Dear Rachael, Alexandra, and Natasha:

Dear Daughters:

In 1966 roommate Jesse Samburg and I were discussing the tragedy of American foreign policy.  The War was devastating Vietnam, our nation, and our generation. Casualties were mounting and Lyndon Johnson was escalating the war. We spoke about LBJ and his generation's responsibility for the loss of hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese and American lives. 

I said to Jess, "After the Vietnam war is over, another cruelty is that it will divide our generation, perhaps forever."

That war divided us and prevented my generation from participating in profound change. We worked hard, we did bring change, good change that lead to the election of the first black president, but we never fundamentally changed the premise upon which our government functions.

Your generation experienced something we never had. You have a President you can call your own who represents unimaginable possibilities for your nation and the world. JFK brought hope but he, and all of the Presidents who followed him up to George W. Bush,  were a continuation of the political ideology of the first half of the twentieth century.

Bill Clinton was a Baby Boomer and represented my generation.

He did and he did not.

His birthday, his idealism in the 1960's, smoking dope, and  embracing the rhetoric of social and economic justice says he was part of my generation.

His most dominant policies, particularly, his economic policies that destroyed millions of American skilled jobs, and in turn, reduced the economic purchasing power of those families, says he was not a part of my generation.

I had lunch with John Odom today. We planned it two weeks ago to get some work done and to celebrate the anticipated victory of Barack Obama. John said, "Obama's greatest strength to bring real change to this country is his use of the bully pulpit."

I replied, "As President, Obama can do more by inspiring a generation than all of his programs the Congress may pass. If these millions of young people can vote, they can take the next step and go to a city council meeting, attend their child's parent-teacher conference, and vote in local elections next spring."

John continued, "Obama should inspire  them to stay in school, go to college or get technical training, get married, have a family..."

While we succeeded on the local and even state level, we failed to build working majorities that brought fundamental change and return this country to the principles upon which it was founded.

Rugged individualism is part of the American story, but it is the exception, not the rule. This country was built when we embraced the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, which in turn were based on the Magna Carta and the concept of the social compact.

The United States was built on the assumption that there are certain basic services that government should provide and national defense is only one of many.

That social compact goes back to the Greeks and the Romans. It is reflected in our public works programs such as aquifers, aqueducts, bridges and roads. It is demonstrated in public libraries, schools, and lighted sidewalks.

The expansion of the frontier was an American phenomena, financed by the granting of public lands for free, mail and communication systems, a military that was not always used wisely, and a sharing of the water and waterways.

Even the rugged individualists benefited from neighbors gathering for a barn raising or harvest or to tend to the herd in times of illness.

No western movie is complete without the storyline of the community banding together to hire a school teacher and build a one room school.

That is not socialism; that is America.

Use this election to rediscover the American story and separate the myths and legends from reality. Use this election to unify your generation.

Borrow from my generation and make your own reality.

Embrace a foreign policy that changes the world through understanding and generosity, not just force. Embrace a domestic policy that recognizes that public investment is for struggling townspeople and the sons and daughters of the ghetto; it is not just for failed selfishly-run businesses.

Vietnam defined my generation. Let this election define yours.

Comments

[jim guilfoil]

Generations are fictions used by scribblers and talking heads to create a myth of change. Obama's use of money to sell himself, to buy enough TVtime to manufacture consent, is part of this 'new page' nonsense. The death knell to campaign finance reform is an issue that cannot be papered over with palaver about 'new generations' etc. Talk to your daughters about taking the money and profit out of electoral politics; about corporate persons and corporate speech creating groupthink and groupspeech that destroys any idea of humanity.
Unless your children and mine start thinking about what makes us human then change will have no meaning, just different stuff.
I haven't heard Obama talk about any of this...in fact he did the opposite.

