H -°, L 23° | Tomorrow: 
H 23°, L 9°It must be tough promoting change we can believe in. Especially when the methods of bringing about “change” are suspiciously similar to those used to preserve the status quo.
However, this is a game the University of Wisconsin-Madison College Democrats are choosing to play, and shame on us for trying to impose ourselves as referees in their match against the enemies of hope, change, and — don’t forget — unity.
According to College Democrats Chair Claire Rydell, who informed us last week that the two months we had spent trying to organize a debate between her organization and the College Republicans was in vain, the young Olympians of change simply could not deal with the stress.
Then the College Democrats insisted a formal debate was not acceptable. Instead, they opted to push for a town hall-style meeting between themselves and the College Republicans. We relented.
Finally, last week, the College Democrats executive board voted against the debate, deciding the time could be better spent hosting a dinner for interested students to ask representatives of the Democrats or Republicans questions at tables of eight to 10 people. At this point, College Republicans Chair Sara Mikolajczak slammed the idea, correctly arguing that this was a far cry from being either logistically possible or even desirable.
But we’re not mad — we’re just disappointed. You Democrats teased us for weeks about the possibility of a showdown between your organization and the infamous College Republicans, and then decided at the last minute to abandon a debate for some Pepsi and Doritos with a half-dozen confused freshmen.
At first we thought all the College Democrats’ annoying revisions to the debate were just their way of playing hard-to-get. We thought they were simply making sure that modern conservatism’s flirtations with pseudo-fascist politics would not be the guiding force in structuring this attempt at democratic dialogue.
In the end, we are left disillusioned and bewildered.
We provided Rydell the chance to rally the excited forces of the liberal majority and crush, once and for all, the very possibility of a Republican party on the
We would also like to point out that this wasn’t for us. It wasn’t for the College Democrats or the Republicans. It was for those students who want to understand the politics of this country a little better before jumping into the fray. We could give the College Democrats some generic, inspiring anecdote about students here, but we are certain their candidate has effectively cornered that market for the foreseeable decade.
We would also like to thank Mikolajczak for knowing the deal. She didn’t need 60 hours simply to recite a simple mantra: Drill Now! Drill Here! And, Bomb Now, Bomb Here! You — the College Democrats — could have done something similar, albeit with a slim chance for a degree of nuance. Instead, the College Democrats opted to pursue a social gathering of limited consequence that would not, in our estimation, have any possibility of success. Whether or not this lack of interest in inspiring genuine dialogue is reflective of Barack Obama’s campaign is a matter for the polls to decide. But if impractical idealism combined with a total lack of respect for student interest at the collegiate level is any indication, we fail to see how Democratic rhetoric will succeed at the national level.
Despite all the crap flying through the air about change, we would like to make it clear that, at least for the College Democrats, the watchword is, yet again, politics as usual.
IP hash: c0d123ee
It’s easier for Claire and Andrew to play the status quo and not risk their reputations over a stupid political debate. Everybody on campus is voting for Obama, why not organize instead of participate in a stupid debate, a rhetorical game in which they would recite the line of the party anyways. Further, the campaign (probably the DPW) has already probably said no to the debate leaving the pressure of saying no, eloquently, on
IP hash: e18430b5
Only the “campus elites” would’ve gone to the debate anyways. LOL.
IP hash: b43eab93
Thank you for reminding us that “change” has been McCain’s mantra for 30 years. Imagine what Washington would be like if it weren’t for McCain consistently injecting change into the gears of our nation’s politics.
“Changiness” as usual.
IP hash: 95a0655d
Dems are just as corrupt and devoid of morals as the Republicans. They just have a different way of screwing us all.
IP hash: f7d0b862
Anything is better than watching that train wreck Sara defend the failed policies of her party.
Honestly!
IP hash: b99e5daa
Actually, I seem to remember the College Dems debating the CRs last year. Sure, they discussed some issues. Did they really inform anyone, or change anyone present’s mind? No, I wouldn’t bet money on it. People attended to see the spectacle, not to hear about the issues. Students got no say in their personal beliefs, and I for one think ordinary folk don’t ALWAYS need the leaders in charge to tell them what other think they should believe. We’re college students - don’t we get that enough from party leaders in the government, from teachers and parents? A debate for this fall is not the right way to get students thinking about their own opinions on issues. Inviting them to discuss their own thoughts with others (maybe some with a bit more knowledge on certain issues than the common Joe) seems like the real way to get students thinking for themselves. The Dems seem to be trying something different - instead of slamming them, maybe we ought to help them succeed.
IP hash: 9f7b290a
This article is absolutely ridiculous.
IP hash: 9c96f22a
Oh no!!! The Badger Herald doesn’t get to hold an all important political debate between the do nothing college dems, and the do nothing college republicans.
Let us all bow our heads in misery and lament the missed opportunity of this “great debate”
IP hash: 1099078f
College Dems are a bunch of pansies! Suck it up and debate.
IP hash: 004cddd7
This is an embarrassing headline for an equally embarrassing column.
IP hash: 6fabc93d
OR, you could just print Obama’s talking points and McCain’s talking points and save everyone the pain of you “debating” ideas that are stale, not yours, and absolutely nauseating.
IP hash: c8f7ded8
The College Dems should be embarrassed that their leadership refuses to stand up for what they believe to be so true.
Are they realizing that they are unable to articulate their convictions without resorting to making up facts or bsing? I would say yes.
And if everyone on campus is supposedly already going to vote for Obama, why do they need to organize? I guess I won’t be included in that group….darn.
IP hash: 4c03e9d5
Why would anyone want to debate Sara Mikolajczyk? The last time she was in a debate, Oliver wiped the floor with her!
IP hash: 018e12cf
“…print…talking points and save everyone the pain of you “debating” ideas that are stale, not yours…”
Agreed; couldn’t have been said better. Rydell and the Dems obviously have the students’ and voters’ best interests in mind. Why should a round table event hold less credibility than a debate when it [the round table] involves more critical thinking by more people than the two debaters?
Too bad you couldn’t work together for something bigger than your competitive streaks, like generating interest in going to the polls, which a debate on rhetoric fails to do. Show an individual how his or her voice matters!
I wanted to write “you guys suck” but that’s just the type of drama you’re trying to provoke here. And it undermines your goal of getting people out to vote. What WERE you trying to accomplish?
IP hash: 99a657b8
Nobody wants to listen to Claire and Sara repeat party talking points to each other for an hour anyways.
God forbid they tried something that could actually get people involved.