How cute....

The American Dream is still there but every time people try to reach it, debt gets in the way and moves it farther away, just out of their grasp.

Hope and change are out there, too, only to fade away when people reach for them, especially if they try to organize to get them.

Oh well..........he's not.

I agree with your example of Sisyphus.

Damn.

He said it would happen in the first 6 months--he meant first 6 years.

Gird up your loins.
A generated, international crisis to test Obama's mettle.
He's gonna need us.
Need our help.
To stand with him.
Initially, it won't be apparent that we're right.
Obama will clean the Augean stables.
We'll be asking 'why is this thing so tough?
Why are they down in the polls?'
They'll have to make the tough decisions.
"Remember the faith you had at this point because you’re going to have to reinforce us."

Remember?

Prophetic?

Pathetic?

You decide.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/10/biden-to-suppor/

because we didn't

I didn't buy it, and I was scolded here.

I do agree with the last statement, though.. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

But I was sure that we would be better off with Obama in the White House.

is that all our mourning and name-calling and gnashing of teeth, sorta plays right in to the Republican narrative.

As some of us now say "I am sorry I ever voted for Kerry" that just allows all of the Bush voters of 2004 to say "tolda ya so".

One thing that was a huge setback though was - the elections of 2010. Republican obstruction paid off at the polls.

I also would take issue with your definition of the American Dream. If the American Dream is of class mobility, then it deserves to die. After all, class mobility in the upward direction is only possible if there is class mobility in the downward direction. Only 5% of the population can be in the top 5%. Anybody who gets into that group from the bottom 95% means that one of the 5% has fallen out of that group.

I prefer the Herbert Hoover vision - a chicken in EVERY pot. Meaning a good life for all. The second part of his campaign though, promised also "a car in every garage".

I was watching a PBS show about Henry Ford, and it sorta struck me. At one point, they said that mass ownership of automobiles changed American society - made it greedier. No longer was the ideal a sort of easy country life of laid back simple pleasures. Now people wanted to go exciting places and do exciting things.

Now the good life as pictured by the average American goes way beyond chicken or cars. It includes an ipad, a plasma TV with surround sound, a DVR, cable television, two or three cars per family, central air, microwaves, dishwashers, washing machines, dryers, electric can openers, and so on and so on.

Plus, a constantly growing population. Are we on pace to reach 12 billion by 2050? Maybe not. The UN is projecting a peak of 10 billion or so by 2050.

But I go back to a quote from Gandhi - the earth supplies enough for every man's need, not for every man's greed.

Otherwise, I agree with the sentiments expressed in your post.

-Laelth

"but I can say that NEVER have I regretted a vote more than the vote I cast for him for President."

48 recs for that.

Well, at least Bush voters do not have to have that regret.

What was the alternative in 2004 to voting for Kerry. Either a) voting for Bush, or b) voting for a Nader who would help Bush to get re-elected. To me, to say, in retrospect that you regret voting for Kerry is to say that, now, looking back, you are glad Bush got re-elected.

any elections except the presidential.

They seem to have been behind the 8-ball every time a midterm election comes around.

The problem is the GOP has controlled the house because they control the redistricting process in a lot of states that went for Obama in 08 and the again 12.

Until the Democrats take control of the redistricting in places like Ohio, Wisconsin, Illinois and Pennsylvania the GOP will continue to own the House in DC.

which is more than can be said for 2004.

However, Republicans took control of the state legislators in the 2010 elections which were not just bad at the House level.

But blaming things on redistricting seems kinda lame to me. It says that Democrats do not have a message, or candidates, who will be able to reach voters. To get such a message and to get such candidates seems more vital, more real than just changing the districts. Screw that, let's go into the conservative districts and kick their useless a$$es!!

Instead of always looking, like Kansas does, for a rich person to run as a Democrat so we can raise the big bucks, let's win with small dollars and great messaging. Find a Russ Feingold, the underdog who won the US Senate race in Wisconsin against an incumbent Senator

"Feingold's senatorial career began in 1992, with a victory over incumbent Republican Senator Bob Kasten. Feingold, who had little name recognition in the state and was campaigning in a primary against a pair of millionaire opponents – Congressman Jim Moody and businessman Joe Checota" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russ_Feingold#1992_U.S._Senate

Find a George McGovern, or a Stephanie Herseth, who can win in a red state like South Dakota.

Don't tell me we cannot win because there are too many conservatives in a district. Represent the bottom 80% and win a majority of their votes, conservative, moderate, or liberal.

I spent the better part of 25 years working the electoral process.

2006 was war and Bush weariness.

So we held the house in districts that were designed for Republican candidates.

I wasn't one of those falling over myself in admiration, mind you, I just thought this guy was honest, that he was different. And I never think politicians are "different."

start another one! I'm truly disappointed in Obama, but at the same time he saved us from going into another Great Republican depression.