Replies

Interesting. Usually 1946 to 1964 are all lumped together. This seems to make more sense, to the extent we're going to examine by age

I was born in 65 and never felt any affinity to the boomers, whom I basically got lumped in with by the MSM.

My growing up years was watching Vietnam, Scooby-Doo, All in the Family, the Brady Bunch, Walter Cronkite, and the Partridge Family(etc.etc).

The first political campaign I remember is Nixon trouncing McGovern, and then came Watergate, and then Carter barely winning over Ford, and then the awful Carter years(bad economy and impotent America).

Then in 80, Reagan appeared on the scene. Optimism personified, and I was hoping he would win(although the media was pushing Ed Clarke, Libertarian, as a conservative alternative(wedge), and actually supported Clarke and in a high school debate, debated for his candidacy, and it is also interesting that 1980 has been the highest vote total for the Libertarian party, but we all grow up, and I did so after that debate)

After that debate I threw my support to Reagan, due to his can do and eternal optimism, and I was actually scared that Reagan would not win, given the MSM coverage of the time.

Well the rest is history, the race was called at 8:15 EST, and Carter rode off to a bitter sunset(as acknowledged by Carter's lukewarm and tardy praise on hearing of President Reagan's death).

After Reagan's ascendency to the Presidency in 80, the press became even more partisan and in the most recent election, I've never seen them more partisan for their side, the democrats. I think it is becoming apparent to many non-political people that the MSM is nothing more than an organ for the democrats and the new political debate is on the internet and FR was a pioneer in the MSM's decline.

Sorry about the long tome going down memory lane, but it was refreshing to see an article that didn't lump me with the self-absorbed boomers.