Home › Elections › Elections Opinion
Larsen: Democrats look forward
But they have miles to go and promises to keep
Download this story as a podcast!
ELECTIONS '09
Check out our one stop for all the information and news you need to be ready for to cast your vote.
Election Central »
Elections stories »
STORY TOOLS
More from Elections Opinion
The historic nature of this year's Democratic presidential primary race and last week's national convention will have a lasting legacy, not merely for this nation's political landscape, but for the people who are the heart of America's greatness.
The primary race became historic when the selection came down to the choice between a woman and a black man.
The convention opened on a historic note when Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., symbolically passed the torch of party political leadership to a new generation of Americans.
And the convention ended on a historic note when Sen. Barack Obama accepted his party's nomination to be its presidential candidate — 45 years to the day after the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. gave his historic "I Have a Dream" speech.
And there is every reason to believe that, come the morning of Nov. 5, another historic moment will have occurred when this nation wakes up to find Obama elected president.
Hope that such a historic moment will occur flowed throughout the Democratic National Convention, but it is not yet a certainty. The torch might have been passed to a new generation of Democrats, but there is still a sizable older generation that does not want to cede control, no matter how muddled its policies or how badly it has stumbled over the last eight years.
Thus, the challenge for the Democrats and their standard-bearers — Obama and vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden of Delaware — is to articulate more fully the promises made during the convention and to distinguish more clearly what Obama could actually do as president and what he hopes he can persuade Congress to do.
A president can ask this nation to commit itself to a 10-year goal of trying to end America's dependence on oil, as President Kennedy asked this nation 47 years ago to commit itself to putting a man on the moon and bringing him safely back.
A president can, as commander in chief, extricate this nation from the war in Iraq and press the war against terrorists in Afghanistan, and ask the military to get rid of its detention center in Guantanamo Bay, and tell the intelligence community that this nation does not and will not torture.
But a president alone cannot cut taxes or change the tax code or provide every child a world-class education or create accessible healthcare for all. To accomplish these things, he needs the full weight of Congress behind him, with a strong Senate majority leader.
And no one would be better for that Senate post than the candidate Obama battled during the primaries — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York. Obama and Clinton are in accord on the problems facing this nation, on the ways to solve them and on the goal of renewing the American dream. With Obama as president and the Senate majority led by Clinton, the wants and wishes outlined during the primary campaign and the convention could easily become reality.
But the Democrats have been here before over the last eight years, certain they had the muscle to retain the White House in 2000 and wrest back control of it in 2004. Whether the Democrats and Obama's campaign have learned from the mistakes made previously will become apparent only as the fall election race unfolds.
Yet, this time, there is a different feel to the party's energy. It is the spirit of people, not politics, that fills the air. People who hope to do better in life than just merely get by. People who hope for decent work, pay and housing. People who hope to leave this nation and the world better off for their children. And that was a major theme running through the Democratic convention, expressed best by Clinton, in her Aug. 26 speech to delegates: "That is our duty: to build that bright future, to teach our children that in American there is no chasm too deep, no barrier too great, no ceiling too high."
And it should not be a future in which people saddle the generations to come with debt from wars that should not have been fought or lost opportunities because of jobs shipped overseas. It should be a future in which the generations today renew the American promise of unlimited possibilities and unlimited opportunities and pay it forward so that hope becomes reality and the dream lives on.
— Richard Larsen is a deputy opinion page editor at The Star. His e-mail address is rlarsen@VenturaCountyStar.com.
Posted by mikeb6804 on September 2, 2008 at 12:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Richard -- the Dems made promises as far back as 1965; they haven't lived up to them yet.
Posted by cslaurie on September 2, 2008 at 8:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And it should not be a future in which people saddle the generations to come with debt from wars that should not have been fought...
Gee whiz, if only Jefferson Davis, Truman, Kennedy and Johnson had thought of that.
Posted by NowHearThis on September 2, 2008 at 11:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Larsen: "...last week's national convention will have a lasting legacy, not merely for this nation's political landscape, but for the people who are the heart of America's greatness."
Let's see the so-called accomplishments of the leftist-liberal DEMS:
1. The failing education system is over-run by leftist-liberals
2. The LBJ era so-called war on poverty and its failure. (People in poverty are there because of their personal choices in life and to think gov't could rescue them is a joke.)
3. The DEMS slamming of traditional marriage with their constant promotion of homosexual rights.
4. Nominating a Black candidate the DEMS see as their affirmative action candidate. Uhm...Obama: A local community organizer, (rabble-rouser) a member of a Black Liberation Theology, "hate America and whites" church for 20-years. A person with very little political experience...someone who speaks great with a teleprompter, but stumbles like GW Bush without one. And the negatives go on and on.