[MattRock]

Obama had no choice but to play the game as it has been mandated by prior law. It may not make the ethics of it correct, but how can it? What we have experienced with the advent of the Internet, and Obama's crafted use of it is a reflection on how the world has changed faster than law. The Internet is the crowning achievement of the Industrial Age, and has grown to become the foundation of the Age of Communication.
Mr. Soglin, I appreciate your observation of the divisiveness of your generation, and I agree. I don't, however, believe for one moment that this should marginalize your roll in the next chapter of "The American Story."
The impression I was left with after Pres. Obama's acceptance speech is that he understands that he needs to reach to the root of the American Society to teach us once again what it means to be patriotic. Your example of committing thoughts and ideas to the world via this website is the perfect example of where your generation will be quintessential to the next generation's success.
The fact that that you can and do speak without any impediment beyond than the cost of a website is an example I hope every American with an experience to share will follow.

[Rational Observer]

"Obama's use of money to sell himself, to buy enough TVtime to manufacture consent, is part of this 'new page' nonsense. The death knell to campaign finance reform is an issue that cannot be papered over with palaver about 'new generations' etc."

Guilfoil's comments make no sense. It is laughable to listen to members of the party which killed legitimate campaign finance reform now bemoan its death. McCain-Feingold had to be watered down sufficiently to pass. What became law was a mere shadow of the original proposal. My friends (to quote Sen. McCain), you can't have it both ways. You didn't want meaningful restrictions on campaign spending -- you killed it -- and the Obama campaign is what you got. His campaign was a once-in-a-lifetime event -- there is no other politician who could collect $600 million in mostly small contributions to mount that kind of campaign. I would like to see one of the right-wing mossbacks try it -- it can't be done.

[DW]

Speaking as a member of the younger generation, deepest thanks for everything it took to get us to this point. We'll take the struggle from here...

...I hope.

[Jack Lohman]

Well, don't count on it. See "Did government control really change hands?" at http://tinyurl.com/08control

[Oliver Steinberg]

From a New Yorker magazine profile on Obama, by William Finnegan, dated May 31, 2004:

[Congresswoman] Jan Schakowsky told me about a recent visit she had made to the White House with a congressional delegation. On her way out, she said, President Bush noticed her "obama" button. "He jumped back, almost literally," she said. "And I knew what he was thinking. So I reassured him it was Obama, with a 'b.' And I explained who he was. The President said, 'Well, I don't know him.' So I just said, 'You will.'"

[Brian]

Have we not been listening to Obama?

In one of his books he praised Reagan for jacking up the war budget. None of that was orgy of spending was needed; it was all a complete waste. You could have just burned that money and it would have had the same effect on our defense posture: nothing. But Obama thought it was a good thing.

Have you not been listening when Obama has been harsh with the democracies in Venezuela and Ecuador? These countries and the others in Latin America who are following a democratic path are on the right side of history and Obama is about to take them on.

Have you not been listening to the silence of Obama about our 767 military bases? Do we really need that many? Obama thinks so. What a massive waste of taxpayer dollars.

Have you not been listening when Obama says he'll go into Pakistan without permission and without sanction from anyone? Or increasing the military budget (not needed; it should be significantly reduced). Talk about being a cowboy. Reagan would surely approve.

And how does it look for the abused Palestinian people? Not good. Rahm Emanuel as COS? Not exactly a fair and balanced broker when it comes to peace and justice in the Middle East. You can forget about either if it's Rahm and Obama guding Middle East policy. Obama is to the right on Bush on some issues in this area.

Who else has Obama's ear? Oh yeah, Brzezinski, the guy who tricked the Soviets into invading Afghanistan. And he's proud of it! In 1998 he was crowing about making some Muslims angry and saying that was okay because the Russians wrecked their country trying to conquer the Afghani people. (And Obama thinks he can do it?) Except that a few of these angry people got some planes and crashed them into some buildings on 9/11/2001. Blowback, big time. And that's who Obama is listening to? Zbig Brzezinski? Some advice.

And how about when practically the entire world recently rejected a key component of Obama's Cuba policy by a vote of 185 to 3 in condemning the illegal (and immoral) sanctions policy we maintain against the Cuban people? Not exactly much change there.

When Obama starts listening to the people who are right on the issues, like Paul Krugman or Dean Baker or Stephen Zunes---instead of relying on a host of Clinton retreads, free market ideologues, and neo liberal imperialists---then I'll pay attention.