THE KIDS ARE ALRIGHT


and they always have been.

I just heard some three-faced, jackass blowhard on talk radio -- I would say who it was, but I wouldn't want to embarrass Marty Griffin -- declare that tomorrow's primary in general, and Barack Obama in particular, have been really great because they've excited so many young people. Because teenagers who didn't even know there was a president are now talking about politics. (That's verbatim. Really. I swear.) And because middle schools and elementary schools are now holding mock elections for their students.

Can someone who likes to play the whole investigative reporter on your side shuck-and-jive, someone who likes to pretend he's a savvy, straight-up man and voice of the little people, really be that much of a moron? Does he really believe there were teenagers anywhere who didn't even know there was a president? And that, even if there were -- which there weren't -- they're now suddenly debating the merits of universal health care or the missteps of American foreign policy? Does he really believe that middle schools and elementary schools have never before held mock presidential elections?

Note to Marty: not being able to name the president is not the same as not knowing there is one.

More notes to Marty: my 13-year-old voted for John Kerry (who beat George W. Bush) at Linden Elementary in 2004, and for Winnie the Pooh (who beat Al Gore and George W. Bush) at the Cyert Center in 2000; I voted for Ronald Reagan at Wyomissing Middle School in 1980, and for Jimmy Carter at Wyomissing Hills Elementary in 1976; somehow I doubt that we -- much less my parents, who also voted in mock elections when they were in elementary and middle school -- were merely foreshadowing the coming of the Pennsylvania Democratic Primary in 2008.

There is, of course, no doubt that children are engaged and engaging in this electoral season -- consider this cloying video, or this grassroots movement, for two recent examples -- but to suggest that it's never happened before, that it's going to change the face of politics forever, or that anything has changed besides the silly, sensational coverage that a bunch of kids with video cameras and internet connections are getting, is to succumb yet again to the kind of ahistorical narcissism that these days fuels both our old politics and our new media.

Posted: Mon - April 21, 2008 at 09:40 AM          

©