5. Global Warming fraud, which really means trying to restrict Americans' civil rights, extra taxes and fees and hogwash on something that hasn't been proven. Remember, the LIBS were proclaiming an Ice Age 30 years ago
6. The liberal news reporting media who give Obama at least 15-point bump due to their constant barrage of pro-Obama coverage and anti-McCain coverage. If Joe Biden's son had knocked up some girl, you wouldn't see that story in the news media, guaranteed!
And the list of Liberal negative-life-elements go on and on.
Posted by NowHearThis on September 2, 2008 at 11:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Obama on Palin's experience, (on CNN Anderson Cooper 360):
“My understanding is that Gov. Palin’s town, Wassilla, has I think 50 employees. We've got 2500 in this campaign.
He conveniently leaves out the thousands of employees she oversees as Gov. of Alaska. Obama correlates his campaign to that of a small city, but leave out info how a governor of a state has a huge responsibility.
Obama has never been a gov't position of making decisions by himself. PERIOD!
Posted by nelsonknows on September 2, 2008 at 2:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I have to say that Obama showed a modicum of class when he refused to discuss Sarah Palin's family issue, not that he showed any the night before but we've learned to take any decency any leftist can possibly show.
Posted by ken10 on September 2, 2008 at 4:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The right wingers are in a state of panic that this country just may have someone COMPETENT in economics for a change.
Posted by calebs on September 2, 2008 at 8:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dear Mr. Larsen,
Does this mean the Star is endorsing Senator Obama? Even before the Republican convention is over?
Sincerely,
Caleb Standafer
Posted by nelsonknows on September 2, 2008 at 9:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Lefists are looking forward by going backward about 70 years to Nazi Germany.
Posted by Mr_E_Man on September 2, 2008 at 10:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
NowHearThis and the other conservitard followers, Let's see the so-called arguments of right-wingers without all the factual discrepencies:
1. The failing education system is the result of a no-child left behind act that had no funding and left all the kids behind.
2. The LBJ era war on poverty and its failure. (Poor people continue to get poorer and incomes continue to drop, but somehow corporate fatcats keep getting richer, by choosing unsustainable profit margins over job creation. hen after profits reach their peak, they ship what’s left of those jobs oversees.)
3. The DEMS don’t slam marriage, but they do uphold the civil liberties of all Americans regardless of sexual orientation. Tell me ‘hearmenow’ when was the last time a gay person ruined your marriage?
4. Nominating a Black candidate. The only ones who seem to care that he’s black are the old-school conservatives, because it would just eat them to the core if he turned out to be a great commander in chief. So instead of debating real issues, they make up stuff about him being an America-hater. BTW, do some reading, the guy rarely, if ever, uses a teleprompter. Unlike GWB, who despite several teleprompters at his disposal, has a hard time forming meaningful sentences.
5. “Global Warming fraud, which really means trying to restrict Americans' civil rights.” As apposed to the conservatives, who represent and receive huge donations from companies that regularly defy environmental laws and end up having to settle with the EPA over clean-up costs.
6. “The liberal news reporting media who give Obama at least 15-point bump due to their constant barrage of pro-Obama coverage and anti-McCain coverage.” Really? Cause all Iv’e seen over the last couple of days are stories about McCain obsessing over hurricane problems. I'm still waiting to read about Palin's former membership and ongoing connections to the Alaska Independence Party, which is working to secede from the United States.
“If Joe Biden's son had knocked up some girl, you wouldn't see that story in the news media, guaranteed!” That’s because dems don’t make a big deal out of personal choice issues like pre-marital pregnancies. But when your party frequently tries to claim a monopoly on ethics and values, be prepared to get called on it when the hypocrisy shows through. Sometimes, the Republicans just make it too easy.
And the list of Conservative negative-life-elements go on and on.
Posted by outadabusiness on September 2, 2008 at 10:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by Mr_E_Man on September 2, 2008 at 10:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
NowHearThis and the other conservitard followers, Let's see the so-called arguments of right-wingers without all the factual discrepencies:
1. The failing education system is the result of a no-child left behind act that had no funding and left all the kids behind.
2. The LBJ era war on poverty and its failure. (Poor people continue to get poorer and incomes continue to drop, but somehow corporate fatcats keep getting richer, by choosing unsustainable profit margins over job creation. hen after profits reach their peak, they ship what’s left of those jobs oversees.)
3. The DEMS don’t slam marriage, but they do uphold the civil liberties of all Americans regardless of sexual orientation. Tell me ‘hearmenow’ when was the last time a gay person ruined your marriage?
