This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on June 3, 2010 2:55 PM. The previous post in this blog was A question of semantics. The next post in this blog is Toxic brew. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Thursday, June 3, 2010

Ahead of his time

Here's a wonderfully cranky post by somebody who's merely middle-aged.

Comments (12)

"When the history of this country is written, your generation-the generation of Chimpy, Cheney, Gingrich, DeLay, Bunning, McConnell, Cornyn, and countless other useless leeches will be seen as having performed one of the most rapid destructions of a society in history. People will wonder how it was that the kids of Depression-era people could be so selfish, so stupidly blind, and so callous, and there won’t be any answers that make any sense."

and then finishes with...

"You are truly The Lamest Generation. I know that what I’ve said here doesn’t apply to all of you, and I want to apologize to any of you that it doesn’t apply to."

Great rant, he works up quite the lather. I only wish I could see it on video, foaming at the mouth and all. The last sentence is the best! An apology after a rant... LOL.

In large part I am offended by the rant. I haven't been Lame, even though I'd be classified in The Lamest Generation. And I must say most of my friends and associates don't fit the criteria either. Sure there are some of us that fit parts of the list, but consolidating all into a lambasted group bothers me. My depression-era parents affected me greatly, but not in the way this rant portrays. It isn't worth the time to respond to any of the accusations.

Let me conjure a word from the current generation....


oh, and you're welcome

Last November, I went up to a little town just south of Detroit for my grandfather's funeral. There's nothing quite like looking at the remains of what used to be a great area, after GM and Ford and Chrysler management took everything they could steal and then left town, and watching how the only folks who could afford to remain were the ones who were already collecting pensions and Social Security. And then, at the wake afterwards, listening to the incessant bitching about how "Obama is going to turn us socialist", because it was only bad if the faces that received any kind of benefit had more melanin in them than Edgar Winter's.

Here's a related thought from one of the LG -- "An Apology to Younger Americans" by Sam Smith


That is a pretty wonderfully cranky post. Still, Lindy West's review of Sex in the City 2 sets this year's high mark for delightful vitriol.

In meaning and, of course. I promise to preview from now on.

One problem with his argument is that he makes the same old assumption that everyone in the '60s who was in the baby boom generation was against the war, was a "peacenik", etc. That was never the case. The counter-culture was called "counter" for a reason, and it wasn't just because it was different from the elders. Country music, truck driving, gun shooting, and all the other attributes of regular old culture survived just fine.

Richard Nixon got 60% of under-30 voters in the 1972 election, even after he'd failed on his 1968 promise to end the war, even after the bombing of Cambodia, even after Kent State (not Nixon's personal fault, I know, but still).

The idea that the '60s generation was some sort of monolithic bloc of hippies groovin' through the war and then turning into hard-line conservatives is about as realistic as the view that the '50s were somewhere between "The Andy Griffith Show" and "Happy Days". It ignores the fact that, for example, the young people involved in civil rights protests in the South in the mid-'60s were facing far greater numbers of young people on the other side. Were those just racist hippies?

I notice the second rant conveniently defined the lame generation as having been at least 40 Sept 11 2001.

Obama was born Aug 4 1961.

Quite a common topic recently:


From the post and yesterday's article, my understanding of the criticism is that it is far deeper than the usual bashing on the Hippy turned sell out Corporatist.

The basic argument is this, Baby Boomers (those born between 1945 and 1964) grew up and started working in an era where they were not saddled with 10k+ in student debt, an overinflated housing market, and an economy increasingly reliant on consumer credit to obfuscate the real shortfall in real income (income minus taxes and inflation) from about 1980 on to today.

In many cases including my own, our Baby Boomer family members became doctors and lawyers with very little to no student debt and their first practices were financed by their World War 2 Generation parents.

In contrast, your contemporary MD and Law graduate is coming out of medical/law school with an average of $50k in student loan debt and due to the lack of a rise in real income since 1980, their parents are increasingly unable to assist them in getting started in their work life because they are worried about financing their retirement.

The so-called war between generations is a debate of the opportunities the Baby Boomer's had vs. the opportunities Generation X and Y have right now.

Throw into account, the public pension fiasco and all the defunding of Higher Education and all the public services my generation will use in favor of keeping a long term financially insolvent Medicare/Medicaid system; along with States such as California cutting services for the poor to avoid a fight over public pensions, we are prime for a inter-generational donnybrook that will make To Kill a Mockingbird read like a Kibbutz.

One problem with his argument is that he makes the same old assumption that everyone in the '60s who was in the baby boom generation was against the war, was a "peacenik", etc. That was never the case.

Not really. I am fully aware of the chickenhawks of that era, who I also despise, but I don't despise them as much as I despise the Jerry Rubins-and there are a whole lot of them, too.

That generation gutted this country and happily led us into wars that they had no intention of trying to pay for. I suppose we should all thank whatever Deity we believe in that these weren't the people who were around in December of 1941. We'd either be speaking German or working as slaves on Japanese plantations.

That generation gutted this country and happily led us into wars that they had no intention of trying to pay for.

Most people of "that generation" like George Bush and Dick Cheney never were liberals, even in their youth. That's the flaw with the argument.

Clicky Web Analytics