Barrack Obama's Cheapest Shot of All: Making Light of Tom Hayden.

What a disapointment Barack Obama has become.

My companion of nearly 35 years has worn an Obama button on his shirt every day since the beginning of this year. He has been so enthusiastic about Obama making sure everyone at his workplace knows has great Obama is. Meanwhile, it's no great secret that David Zephyr has swung from candidate to candidate. And why? Because I like them all. But not anymore. And this message is all about Barack Obama.

Last night, I received an e-mail from my old friend Tom Hayden of an open letter he had written to Senator Obama which is also posted at the Huffington Post website. The letter speaks for itself and is way too generous in my opinion, but that's the soft-spoken and decent nature of one of my all time heroes, Tom Hayden. A humble man whose heart never let him suffer injustice. His heart, by the way, which is in not such great shape these days after a heart attack not too long ago. But what a heart it has been.

In 1969, because of Tom Hayden, when I was just 17 years old, I organized the Moratorium Against the War at my college campus in Texas. I was threatened with being expelled by the Dean and wound up being so harrassed that I walked away from the college after the term was over, ironically on the "Dean's List".

Below, I have included a picture of Tom Hayden, still a teenager being beaten in McComb, Mississippi in 1961 (an important date because that is also the year that Barack Obama was born). Look at the photo and at that brave young boy who was "there", putting his very life on the line for Civil Rights way back when very few whites dared stand with blacks in the South. A picture is indeed worth a thousand words.

Tom Hayden, perhaps more than any other person, was the architect of the movement against the War in Viet Nam, though he would never say so. He was with Robert Kennedy just the night before Bobby was murdered. His anger took him to Chicago where once again he was beaten in the streets, arrested and tried by a kangeroo court alongside Bobby Seale and the rest of the Chicago Seven in 1968.

Later, I worked with Tom and Jane, helping them with their local organization here in Southern California in the 1970's called Citizens for Economic Democracy and later volunteered my time and heart once again when he ran for Governor of California. I am proud to say that Tom has been in my home and that he is one of the finest and most sincere progressives that this country has ever known.

You know, I winced at Senator Obama's brazen insult to my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters last month and bit my tongue as his staff flat out lied to the the gay community regarding the extent of a role a terrible homophobe played in his events. The guy that was to represent a "new" politics showed us that he also had a talent and an inclination for playing "old" politics when it suited him.

But, for me, this time, Mr. Obama really went too far with his gratutious and completley un-called for insult to such a great American as Tom Hayden who was fighting for Civil Rights, being beaten and jailed for Civil Rights when Baby Barack was shitting in his diaper.

Well, this morning, my precious companion quietly left our home --- without his Obama button pinned to his shirt. And I felt like someone had punched me right in the gut. And I think I will always remember that.


David Zephyr
Los Angeles

P.S. And for those who have not read Tom Hayden's letter, I have posted it below this photograph of Tom at 18 years old taking a beating for all of us.




AN APPEAL TO BARACK OBAMA
By Tom Hayden

“The Democrats have been stuck in the arguments of Vietnam, which means that either you’re a Scoop Jackson Democrat or you’re a Tom Hayden Democrat and you’re suspicious of any military action. And that’s just not my framework.” – Sen. Barack Obama <1> <#_ftn1>

Barack, I thought Hillary Clinton was known as the Great Triangulator, but you are learning well. The problem with setting up false polarities to position yourself in the “center”, however, is that it’s unproductive both politically and intellectually.

Politically, it is a mistake because there last time I looked there were a whole lot more “Tom Hayden Democrats” voting in the California primary and, I suspect, around the country, than “‘Scoop’ Jackson Democrats.” In fact, they are your greatest potential base, aside from African-American voters, in a multi-candidate primary.

More disturbing is what happens to the mind by setting up these polarities. To take a “centrist” position, one calculates the equal distance between two “extremes.” It doesn’t matter if one “extreme” is closer to the truth. All that matters is achieving the equidistance. This means the presumably “extreme” view is prevented from having a fair hearing, which would require abandoning the imaginary center. And it invites the “extreme” to become more “extreme” in order to pull the candidate’s thinking in a more progressive direction. The process of substantive thinking is corroded by the priority of political positioning.

I have been enthused by the crowds you draw, by the excitement you instill in my son and daughter-in-law, by the seeds of inspiration you plant in our seven-year old kid. I love the alternative American narrative you weave on the stump, one in which once-radical social movements ultimately create a better America step by step. I very much respect your senior advisers like David Axelrod, who figured out a way to elect Harold Washington mayor of Chicago. You are a truly global figure in this age of globalization.

But as the months wear on, I see a problem of the potential being squandered. Hillary Clinton already occupies the political center. John Edwards holds the populist labor/left. And that leaves you with a transcendent vision in search of a constituency.

Your opposition to the Iraq War could have distinguished you, but it became more parsed than pronounced. All the nuance might please the New York Times’ Michael Gordon, who helped get us into this madness in the first place, but the slivers of difference appear too narrow for many voters to notice. Clinton’s plan, such as it is, amounts to six more years of thousands of American troops in Iraq . Your proposal is to remove combat troops by mid-2010, while leaving thousands of advisers trying to train a dysfunctional Iraqi army, and adding that you might re-invade to stave off ethnic genocide. Lately, you have said the mission of your residual American force would be more limited than the Clinton proposal. You would commit trainers, for example, only if the Iraqi government engages in reconciliation and abandons sectarian policing. You would not embed American trainers in the crossfire of combat. This nuancing avoids the tough and obvious question of what to do with the sectarian Frankenstein monster we have funded, armed and trained in the Baghdad Interior Ministry. The Jones Commission recently proposed “scrapping” the Iraqi police service. Do you agree? The Center for American Progress, directed by Bill Clinton’s former chief of staff, is urging that all US troops, including trainers, be redeployed this year. Why do you disagree? Lately you have taken advantage of Hillary Clinton’s hawkishness on Iran to oppose bombing that country without Congressional authorization. But you carefully decline to say whether you would support bombing Iran when and if the time comes.

This caution has a history:

- you were against the war in 2002 because it was a “dumb war”, but you had to point out that you were not against all wars, without exactly saying what wars you favored;
- then you visited Iraq for 36 hours and “could only marvel at the ability of our government to essentially erect entire cities within hostile territory”;
- then as the quagmire deepened, you cloaked yourself in the bipartisan mantle of the Baker-Hamilton Study Group, which advocated leaving thousands of American troops in Iraq to fight terrorism, train the Iraqis until they “stand up”, and sundry other tasks of occupation;

Perhaps your national security advisers are getting to you when it should be the other way around. Their expertise is not in the politics of primaries. If anything, they reject the of populist peace pressure influencing elite national security decisions. The result is a frustration towards all the Democratic candidates for what the Center for American Progress has recently called “strategic drift.” The political result is the danger of returning to John Kerry’s muffled message in 2004. The policy result may be a total security disaster for our country, draining our young soldiers’ blood and everyone’s taxes on the continuing degradation of our national honor in a war which cannot be won.

Just for the record, let me tell you my position on Iraq. I think the only alternative is to begin a global diplomatic peace offensive starting with a commitment to withdraw all our troops as rapidly as possible. That is the only way to engage the world, including the Iraqi factions, in doing something about containing the crises of refugees, reconciliation and reconstruction. It means negotiating with Iran rather than escalating to a broader war. If you want to “turn a new page”, it should not be about leaving the Sixties behind. It will be about leaving behind the superpower fantasies of both the neo-conservatives and your humanitarian hawks. And yes, it is to be “suspicious”, as Eisenhower and John Kennedy came to be suspicious, of the advice of any Wise Men or security experts who advocated the military occupation of Iraq. Is that position as extreme as your rhetoric assumes?

