians preach bi-partisanship.
The world has never celebrated great moderates. We love to win, hate to lose and curse indecision and capitulation. John McCain strikes no one as a winner. Of course, I could be wrong…
Hillary Clinton is the quintessential Boomer, therefore she will be taken seriously. She should be, as long as dead Democrats continue to vote in Chicago and Milwaukee, she is a viable candidate where I live. However, her election would divide this nation like it hasn’t been divided since the Civil War. I equate Hillary Clinton to another famous “boomer” type, the infamous abolitionist John Brown.
You’re probably asking yourself, “Why John Brown?” Good question. Is Hillary as vicious as John Brown? No. Is she as rabidly pro-life as John Brown? Not on your life. (Pun intended.) But like Brown, she is a generational lightning rod who attracts viciousness and division. Standing on that stage in Tennesse, I realized that Hillary would have to win just about every Boomer vote to be POTUS, and she won’t.
She can’t win the majority of her own generation. Yes, they rule the world – or at least the United States – right now, but Boomers do not want to be reminded the moral morass of the Clinton years, let alone return to it. Even the far-far lefties can admit that once is enough for the Clintons. You know which democrats win presidential elections? Southern Democrats. That’s right. Think President Carter. Think President Clinton. Even President Johnson. Kennedy was the last northern Democrat, and – to paraphrase Lloyd Benson – Hillary is no Kennedy.
So scratch Hillary.
Who does that leave? Rudy? Mitt Rommny? Barack? (Side note: If Obama runs, he’ll be the first and only Gen Xer to do so.) I don’t know. My epiphany didn’t take me there. But this I can tell you: We are in a historical winter and it’s the Boomers who set the tone and tenor in society during these periods. I don’t see Boomers putting a non-Boomer at the helm in a time of crisis. But I also don’t see them backing Hillary.
And sorry, no, I’m not running.
The nomination of Barack Obama yesterday guaranteed another historic milestone. The next President of the United States will not be a Baby Boomer. Whomever wins the presidency will usher in a new generation to the Oval Office.
Will it be the first wave of Generation X (1961 – 1981) or the last wave of the Silent Generation (1925-1942)? I am student of Strauss and Howe; check out their book The Fourth Turning for more generation information.
It’s probably no surprise that the first Silent presidential candidate comes from the ranks of the senate. This generation has always been about process and compromise. This is the Peggy Sue Got Married (too early) generation. The Silents ushered in the divorce epidemic as well as civil rights, women’s rights and the age of cool.
The Silents also produced Generation X. Arguably one of the greatest generations to ever walk the earth :-) (thank you). Generation X is the “Just Do It” generation and the Ferris Bueller’s Day Off generation (savvy, smart, individualistic). They are also screwed up because they got caught in the brunt of the before mentioned divorce epidemic and the greatest anti-child period of American history.
Right now, the political campaign is all about symbols and slogans. However, if the media becomes more savvy, it will delve into the value systems of the slogans that we are already seeing.
Change vs. Honor
Audacity vs. Experience
Hope vs. Integrity
Yes We Can vs. Leadership
This is more than a generation gap. It’s a values gap, and now that Baby Boomer idealism has been checked at the door, this gap may also mark the end of the culture war.
Which generation has a corner on the marketing? That’s a traditional question and the answer is, it depends on which generation you belong to. The real question is, which candidate can capture the imagination of the other’s generational base?
Ahhh... That's a no-brainer.
Camille Paglia asks in the Telegraph: "Is Hillary Clinton the savior of feminism? Is she the messianic Wonder Woman who will finally break the glass ceiling of the presidency?"
In a word, no. Hillary is not Wonder Woman and will not be breaking any glass.
I had an interesting conversation with a bunch of twenty-somethings last night. One of the young ladies said that when she sees Hillary Clinton and Martha Stewart on TV she gets "a feeling of revulsion." She said, "It's not like I'm against feminism, but I don't stand for what they stands for." I prodded her for more . . . for reasons. She just shrugged and said, "I can't explain it... something about them just isn't right."
Hmmmm...
In the Telegraph, Ms. Paglia tells women why they shouldn't vote for Hillary. To America's largest and youngest generation, she is preaching to the choir.
John McCain was on Letterman last night. F-U-N-N-Y!
You can check it out here. (Go to April 1st monologue).
OK, I get it now. McCain is mounting a multi-generational attack. Not good. He needs to concentrate on one generation, the largest and youngest and soon to be most influential. Last night's appearance is a step in the right direction.
A step.
On Sunday's edition of the National Conversation radio show, I analyzed the three presidential candidates from a generational perspective and laid out what "old man" McCain needs to do in order to capture the hearts and minds of the Millennial generation.
Looks like the makeover is already underway.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
Recent Comments