History does not remember it as a revolution.....

until it has won...otherwise it is known as an insurgency, or a rebellion.

This is in response to someone saying how Obama's movement is basically a revolution in America. While I agree with the sentiment and see how vast numbers of people are stepping up in ways they haven't previously, I am cautious and picky about the terms.

So until we win, we are just a potential side note in history.

For instance, the youth voted in 2004 at rates basically not seen since 1972, and they voted for Kerry at rates that NO age demographic had done for Democrats lately. Yet we get told that Kerry didn't inspire and we don't consider it a revolution.

To those who say Kerry didn't achieve anything, I kindly say "up yours". The youth (me at age 22 then) made a huge movement towards the Democrats. We followed that up with 2006, where we again showed up for a mid-term at rates not seen in quite a while. That was not yet Obama time, remember?

Some of those new young party activists and caucus-goers this time around found their inspiration in their loathing of Bush in 2004 and their first political acts were getting behind Kerry. If Kerry had won then, it would have been called a revolution. Considering that the election practices in Ohio were as fishy as they come in America, I think the revolution has already started, but history will just have to catch on to it when we score a more visible win.