Your problem, if I may say so out loud, and with all respect, is that the deepest rationale for your running for president is the one that you dare not mention very much, which is that you are an African-American with the possibility of becoming president. The quiet implication of your centrism is that all races can live beyond the present divisions, in the higher reality above the dualities. You may be right. You see the problems Hillary Clinton encounters every time she implies that she wants to shatter all those glass ceilings and empower a woman, a product of the feminist movement, to be president? Same problem. So here’s my question: how can you say let’s “turn the page” and leave all those Sixties’ quarrels behind us if we dare not talk freely in public places about a black man or a woman being president? Doesn’t that reveal that on some very deep level that we are not yet ready to “turn the page”?

When you think about it, these should be wonderful choices, not forbidden topics. John Edwards can’t be left out either, for his dramatic and, once again, unstated role as yet another reformed white male southerner seeking America’s acceptance, like Carter, Clinton and Gore before him. Or Bill Richardson trying to surface the long-neglected national issues of Latinos. I think these all these underlying narratives, of blacks, women, white southerners and la raza – excuse me, Hispanic-Americans - are far more moving, engaging and electorally-important than the dry details of policy.

What I cannot understand is your apparent attempt to sever, or at least distance yourself, from the Sixties generation, though we remain your single greatest supporting constituency. I can understand, I suppose, your need to define yourself as a American rather than a black American, as if some people need to be reassured over and over. I don’t know if those people will vote for you.

You were ten years old when the Sixties ended, so it is the formative story of your childhood. The polarizations that you want to transcend today began with life-and-death issues that were imposed on us. No one chose to be “extreme” or “militant” as a lifestyle preference. It was an extreme situation that produced us. On one side were armed segregationists, on the other peaceful black youth. On one side were the destroyers of Vietnam, on the other were those who refused to submit to orders. On the one side were those keeping women in inferior roles, on the other were those demanding an equal rights amendment. On one side were those injecting chemical poisons into our rivers, soils, air and blood streams, on the other were the defenders of the natural world. On one side were the perpetrators of big money politics, on the other were keepers of the plain democratic tradition. Does anyone believe those conflicts are behind us?

I can understand, in my old age, someone wanting to dissociate from the extremes to which some of us were driven by the times. That seems to be the ticket to legitimacy in the theater of the media and cultural gatekeepers. I went through a similar process in 1982 when I ran for the legislature, reassuring voters that I wasn’t “the angry young man that I used to be.” I won the election, and then the Republicans objected to my being seated anyway! Holding the idea that the opposites of the Sixties were equally extreme or morally equivalent is to risk denying where you came from and what made your opportunities possible. You surely understand that you are one of the finest descendants of the whole Sixties generation, not some hybrid formed by the clashing opposites of that time. We want to be proud of the role we may have played in all you have become, and not be considered baggage to be discarded on your ascent. You recognize this primal truth when you stand on the bridge in Selma, Alabama, basking in the glory of those who were there when you were three years old. But you can’t have it both ways, revering the Selma march while trying to “turn the page” on the past.

This brings me back to why you want to stand in the presumed center against the “Tom Hayden Democrats.” Are you are equally distant from the “George McGovern Democrats.”, and the “Jesse Jackson Democrats”? How about the “Martin Luther King Democrats”, the “Cesar Chavez Democrats”, the “Gloria Steinem Democrats”? Where does it end?

What about the “Bobby Kennedy Democrats”? I sat listening to you last year at an RFK human rights event in our capital. I was sitting behind Ethel Kennedy and several of her children, all of whom take more progressive stands than anyone currently leading the national Democratic Party. They were applauding you, supporting your candidacy, and trying to persuade me that you were not just another charismatic candidate but the one we have been waiting for.

Will you live up to the standard set by Bobby Kennedy in 1968? He who sat with Cesar Chavez at the breaking of the fast, he who enlisted civil rights and women activists in his crusade, who questioned the Gross National Product as immoral, who dialogued with people like myself about ending the war and poverty? Yes, Bobby appealed to cops and priests and Richard Daley too, but in 1968 he never distanced himself from the dispossessed, the farmworkers, the folksingers, the war resisters, nor the poets of the powerless. He walked among us.

The greatest gift you have been given by history is that as the elected tribune of a revived democracy, you could change America’s dismal role in the world. Because of what you so eloquently represent, you could convince the world to give America a new hearing, even a new respect. There are no plazas large enough for the crowds that would listen to your every word, wondering if you are the one the whole world is waiting for. They would not wait for long, of course. But they would passionately want to give you the space to reset the American direction.

What is the risk, after all? If “think globally, act locally” ever made any sense, this is the time, and you are the prophet. If you want to be mainstream, look to the forgotten mainstream. You don’t even have to leave the Democratic Party. It’s time to renew the best legacy of the Good Neighbor policy of Roosevelt before it dissolved into the Cold War, the Strangelove priesthood, the CIA coups in Iran and Guatemala, the sordid Bay of Pigs, the open graves of Vietnam. It’s time to renew the best legacy of the New Deal before it became Neo-Liberalism, and finally achieve the 1948 Democratic vision of national health care.

May you – and Hillary too - live up to the potential, the gift of the past, prepared for you in the dreams not only of our fathers, but of all those generations with hopes of not being forgotten. #

He's made some disparaging remarks about Baby Boomers and how their era has ended. I don't get it and I certainly don't understand why he would disparage Tom Hayden, who is a hero of mine as well.

Sigh.

making these comments about different people. I'm not impressed one bit.

I will not be voting for Obama, that is a guarantee. This really is the end for me too. :(

He was so close he could taste it, and hates that it seems to be slipping away. Learning to live with crushing disappointment and endless, painful criticism is simply a seasoning process.

He ain't perfect. He's green.

anyone, yes anyone but another rePIGlican. :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

Note: However, I don't think he has a chance after this recent string of crap. He is losing support quickly and he knows it. Oh well ...

:dem:

old RW tactic. I really don't care to see it from anyone on our side.

Again I see evidence that Obama is too green (inexperienced, naive, whatever) for the Presidency.

"Scoop" has been dead for nearly a quarter of a century. We can peruse his record and impact on the body politic and come to whatever conclusions we may. That book is CLOSED.

Tom Hayden is VERY MUCH ALIVE, ENGAGED, continuing to stand up for the principles SOME of us 76 MILLION still hold dear while EDUCATING our kids. And YES, anyone with two brain cells to rub together should be "suspicious" of the MIC. IKE WARNED US. I watched that speech as a pre-teen. Obama was still a fetus at the time.

Of the 250 or so military adventures the U.S. has engaged in since the "Great War" exacty -0- have contributed to functioning democracies. Smedley, WHERE IS YOUR REINCARNATION???

He needs a good dose of therapy.

...Hillary is a baby boomer. In the process of marginalizing her, he marginalizes the generation that is the back bone of the democratic party.

for 'Soylent Green.' And why the hell isn't that film ever aired on TV? Probably because it's the next step....

a new way to distance the candidate from mainstream voters and align with GOP.

As info, DLC'ers HATE liberals with a fiery burning passion. They're Freepers at heart.

campaign was that he would unite the country. I like Obama, but I think he is not ready to run for president quite yet. Unfortunately, he is making a record that may come back to haunt him at a future date when he is ready to run. He has already made some strange mistakes including this one.

As one who lived through the events of the late '50s and '60s, it is interesting to me that Obama depicts the anti-Viet Nam protesters as rather extreme, but embraces the civil rights protesters. As the original post points out, in many cases, they were the same people. In any event, the same moral values and courage that motivated and allowed the '60s generation to protest the civil rights abuses motivated and allowed them to also protest the war. I am puzzled by teh fact that Obama, in his Selma speech, embraces those who marched for the equality of African-Americans and, Obama, in speaking about members of the '60s generation distances himself from those same individuals. Does his inconsistency in this regard arise from an inconsistent moral judgment? Obama does not have to be against all wars. That goes without saying. He probably could not be elected president if he were. But, he should be careful about how he characterizes the activists in the past and their moral judgment -- especially if he was just a schoolboy at the time.

n/t

Tom's very powerful letter. Sobering and oh so sad.

