My son, born in 1978 when Carter was president, reminded me that his entire waking talking life from 1981 on has had a bush or a Clinton in the administration and in power.

I, who have been around a lot longer, do recall other administrations…..and his comment did leave me thinking – he and others around 30 year old have never known a DC without a bush or Clinton. So – I can see why Obama is attracting voters my son’s age.

They do not like dynasties and want a real change – and Obama is a real change in many ways – but first of all he is not a bush or a Clinton and that is attracting the more “youthful” voters – and now also many of my “aged” cohorts who with Edwards out – are tired of politics as usual and see Clinton as a predictable politics as usual…..

There is a huge benefit in electing someone who has not been in D.C. forever – politicians staying there develop myopia after a few terms and can no longer see outside the beltway. Someone who has more recent real life experiences elsewhere brings a different and broader view to the country’s future..

And I really can’t stand the arguement that experience is what is important – what is important is having excellent people around you – who argue with you and are not afraid of telling you something you might not want to hear. We learn from a variety of views and sources – fear based reports are what got us where we are with mad king george. I actually loved that Obama said he loses pieces of paper – so do I – and that does not make us idiots. What is isiotic is that the “media” saw that as a bad bad thing!

Yeesh! Maybe we need a clean sweep of the media as well as the powers-that-be in D.C. ?