4. Nominating a Black candidate. The only ones who seem to care that he’s black are the old-school conservatives, because it would just eat them to the core if he turned out to be a great commander in chief. So instead of debating real issues, they make up stuff about him being an America-hater. BTW, do some reading, the guy rarely, if ever, uses a teleprompter. Unlike GWB, who despite several teleprompters at his disposal, has a hard time forming meaningful sentences.
5. “Global Warming fraud, which really means trying to restrict Americans' civil rights.” As apposed to the conservatives, who represent and receive huge donations from companies that regularly defy environmental laws and end up having to settle with the EPA over clean-up costs.
6. “The liberal news reporting media who give Obama at least 15-point bump due to their constant barrage of pro-Obama coverage and anti-McCain coverage.” Really? Cause all Iv’e seen over the last couple of days are stories about McCain obsessing over hurricane problems. I'm still waiting to read about Palin's former membership and ongoing connections to the Alaska Independence Party, which is working to secede from the United States.
“If Joe Biden's son had knocked up some girl, you wouldn't see that story in the news media, guaranteed!” That’s because dems don’t make a big deal out of personal choice issues like pre-marital pregnancies. But when your party frequently tries to claim a monopoly on ethics and values, be prepared to get called on it when the hypocrisy shows through. Sometimes, the Republicans just make it too easy.
And the list of Conservative negative-life-elements go on and on.
You might have put down a lot of words, but a few will suffice from me. Bull puckey!
Posted by Mr_E_Man on September 2, 2008 at 10:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Outstanding rebuttal, outadabusiness. You make me proud to be a dem.
Posted by GDOG5 on September 3, 2008 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Liberal left wing STAR!
Why haven't you printed any of the write ups from DEMs who support McCain? Let me help you..
READ IT AND WEEP, all those who haven't a clue!
9/2/08 - "LIEBERMAN: OBAMA NOT READY TO LEAD, But McCain and Palin Are"
9/1/08 - "John Coale, a prominent Washington lawyer, husband of Fox TV host Greta Van Susteren and a supporter of Sen. Hillary Clinton, announced today that he was supporting John McCain for president."
Posted by Mr_E_Man on September 3, 2008 at 12:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'd like to know why the so-called leftist media isn't reporting on the real issues revolving around Palin.
Posted by H8War on September 6, 2008 at 11:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Actually the leftist media only exists in the mind maps of thick-headed Riech-wing Rethuglickens like Scapegoat, NelsonKnowsNothing and Techuser. Outadabusiness are you related to GW Bush? You form inarticulate rebuttals just like him.
Honestly, I don't see how the knuckle-dragging Reichists have the gaul to even show their pitiful monikers publicly, after voting for repeatedly, and continuing to support the man who is RESPONSIBLE for the most horrible terrist attack on the US in it's history--George W. Bush. The captain of the Exxon Valdeez was held responsible when the ship we was in charge of ran aground. And any CEO whose comapany loses money or hits a scandal is held (at least somewhat)responsible. And John F. Kennedy--a real President--after the Bay of Pigs fiasco which was fully planned by his predecessor and his CIA chief John Foster Dulles, nevertheless took full responsibility for the disaster in front of the whole nation, because it happened on his watch. Not spoiled frat-boy Bush. He was held out as a hero when he said he would "Go after the terrorists" and make them pay for the horrific attack, and never really asked what the **** he was doing reading to a bunch of 7-year-olds while his nation was under attack. Of course, any president in the same situation would have said the same thing, whether it was Al Gore, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, Richard Nixon, John Kerry, George H.W. Bush, or even Jimmy Carter. The difference is, any of the above would have made sure they actually CAUGHT Osama Bin Laden with American troops, instead of outsourcing the battle of Tora Bora to Afgan warlords, one of whom was bribed to let Bin Laden get away. I guess Repuglickers like to reward gross incompetence, which is why they want you to vote for Caribou Barbie and old man McSame.
GDOG5: Joseph Lieberman is a dirty rat traiter, not a proud American Democrat.
Since the Thick-heads keep harping about Obama's middle name being Hussein (a name as common as "Smith" in the Middle East), I wonder why they don't go after Al Gore, Al Franken, and Al Sharpton for having the same first name as Al Quaeda? It seems to be right up their unintellectual alley.
Posted by nannyfo1 on September 6, 2008 at 2:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would make fun of Al Gore's first name, but there are just too many other things about him to make fun of.
As I was watching the DNC, listening to talk about future generations, I was sad that the 50 million babies the dems have killed won't be able to participate. Maybe the dems should rephrase, something like, "We need to create a brighter future for those that survive the womb...
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
- Posts that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability.
- Disparaging remarks, abusive language or obscene comments.
- Threats, whether obvious or veiled.
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
There are 15 comments to this article.
Comments are found beneath the Yahoo! ad below.