This is why Howard Zinn says that every great, progressive change in this country always came from direct action, not electoral action.

Politician. Ambition.

Activist. Mission.

Thanks much for the wonderful post.

cali called it 'powerful' and I have no words that better that. Powerful, indeed.

I've seen posts with mud being slung at Barack Obama, but a single comment in passing does not change the character of this good man. If the poster had been a Republican, he would have made hay out of Obama's missing flag pin. Please spare us the drama; it's so obvious that you're grasping at straws. Millions of Obama supporters across the country will not be swayed by tactics like yours. And, sorry, but I really don't think that your friend has "given up" on Barack Obama.

I'm nowhere near being a Baby Boomer, but my parents taught me about Tom Hayden, and I read his autobiography and have always admired him.

Obama is searching for a theme, and he's launching trial balloons here and there, but they really are missing the mark. As exciting as Obama is a politician, I think he needs more seasoning--and more respect for our history and the mavericks who opposed VietNam and set us on a healthier, more caring course.

The more Obama flounders, the worse he is looking.

I think he may be looking at generational conflicts as something similar to regional culture wars.
He may be working on a way to pull in the conservative leaning gen xers.
"Next in line to fix things, etc."
In order for that to happen, the baby boomers need to stop argueing and lay the groundwork, etc.

He is the best one to bridge that gap.

He gets his creds by bad mouthing the parents to accompany the call for responsibility.

It seems that you saw through it.

Maybe you are right.

At this point, I don't care who the Dem leader is, I just want a leader on our side. I will support Obama, Clinton, whoever... Just give me some leadership! (smilie)

I don't care who is our leader at this point. I just don't want another repuke in the White House.:kick:

envisions himself a "uniter" but I didn't vote for him either.

to know, 1) his only talent is talking; and 2) he'll change what he says to fit whatever crowd he's talking to at the time.

Barry is a joke and a fraud.

And of all the sick cosmic jokes in the that could be played out in the world I can't imagine there will ever be a sicker one than the one we're all living out right now. The most important election since the founding of this country (possibly) and millions of people are basing their decisions on two candidates because one's a woman and one is black.

Doesn't matter that neither one has the character or intellect or decency or the desire to do what is right to serve their country rather than their own greedy agenda. (That is what we need in a pResident right now.) They're going for the 'it's time for the country to have a woman/black president' schtick. Any anyone who CAN see how flawed these two people are is either a 'mysoginist' or a 'racist' according to their hardcore supporters.

Obama's insecurity and jealousy show what a weak person he really is. He has to berate the people who have fought these people off before, who recognized what pure evil they were when the popped back up on the scene, and who knew what we'd be in for if these nasty bastards got control. Does the mouthy little fool want those over-the-hill hippies to quit protesting and quit speaking out? Give the anti-war movement over to the younger generations and just see how far they go? In my day the young were vocal and very serious about fighting back against the liars and killers in our government. Don't see a lot of that with these younger generations. In fact, it's almost front page surprise headlines when it happens rather than just taking care of business when I was young.

Obie can badmouth the 'hippies' all he wants. He's never done a damn thing to impress me (or anyone I know for that matter). But he can give a good speech. Just don't look for anything more than that. But remember one thing. What you hear coming out of his mouth today is NOT what you'll hear tomorrow.

By what political process do you think you can achieve that?

The reason we have "separate but equal" branches of government is that our founders knew damn well we were never going to be governed by disinterested noble saints.

The ONLY candidates who feel free to speak their minds are the ones who know they haven't a chance in hell. If their numbers were to rise suddenly and dramatically....watch their speeches and positions alter.

honesty.

"More disturbing is what happens to the mind by setting up these polarities. To take a “centrist” position, one calculates the equal distance between two “extremes.” It doesn’t matter if one “extreme” is closer to the truth. All that matters is achieving the equidistance. This means the presumably “extreme” view is prevented from having a fair hearing, which would require abandoning the imaginary center. And it invites the “extreme” to become more “extreme” in order to pull the candidate’s thinking in a more progressive direction. The process of substantive thinking is corroded by the priority of political positioning." For example, you don't stake out a position that the causes of global warming are still uncertain so that you don't piss off the extreme that says global warming is a fraud and so that you simultaneously don't piss off the people who consider man made global warming a fact and who have been made out to appear extreme via the MSM echo chamber even though the man made global warming people are correct. Not that Obama is actually doing this, but this is what is happening with his postions on Iraq, Iran, and others.

There are some absolutes that have not changed in this country and Hayden also covered them in his letter. There is nothing to bridge because these issues were around 50 years ago. The baby boomers fought to correct them, won some, lost some. But they are either back again, or never went away. Obama's charge, and whoever the Democratic nominee's charge will be to be bold, do the morally right thing regardless of the heat, and fix them permanently.

Very important post ~ thanks.

Thank you for your kind words.

What will he be left with come election time?

Insult the LGBT community.
Insult Baby Boomers.
Insult TOM HAYDEN??? WHAT is Obama THINKING???

I'm tired of all the explanations of "what he really meant."

:shrug:

Hayden has always been a man of courageous action as well as words.
To me, using his name as this candidate did reflects political immaturity at the very least, along with insensitivity to those who have gone before..

Thanks again for putting things in perspective so well.

How sad is that. Thanks for you kind words, JohnnyLib2.

as a potential vote some time ago.
He just keeps reassuring me that I
made the right choice.

I really wanted to like him.
His speech in 2004 was great, and he showed promise - "another Bobby" and all that.

But, sadly, I think he got caught up in exactly what Hayden says - the idea that he, an African American, could make a legitimate run at it.

I was asked by a close acquaintance of his, 'way back when he had just announced, to contribute to his campaign. My response was "as soon as he spells out some real positions, rather than carefully-worded, nuanced political-speak."

Sadly, he never did that, but has taken to firing pot-shots. He has said he is not comfortable with the negative aspects of campaigning, and it shows. But he is trying anyway, and that shows.

He never was a realistic choice of a leader to clean up the mess made by the PNAC and their lackey gwb. Now he seems to be trying out a variant of the slogan we used - "don't trust anyone over thirty!" Now I see him as just another opportunist, whom I cannot trust. I don't believe anything he says, because ultimatly I believe he'll do what works for HIM.

Well, dammit, people can marginalize us who lived through the tumultuous 60s hoping for the Age of Aquarius at their peril.

WE didn't fuck it up. THEY did. THEY capitalized on the oh-so-convenient assassination of Kennedy, created a war to make themselves rich. When we got pissed off at that and elected Carter, who was set to follow OUR agenda, negotiating peace and working toward energy independence, THEY ridiculed him and used the oh-so-convenient hostage crisis to get their boy ronnie in place, so they could start the systematic dismantling of the New Deal and wage war on the Middle Class.

Clinton was sort-of on our side, but marginalized Gore's environmental efforts and did little to roll back the deregulation nightmare.


It is high time we finally got one of ours in place to start fixing things. That does NOT mean 'turning the page' and forgetting what Earth Day (I attended the first one) is supposed to be about, or banning "Age of Aquarius" as old hat.

My choices are ALL baby boomers, and, sadly, ALL long shots at this point.

Biden
Gore
Edwards
Dodd


I hope Hillary and Obama just tear each other to shreds. Then maybe we can find an actual leader.

because he's never had a dog in the hunt.

We all have collective memory, from different POV's, which he does not share. What seems to be coming through is a disdain for those who took to the streets a few decades ago.

Why? :shrug: MKJ

he'd just a cocky little whippersnapper!

He left Hawaii for Indonesia in '67-'68? He came back to Hawaii in '72 or so?

I was 8 when Kennedy was shot, and I remember it vividly, as I do the Cuban Missile crisis when I thought we'd all die. I remember seeing little girls dressed in their Sunday best being harassed by the police. The only difference between them and me was that I didn't have lace on my little socks or much pigment in my skin. I was afraid that the police would come for me!

When I was 12, Detroit burned (I'm a Michigan native) along with lots of other smaller cities in the state. Then in '68, at 13, I remember Dr. King and Sen. Kennedy being shot, and then that horrible Chicago convention.

If Barack had lived here, I think that he would have been old enough to see the riots, the assassinations and the convention on TV if he had lived here. He's a smart person, maybe some of it would have stuck with him. He'd also have been old enough to understand Kent State and the beginning of Watergate.

He wasn't here for a good deal of important history, and he doesn't seem to have taken a decent course in modern American history to fill the holes in his understanding. I know people his age who have similar views despite having lived here all their lives, but I don't expect that they have any chance of being a President. I wouldn't vote for them, either.

I had great hopes for Obama, but I have become less and less interested because of this kind of stuff.

We have an ahistorical president now, a uniter and not a divider. I don't want another one.

Over and over and over.

I am and have always been a Kucinich supporter - however I have talked up Obama a lot - even to my very religious republican family. They are all on board as possibly voting for Obama. Only problem is now when they call me and ask me questions I have to be honest and tell the what has happened in the last month. I feel like Im telling them a hero is no longer who we thought he was. Its sad. Most of all Im sad for Obama because I felt he had a real chance to make a difference in the current American political climate, something that now seems like a lost pipe dream to me.

That was the magic of him...

As an aside, Scoop wasn't some monster...He was economically liberal, socially liberal ,but he was a foreign policy and defense conservative...

He also authored the Jackson-Vanik Amendment to push the Soviet Union to respect human rights for better relations with the United States...

nt

He believes that a new generation of leadership is best able to bring about the sort of positive, progressive change this country desperately needs. To suggest that Obama has disrespected or doesn't appreciate those great leaders who have walked before him is demonstrably wrong. In fact, to promote this line reflects either a sad misunderstanding at least or intentional deception at worst.

A short video clip: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x68443

obama is dissing those who tom mentions. i have never heard any statements where he has dissed those people and until i do i`ll reserve my judgment. i do believe it was a direct shot on hillary ,bill, and those who want the status quo in american politics.
it`s going to be very interesting how this plays out in the future

than a 46 year old who doesn't.

You tell it with much more eloquence than I do.

still being far from retirement age, do NOT think we're obsolete, and who don't see why a generation identified (by the media, anyway) for its love of Wall Street and the Republican Party ought to prematurely push us from the political scene?

Sorry. No. Not even rephrasing it "nicely" will make it sound any better than what it is. It's called "ageism" -- a type of bigotry.

And while I think identifying people by the year of their birth is stupid -- in reality, you find every shade of person in every generation -- if you're going to try to play the game of stereotyping people by their generation, offering up "greedy Republicans" as an alternative to "unwashed hippie antiwar demonstrators" to solve the crises of our times is, well, mind-boggling.

both hillary and obama best heed his words. i would really like to see if they respond to tom`s statements.

On the other hand, I was never impressed by Obama in the first place. Sure, his speech at the 2004 Dem convention was nice, but I've found him singularily uninspiring ever since. To me, there's never been a "there" there.

sw

*

Obama's campaign is coming across as divisive not inclusive.

Beautiful letter by Tom Hayden.

he really doesn't have the heart or experience for it.

Think about that, DZ.

He has been told his entire POLITICAL life that Bill Clinton is the most gifted politician and that Democrats can ONLY win by adopting Clintons' way - Gore 'lost' because he distanced himself from Clinton, dontchaknow?

I loathe what Obama said - but who was he trying to emulate when he said it? The guy that the corpmedia calls a political 'genius' dontchaknow.

with a politician as skilled and charismatic as Bill Clinton. He was the exception. As there is no one in the race with Bill Clinton's ability, triangulation is moot.
Al Gore did make a mistake distancing himself from Clinton, but picking Josef Liebermann as a running mate was the worst of all methods to effect distance. The simple fact is, no state south of the Mason/Dixon line would give its electors to a ticket with a guy whose wife's name is Hadassah. The fact that Liebermann was ineffective as a running mate lent to doubts about his political loyalties. He damn near gave Dick Cheney a blow job during their debates.
Mr. Obama still has much to learn. Sounds like he may have Bob (0 for 8) Shrum advising him.
"The only thing you find in the middle of the road are yellow stripes and dead armadillos."
(Jim Hightower)

And always have been.

You think Lieberman's firm support for Bush's decisions on terrorism and Iraq war strategy throughout 2001-2007 was more influential in the public eye than Clinton's firm PUBLIC support for Bush's decisions on terrorism and Iraq war strategy throughout 2001-2006?

I'd say 2007 but both Clintons have adjusted their public statements ever since Joe Lieberman lost his primary race in mid-2006.

emulate Bill Clinton son now Obama stupid comments are Bill Clinton Fault what a joke your worst the the republican .

posting this. I really hope that Senator Obama reads the message.

What is important for him to remember that the Tom Hayden democrats were right. More, they are still democrats. The Scoop Jackson democrats became part of the republican party in 1980. While the Tom Hayden democrats continue to be the holders of traditional party values, and are progressive in their application of these strengths to today's issues, the Scoopers are those advocating the Cheney policy in the Middle East.

One of the things that was common in the 1960s was blaming the older generation for current problems. It was a tactic that a lot of the youthful leaders subscribed to. Tom Hayden was not one of them -- he was insighful enough to recognize the advantages of uniting with people of like values, despite age. And he wasn't prone to placing blame on others, when he could be focusing his energy on finding solutions.

It's an error for Senator Obama, who I think is a good man, to have spoke as he did. It is the second error in recent weeks. He might do well to listen, closely, to one of his Elders. For, indeed, it is unlikely Obama would be running for president today, if not for people like Tom.

Again, thanks for posting this. It's one of the things I'll print out, and put in a notebook, for my children to read and enjoy in years to come.

post enlightening us from a different angle, H20 Man.

To an arrogant young man who doesn't have a clue why he's running for president ~ other than the fact that desperate Americans turned him into a rock star.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/11/08/obama-hits-generational-d_n_71729.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/21/weekinreview/21broder.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

http://speechwriting-ghostwriting.typepad.com/speechwriting_ghostwritin/2007/02/barack_obama_ex.html

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0907/Obamas_generation_appeal.html


Does he really want to throw Baby Boomers under the bus? It sounds like it. It's discouraging, because I think that in a sense, the Baby Boomers could just be skipped as far as having power. Clinton and Bush would be the only two BB presidents, and I don't really see Bush as carrying the torch of real 60's ideology.

Last night when I was falling asleep I kept thinking how sad it would be if George Bush was the last boomer president ~ a generation that made such a difference regarding civil rights, the environment, etc.

done.

I'm 40, for the record.

Peace? Civil rights for all?

:shrug: MKJ

The antiwar people (I was one of them) of the 60's didn't end the war. The goverment had to finally admit it was a lost cause and pulled out. NO amount of marching, sitting-in or rioting had any effect on it. It IS time that we move on and stop wasting energy on tactics that don't work. If we don't adjust to a different scenario, the opposition will squash us like bugs.

these links you provided.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0907/Obamas_gene...

http://speechwriting-ghostwriting.typepad.com/speechwriting_ghostwritin/2007/02/barack_obama_ex.html

:shrug:

I see references to his previous comments though. Thanks for the Huffingington link.

What the hell is he thinking by making these comments!! :grr:


:kick: & Recommended for the OP.

out in history like Tom Hayden who can write an open letter like this..chocked full of poignant historical anecdotes and truths that reduce you to looking like the political novice with bad advisers that you are.

"Barack, I thought Hillary Clinton was known as the Great Triangulator, but you are learning well. The problem with setting up false polarities to position yourself in the “center”, however, is that it’s unproductive both politically and intellectually."

Also, not smart to try and set people against each other..there must be ways to set yourself apart from the other candidates without this. I'm wondering who his advisers are that's coming up with these really unsavvy speeches and agendas?


Thanks, David, I feel like I know quite a bit more than before I read your post.

What a disappointment he turned out to be.

Sorry.

was disrespectful. You can type "not true" til your fingers grow callouses and it will not change that perception.

...a perception, which does not make reality.

Some perceive the reference as disrespectful...but they are wrong. The point is that Obama rejects the stale, conventional political framework, comprised of phony extreme stereotypes like "Scoop Jackson Democrats" vs "Tom Hayden Democrats." That's nothing to be offended by. That's something to embrace.

;-)

Thanks. No need for interpretation. All you have to do is pay attention. It's not hard. ;)

Baby Boomers who mebbe took one too many baton blows to the head back in the day, inspired by TOM HAYDEN to put my body on the line as he did. My eyesight and hearing ain't what they used to be. But I tell you what, I can still spit enough tacks to upholster a divan and I ain't senile jes' yet. So when someone tells me they're a "uniter, not a divider" and then proceeds to appeal to DIVISIONS it sorta does get my attention...

Look, JD, all snark aside now. Barack Obama is a GOOD MAN. His voting record is stellar. He's an OUTSTANDING orator. The Beltway is a cloistered and sick system in which many are chewed up and spit out. The view from INSIDE is distorted. The Democrats have alienated their base and Obama is following suit by decimating his potentially INCREDIBLE cross-over appeal.

Rather than "interpreting" and "explaining" what he really meant while taking potshots at li'l ol' librul black aunties like me, you might do well to get back to your candidate and EXPLAIN TO HIM HOW his tactics of polarisation are hurting him. That is, IF you GET IT. Because CLEARLY he doesn't.

Obama is demonstrably CAUSING CONFLICT, NOT "uniting".

And his wife has a problem with TMI.

:hi:

Edit: Never mind.

:toast:

There are many "Tom Hayden Democrats" like me, and I find this powerfully offensive. I can't speak for the "Scoop Jackson Democrats" - and I have no doubt there are plenty of them out there - but my guess is these bleatings won't make them very happy either. Obama needs us all, yet he seems determined to alienate group after group in his quixotic attempt to "unite" us.

It's just ringing more and more false every day. Three months ago I was considering Obama for my primary vote, despite my support for Kucinich. He's disabused me of such a notion now.

Well, said. Thanks for sticking up for Tom.

The Founders would have recognized him as kith and kin.

His LIFELONG dedication and ACTIONS say ALL that needs to be said. Yeah, I'm a boomer and Tom Hayden is an icon to me. A LIVING HERO.
Taking a cheap potshot at him was just another in a series of gaffes and an indication of VERY POOR judgement.

...that I can name. The rest are neocons now AFAIK.

I never called myself a Tom Hayden Democrat, but I am one, I guess. Obama sound like he's watching too much South Park. In online debates I've had expressions like "hippie socialist" thrown at me, and I think that's as good a descriptor as any for the things I'm proud of. Most ironically, that came from a young man who is wheel chair bound, who didn't know what we baby boomers did for accessibility. Obama was never my first choice, and it seems he's got some growing to do.

--IMM

Right on target.

As the OP said, halfway is nowhere.

--IMM

Don't accept that ridiculous artificial division that Obama has miraculously created out of thin air. It didn't exist before he said it. Don't let it exist now.

There are divisions. There was a time when, like Tom Hayden, I was fighting against Democrats, because they were wrong on the issues. Let's hope that doesn't happen again.

As it is, I will support the nominee.

--IMM

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Now...please learn some manners.

Or, really, had their say. Those who became corporatized, maybe. But there are a lot of gentle, idealistic people out there who still hope for some of the changes that briefly flickered in the 1960s.

I am right about Obama's age. He is really almost a baby boomer himself, for that matter.

The people who opposed the Vietnam War in the 1960s were RIGHT. They were marginalized in their day, and now all that verve and spirit and generosity of mind is just old and out of date?

Jesus Christ, look at all the frickin' old men we had as presidents - in particular, REAGAN. We go from the WWII generation to Gen X?

Even Clinton wasn't ideal as far as representing the movements of the 60s ~ he didn't do nearly as much for the environment as we'd hoped and he did become corporatized, which is what worries me about HRC.

Kucinich is more representative of those "gentle, idealistic people" you mention than the others this time 'round. And Kerry was last time.

:eyes:

:eyes:

Not in 2008!

As a "50 something" I was blown away by the Hayden Letter.I well remember those days, And having such a role in it made you a part of American History.
I envy you----
Johnnytoobad

:hi:

The american dream is starting to slip away ----

I'm really disappointed in this guy. I expected more. A lot more.

being put into the race to mess us up, that is what we should be looking for!

I know that some GOP linked group ran ads against Edwards.

Please elaborate, that just sounds like it was pulled from your physical nether regions.

Links?

MKJ

It's guys like Obama that get me to heed my old SDS button, "Vote in the Streets".

He now sharing the bottom spot on my list with Hillary.

except for one friend that still has him as her fave, because she's from IL. Everyone I talk to (and my friends are news reader types) have ruled him out because of the gay slams, the insults about the older crowd, and the flag issues. I find his comments a form of ageism. I also think he's doing everything wrong lately.

He literally is sealing the deal that Hillary is the heavyweight favorite to win the nomination. I thought it may come down to him or Mrs. Clinton, but now I think it'll come down to Edwards, Biden or Obama (unless he keeps insulting voter segments of the Democratic party) as big outside shots to stop Hillary, although I hope I am wrong and she will lose ground.

The entire old folks park where my best friends mom lives is already discussing Sen. Obama not having the love of this country to face the American flag and place his hand on his heart out of respect for those who have died for this country... that's their take on a small issue, it's not my fault, he did it. And it's not a stupid discussion, because I even got an email about it from a lady I know in CO, and she rarely forwards political items.

His gaffes of the patriotic type are going to destroy his chances as that story gets more and more circulated, because he already has so many racists against him and people who are scared of his potential ties to his father's religious ties that his dad apparently didn't really practice, but to simple folk in Ohio - that won't matter!

I still don't understand the point of removing the flag pin - is he trying to lose his shot to beat Hillary? There will be commercials slamming him for doing the flag things, and, sorry, if I have to suffer through a Hillary presidency, I'll do it instead of putting us up for certain failure from an Obama GE run. Hillary can win it, but I don't want her, I want Biden or Edwards since Gore or Clark aren't running.


Sorry for the long comment if anyone was reading, this just upsets me about Tom. Thanks to the OP for the thread.

His whole life has been a lie!

He voted for Nixon in 1968!!!

I seen it!

:sarcasm:


Waiting for the "he's senile" slams to start.

NOT :sarcasm:

which is a yummy sea creature tasting exceeding well in fettucine?

As an homage to notorious misspellings of the past. :)

I had high hopes for him but he has turned into a major disappointment. :-(

but not a major blow to Obama's campaign.

is somehow HELPING Obama??? :shrug:

Yes, just one vote, however...

Oh, I think not. It's an insult, but an extremely ego inflating one. No, the only one in position to take a blow is Obama, because he is the one who is campaigning for votes by turning off whole sectors of the Democratic voting population.

Wonder what the demographic breakdown looks like. :crazy:

I was a teen growing up in Berkeley in the 60s. I saw my city occupied by the National Guard and bivouacked on the edge of town for a week... military tanks rolling down our streets. Peace demonstrators corralled, compressed and contained by NG on university campus and then teargassed by military helicopters. I saw friends/demonstrators horribly beaten by state police. One shot to death.

We, from the 60s are still here. Yes, still fighting.

I do not take the comments by Obama lightly or well.

I have been a member of The Gray Panthers, working against ageism.

I worked on a very difficult two year local political project with people 70s-90s. We won, by the strength and dedication of the elders. The courage, strength, wisdom and dedication of the elders in the face of the 'powers that be' while fighting arthritis, heart troubles, loss of spouse, etc. was a true lesson to me.

I heard the stories of their lives. They had done what had been asked of them: worked, payed taxes, abided by laws. Most of these elder women had never learned to drive. You should have seen them speak out to the 'powers'. They won. Took 2 years, some died along the way.

I belong to an organization of 200+ western history enthusiasts/scholars, who meet monthly. I am by far the youngest, at 56. 98% are 65-91. A group of interesting and interested people.

I haven't had much opinion one way or another about Obama... but I have spent 25 years fighting ageism, and he is skirting close to it. I will no more abide an ageist than a racist. I am not happy at all.

I reckon nobody will read this post, but I am mad. I don't want to be marginalized because I worked in the 60s and still do, and I sure as shit don't want our elders (some of the smartest people I know) discounted or marginalized.

Here is a photo of my husband at a draft/war protest sit-in at the Oakland Induction Center in 1997, where Joan Biaz was arrested.



We should be CALLED UPON, not discarded.

enough to be pretty aware of all that happened. Obama, for all his skills, was a very young child in those days. He may both right and ready in the future. For now, I'll go with those born earlier.

Great picture, by the way, but I think you meant 1967?

JFK, Berkeley, 1962. 88,000 audience. I was there, dad took me, I was 12.



88,000 people and no fake backdrop.

My town six years later under Gov. Ronald Reagan:

Thank you.

I read your post and it moved me to tears. I was a teen during the 60s in the midwest. My dad, a WWII vet, took me to my first protest. The ole baby boomer was heart broken to have to take my daughter to her first anti war protest. We are not and never have been insignificant.

...brings back memories.

I was there for the second shot and I do remember tanks in the streets and in particular I remember asking a National Guardsman if he really would shoot me with that rifle (with bayonet) he was holding. "Yes", he replied, without hesitation.

I remember being teargassed at lower Sproul Plaza -- the police told us all to disperse, then left us with only one route to take, and then the helicopters came over that line of people with nowhere else to go and teargassed the sh*t out of us.

Remember folks: tanks in the f*ckin' streets of an American city, under "Saint Ronny". I never forgot and I am beyond pissed that Obama would dare to talk about "Tom Hayden vs Scoop Jackson" Democrats AS IF each were equally legitimate. For the record, Barack: on the issues where they disagreed, Tom Hayden was right and Scoop Jackson was wrong, wrong, wrong. You might want to leave those conflicts behind, but they are still with us, and it is the Republics and neocons who have made sure of it. For the record, Barack: there isn't a chance in hell you would be running for President right now if it were not for the likes of Tom Hayden and their willingness to stand up and fight the battles that needed to be fought.

My goal is to see the rabid right wing ground into dust and dispersed to the four winds, politically speaking. If that means we keep fighting the same battles, so be it. Remember, it was our refusal to fight those battles to the bitter end that has been our undoing. In the Watergate situation, we avoided impeaching Nixon and really holding him and his cronies to account -- and they popped up later, causing untold mischief at home and around the world (Iran-Contra being just one example). They continued their dirty work with Reagan, with Bush I and with our current sorry excuse for a president -- the very same individuals who worked for a disgraced Nixon are now at the highest levels of government and calling the shots.

The last thing we need is someone in our own party telling us we need to "reach across the aisle" to these fascist f*cks. You don't win over evil by finding common ground. You win by fighting it.

Thank you!

I read it and loved it ~ you express the passion of those times beautifully, and, it's true, that passion is still alive is all of us (no matter how young or old we are) who understand the powerful meaning and value of what happened in the 60s.

Keep fighting the good fight. :thumbsup:

Even if you thought it wouldn't make any difference. "We should be CALLED UPON, not discarded." :thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

Thank you.

Especially your work against ageism which is attacking boomers from every angle.

This Gen X'er is grateful for the tough battles the boomers fought.

My favorite part:

No one chose to be “extreme” or “militant” as a lifestyle preference. It was an extreme situation that produced us.

Word.

We didn't produce the extreme situation.

So true. So very true.

:kick: & Rec

he never really says anything of substance, and I find him boring. If you want to see more capitulation to the RW, vote for Obama.

I often wonder where I would be without the sixties. I was born in 1967 so I didn't live them but I benefit from them every day. God bless people like you and Tom Hayden.

:kick:

is in the lines Tom Hayden so eloquently wrote:

"Will you live up to the standard set by Bobby Kennedy in 1968? He who sat with Cesar Chavez at the breaking of the fast, he who enlisted civil rights and women activists in his crusade, who questioned the Gross National Product as immoral, who dialogued with people like myself about ending the war and poverty? Yes, Bobby appealed to cops and priests and Richard Daley too, but in 1968 he never distanced himself from the dispossessed, the farmworkers, the folksingers, the war resisters, nor the poets of the powerless. He walked among us."


This is something we need to ask all of our candidates, and we can't accept a candidate who leads us with anything less. Why is it that the capacity to honestly change is now derided as "flip flopping." Kennedy began working for Tailgunner Joe McCarthy. He didn't draw people from all avenues of life by "triangulating" or "playing to the middle" but by coming to a position where he could stand his ground in good conscience and we were brought together by him and his position.

David, thank you so much for your post. I also met Tom Hayden - although only in passing once when I was just 19 and had just filed CO. At the time, I didn't realize what an honor it was, although I did think it was pretty cool.

I don't think Obama intended to dismiss Tom Hayden - or Scoop Jackson, for that matter. But that he can so cavalierly, if unintentionally, dismiss two positions embodied in two people that really need to be considered and brought into the progressive conversation now above all else, points to three serious problems:

Lack of historical perspective ( ironically many on the left in the 60s, including moi, took this position vis a vis the Old Left, union people, and others who were our allies but whom we alienated);

An implicit rhetoric of division that belies the main rhetoric of unity that Obama sounds;

The current inability to see that "splitting the difference" between very divergent positions - the same approach he tried with his Gospel tour and that is where he lost me completely and utterly - is not the same as having a reasoned, and principled position that will draw others to you, or where others can finally say "I respect this, but I disagree."

Let's not go too far in idolizing Tom Hayden. He and his seven defendants made a zoo out of their trial. It didn't do us any good at all. And this book has an afterward by Tom Hayden, so it's no right-wing publication. ITEM OVERVIEW

Michael Moore mocks George Bush and Al Franken ridicules Rush Limbaugh, but the mixing of play and politics today is polite and respectful compared to the carnival of contempt known as the Chicago Eight trial. Opening at the end of 1969, the trial brought Yippies, antiwar activists, and Black Panthers to face conspiracy charges arising from the massive protests at the 1968 Democratic National Convention. The defendants openly lampooned the proceedings, with Abbie Hoffman blowing kisses to the jury and the defense bringing a Viet Cong flag into the courtroom. The judge ordered Bobby Seale of the Black Panthers bound and gagged for insisting on representing himself. And an array of celebrity witnesses appeared, including Timothy Leary, Norman Mailer, Arlo Guthrie, and Allen Ginsberg, who provoked the prosecution by chanting "Om" on the witness stand. This book combines an abridged transcript of the trial with astute commentary by historian Jon Wiener. A foreword by defendant Tom Hayden examines the trial's relevance for protest today, and drawings by legendary cartoonist Jules Feiffer help re-create the electrifying atmosphere of the courtroom.

the trial of the Chicago Eight.There are a few things totake into account, though, regarding Hayden. Hayden's letter was in praise of Bobby Kennedy who was very different in tactics, and not in praise of his own actions or those of his co-conspirators. And in looking at Hayden, this is the person who started in the Civil rights movement, went on to write the Port Huron statement with SDS, went on to the Chicago Eight, and then pulled back to the community. He didn't go Weather Underground. He went community.

From my own point of view, if we look at those names - Bobby Seale, Abbie Hoffman, Arlo Guthrie - to take three - Seale at 31, Hoffman was 31, Arlo was 22. They were pretty young.

More to the point, it was that they kept working over the years, after the war was over and central stage was gone and we slogged through the years under Reagan, and they kept going. And they still are.

And actually, I don't know if it didn't do us any good. I honestly don't. Being polite certainly was not working. Chicago set the stage for the defeat of Humphrey, but how much of Chicago's anger and insanity - and the subsequent trial - was, at least partially, in frustration and anger over the assassination of Kennedy. I don't know if you were around then. but the rage was palpable and we younger ones were not always thinking too straight.

It is a very complex issue

I bought a huge bottle of Exedrin Plus about a month ago. I just ran out.

Hayden says Obama is "setting up false polarities," but what it seems to me is that Obama is rejecting the existing polarities, which he believes are not useful.

And David Zephyr says that Obama is insulting Tom Hayden, but then wouldn't he be insulting Scoop Jackson as well?

I think Obama is saying something very interesting and worth listening to, and something very different than Hayden is claiming he is saying.

My college daughter and her friends really like him, but I don't know that the passion he inspires is sustaining enough the divide them from their parents.

At least from progressive parents, it will bring together RW fundy parents and their kids who don't like hippies, that's for sure. :eyes: MKJ

And many volunteers have grey hair. Many volunteers are in college or in their 20's, 30's, and 40's, too. Believe me, there is no "generation gap" in the Obama camp. That's one of the things that drew me to it, and I'll never regret it. One of the best experiences of my life.

civil rights/antiwar/feminism/environmental issues that dominated the 60's/70's?

MKJ

on edit added "you" to title.

so the premise of your question is all messed up. ;)

To which "fights" is he referring? MKJ

it's easily found in any kind of search. MKJ

Read it. The object of his quote is not a set of issues, rather it's Clinton as a presidential candidate. Obama's talking about leadership...and which candidate is best qualified to deliver, which candidate is best equipped to "bring the country together" today. I'm sorry. To suggest that Obama is not deeply attuned to civil rights and "the struggle" is to not understand the man.

That's what I'd like to hear clarified, nothing more. MKJ

How about an example? In the 60's, antiwar marches and protests were huge AND in the news all the time. Mainstream media followed every large anti-war march. Republicans at that time said that, if the media didn't pay any attention to the anti-war protestors, the protestors would stop. You may have noticed that the anti-Iraq war marches and protests get little, if not zilch, of coverage in the mainstream media. It's one of those old methods that just doesn't work anymore. If we don't learn from our mistakes, we're doomed. It's not about whose generation is better; it's about experience. I think we waste alot of time organizing marches, events, etc. when he could be working on more constructive things.

MKJ

Sadly, the only ones I see driving wedges are those who claim offense when a political candidate says let's join together...and move past the old dysfunctional model of American politics.

as well and we need more people like Tom ....NOT LESS.

There is one candidate that does carry Tom's vision....Dennis Kucinich.

We were in college together. Tom was just 2 years older than us. It started with "teach-ins" at the college campuses. It was Tom's generation that led us into political activism. And we all continued leading our younger brothers and sisters for years.

So when you alienate Tom Hayden, you also alienate millions and millions of us not just from his generation but also all those up to 10 years younger than him or more.

enough to remember both Scoop and Tom it infuriates me. If all he wants is the under 40 vote then that is what he is going to get. Someone in his staff should tell him to wise up.

is that the whole statement? I mean, is that it? Is that all? “The Democrats have been stuck in the arguments of Vietnam, which means that either you’re a Scoop Jackson Democrat or you’re a Tom Hayden Democrat and you’re suspicious of any military action. And that’s just not my framework.”

Obama seems to be distinguishing himself from the older generation, and I suppose it's not easy to be on the receiving end of that (I am a boomer myself). But that's no insult, what Obama said, if that's all there was.

Seems to me that Obama was saying the mindset of that decade, that generation, though justified at the time, no longer applies and suits the country.

I personally disagree. But his words are not an insult.

Scoop was a hawk but he was also a strong New Deal type Democrat--he never would have taken his marbles and left the party like Lieberman did. Tom Hayden was and is a great patriot and deserves better. In fact, both Scoop and Hayden deserve better.

He's on record with a quote which is designed to impugn one of his competitors...OK, I get that, they are fighting for the nomination and questioning her IWR vote, for instance, is completely understandable.

However, he also impugned an entire generation in that statement, probably not by design, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. But, it's possibly evidence of a certain tone deaf quality when it comes to understanding the passions of those who vote Democratic.

So, hopefully he's learning and evolving his policies and his campaign. And, if he's really as smart as he seems to be, he will evaluate this feedback from the party base and not instantly accuse anyone who finds a problems with his stance as a Hillbot Hater of Obama as you did.

MKJ

I'm not talking about what he did, but what you just did. Only YOU are a reasoning thinking human being and anyone who utters criticism is a "hilbot"? A robot?

Obama will be destroyed by his supporters, if that's what you are. I'm sincerely hoping not.

have nothing to do with his mistakes that offend millions of citizens. you could respect that mistakes have been made, rather than blast Hillary supporters as pushing lies.

that many who have been given pause are NOT HILLARY SUPPORTERS.

and yet you'll see almost every candidate wrap himself in this fiction.

Thin what the "middle ground" means.

It means:

Take half the troops out of Iraq

Take half the lead and mercury and other toxics out of drinking water.

Ship only half the good paying jobs overseas.

Take billionaire HMO chiefs and tax only half their earnings.



The "middle ground" serves the corporate robber barons. Middle grounders hope to fool enough well minded people into voting for them and later doing nothing to stop the mindless machine from devouring the common people.

Nancy Pelosi is a good example of "middle Ground". She won't take a stand so she stands for nothing.

:applause:

So many fall for it but even people who don't self-identify as a liberal or progressive, overwhelmingly favor liberal and progressive policies. The "centrist" candidates know this but try to marginalize and outright dismiss anyone with a populist message.

I'm going to start saying "Right On" again. And your post was "right on".

;-)

Tom Hayden went in search of the origins of his passionate commitment to human freedom and found it in our common heritage in a land colonized by England. This is, by the way, that same England which created Iraq as a country. Oh, and by the way, they were also in India, and Palestine...

Hayden discovered what, thank God, I had never lost. On the inside cover of his book, Irish on the Inside.

"Hayden's parents erased his Irish heritage in their request for respectability."

Hayden seems to know the dangers of conformity and the value of questioning. This is something that many Irish Americans lost, see the book "How the Irish Became White."

As a human being, he is worthy of respect rather than being made into an "it," a category for a certain kind of Democrats. He is a person. And there are many of us boomer Democrats who might not have agreed with everything he did but we revere his commitment and courage. Were that I so courageous!

Ton Hayden is VERY MUCH ALIVE and is NOT an "IT." With that remark you really captured what disturbed me so nuch about the quote. Perhaps Mr. Obama would be so kind to define for us exactly what he thinks a "Tom Hayden Democrat" is.

thank you

This is really pathetic.

eom

Wow. Tom Hayden is such a hero of mine; Zephyr's letter is so eloquent.

You're seizing on a tiny, out of context quote and working it up into an outrageous diatribe.

What's next? Swift-boat hippies against Obama?

C'mon. Perfection is still the enemy of the good.

We already have a candidate who represents everything we progressives want in Dennis Kucinich, and the man polls in the single digits.

We've got to support the candidates we have, not the candidates we want.

(Like AL GORE!)

If he is running as the new Clinton, we've already got one.

They seem to go to extreme lengths seeking votes from people who will never vote for them. Meanwhile they alienate us, the ones who are dying to throw our support behind them. We ask for a peaceful world, a clean environment, a decent health care system, a fair tax structure, and jobs - in our country. We are asking for a leader who will not sacrifice these goals for some voting block whose votes will not make up for the ones they lose from us.

They need to convince you to abandon those issues in order to "win" because the other guys are so much worse. However, either way, we lose. It is a false choice we are being offered.

The only winners (D & R) will be those in office being paid handsomely by us while serving their corporate masters at our expense.

This so clearly expresses my frustration at various times with several of our candiates, as well as Congress.

They are not channeling the energy of their smart, motivated, passionate base, for reasons that aren't clear to me, at all. MKJ

Thank you for posting it!

That needed to be said.

Up until recently I was just thinking Obama was just plain wet behind the ears and naive with all the gaffs of the past couple of months. I'm starting to really wonder if he is who he says he is, or who is image is managed to be. I'm getting to where I don't like what I'm seeing right now.

and I took up for him a few hours ago on a different thread about the picture that's being emailed around of him without his hand over his heart. That incident is irrelevant to any of this above. It's just that I'm really starting to wonder if this guy is what he is supposed to be.

I don't know how stuck in the 60s we are but we sure are full of ourselves and how much we did (or in reality didn't do) to end the war.

He said in the 60s you were either a Scoop Dem or a Hayden Dem and that's not my framework. How does that insult Hayden? Did I miss something. (Sorry, I did not read all of Hayden's letter. I read enough to know he's as full of himself as all the boomers. And I should know. I am a boomer.)

So now you have to denigrate yourself in order to support Obama? Great candidate. That makes me just wanna run right out and support him.

but then, I've never held myself out as being as self important as some boomers do.

(Talk about get over yourselves.)

We had good music. But some boomers give us way more credit than they should.

Boomers have not, you must admit, done such a great job (you do know Bush is a boomer, don't you), why not let someone else try? Which was pretty much Bill Clinton's platform in 1992.

as some sort of a monolith, don't you? :crazy:

I wonder what kind of world I would have been born into if Bobby Kennedy had not been shot.

Psst, Barack: the reason we're still fighting these battles from the 60s as a country is because we haven't truly won them yet.

because Hayden was in the forefront of the Civil Rights movement. If Hayden decided to rape Michele Obama, Barack should not criticize him because Hayden was beaten up doing what is right as a youth? Of course, this is an exaggerated example, but the idea is the same: if I do anything to help you, you cannot criticize anything I do or say.

As you can see, I am not an Obama fan...never have been. But to tie his hands on whom he can criticize based on their history seems ridiculous to me. As an African American, I am grateful that Tom Hayden did what he did, but I am not going to enslave myself to his ideas because of it. That being said, I am a Tom Hayden Democrat.

Is that what you have to do to make Obama in the right? Postulate that a man who stood up for Americans is a rapist? TOM HAYDEN IS NOT A RAPIST. Sorry, the analogy is beyond bizarre. Obama wasn't criticizing a rapist. He was criticizing a generation of...rapists?

"That being said, I am a Tom Hayden Democrat." Uh huh.

Obama can say anything he damn pleases. What YOU are saying is that WE aren't allowed to comment on it.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

imho...

Dude, if that's the first thing that comes to mind as an example...

but he is too immature. I don't think he has the wherewithal to run this country. We see all the glaring mistakes in decisions he has made. His supporters are constantly bashing Hillary. Maybe they don't like the road Hillary sees but she is steadfast in it.

I still think Obama should have waited a term or two to run from president. The maturity he needs would have sunk in and he could take the reigns of the presidency with ease. The only problem is once a person has lost the candidacy he is considered a looser. Look at John Edwards another good man but the looser title still follows him and he can't get the momentum. I hope Obama wises up and gains the maturity he needs to lead.

Whether he learns from it is a whole other question.

the only good one!

He doesn't know what it was all about. Civil rights. The Vietnam War. The authoritarianism of Nixon. Quite a few don't. We do. Those of us who were the "baby boomers" of the 1950s.

We saw so many of our contemporaries in elementary school separated from us just because they were the "wrong" color and we saw so many of their parents being beaten in the streets when they protested the separation.

We saw so many of our contemporaries from high school being drafted to fight a war we couldn't understand and then we saw many of our contemporaries from college being shot down at Kent State when they dared to protest a war we finally could understand and couldn't support and an administration that we didn't believe in and didn't support.

We became the "love children" of the 1960s and the 1970s. I am still a "love" child. Barak Obama proved to me that he is a "hate" child when he shared a stage with a homophobe. I thought, nothing everyone fought for so hard means anything. So I am not surprised by his attack on Tom Hayden. Which was another attack on everything we fought for. Those of us who do know. Who do remember. And who will never forget. And who are horrified, really, that it is happening again. We want a president who will stop it. Not a president who will continue it.

I remember the doves being released on the Mall. I still believe in our ideals. I do not believe in Barack Obama. Simply because he does not share those ideals.

I supported Tom then, as I do now, Tom Hayden speaks for me

It's always good to hear from you and read your posts.

Quite the interesting post. A good read.

number one Senate advisor and mentor...

Joementum??

It shows.

But on this issue, he again reinforces to me why he simply isn't ready for the Big Dance. Maybe later down the road. But right now, he's got some growing to do. History is one of our greatest teachers and we're not going to make much progress denigrating or marginalizing those who came before us and put their lives on the line to fight for our rights.

and yours too, david :hi:
obama will not get my vote either.

:hi: I dunno WHAT Obama is thinking. Maybe that his rhetorical skills will override OUR COMMON SENSE that he's equivocating long and hard. It IS a shame. I had high hopes for him UNTIL he threw my peeps under the bus, backed up and ran over them again for good measure.

NOW he's trying to make an "it" out of a man who INSPIRED me as a teen, for whom I VOTED back in the day and who continues to represent the ideals I hold dear. I. Just. Don't. Get. It. :shrug:

bill, that is, with the triangulation stunts, exceot his don't go over very weel :D i never trusted obama, and i couldn't put my finger on why, and now it's become VERY clear.

And a friendly hello to you. I love the Frederick Douglass avatar. He may the greatest American ever. His "Narrative of a Slave" should be mandatory reading in every high school in America. How he taught himself to read, tricking "free" white kids into "teaching" him new "words" transcends the sublime to the cosmic. :hi:

And then Douglass became a feminist. He and Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton all hung out together. That should be a movie.

Here's the messge that I received last night from Tom after I had written him.

"Hey david nice to hear from you. I wouldn’t give up on anyone entirely but I appreciate your sentiment." --- Tom Hayden

Typical of Tom's generosity and humilty, huh? Giving the benefit of doubt to Senator Obama.

I am a proud Tom Hayden Democrat.

--DZ

he taught when writing his book on religion and the environment.


He is the real deal and as you say, one notices how well he treats people. True dignity.

And a brilliant writer. Thank you for posting this letter.

Referring to an Obama position as "more parsed than pronounced" is a close as TH got to smacking the pup. Rather than swagger and toss off throwaway comments about "Tom Hayden Demococrats," Obama could learn a lot from this letter.


Jello Biafra calls him "ObamaRockStar." I've asked Obama folks what O's about beneath the packaging --- "more parsed than prounounced" sums up my impression :spray:

i will not vote for obama this time, but i will certainly consider him at a later date. hayden's response to him was substantive, and i hope he gets the message. after he heals from the :spank: :D