Romney vs FOX

A major part of our presidential process in this modern age is through the media. Tons of people, even classmates of mine, blame the media for influencing us in certain ways- making the president look insufficient or overzealous at times. However, that is their job. The media is suppose to inform and influence us. Everyone knows that certain television networks take certain sides on politics, and some people think that they shouldn’t do that.

My specific advice to those who think that the news is too opinionated: if you really feel that way about the news and media centers, I certainly hope that you watch C-Span. I can’t tell you how many people are FOX haters, but watch MSNBC, and those who watch FOX but despise MSNBC. I call you fools for anyone who makes such a criticism and doesn’t regulate it when they don’t criticize it.

When it comes down to it, the media influences the way we think and feel about anything they broadcast- especially Presidents. Television provides us a direct link to the President. Let’s face it, I’ve never received a Christmas Card from the White House, or even a personal letter in the mailbox explaining why the economy is the way it is from the President’s office. We need the television to get a sense of a presidential candidate’s personality, political views, and campaign promises. We depend on it.

Republican candidate Mitt Romney was rarely seen on television prior to a recent interview by Bret Baier with FOX News this last week. Unlike Cain who couldn’t keep his face off the news, Romney has been relatively quiet off the set of the Primary debates in the fall. This interview almost felt like a ‘behind the scenes’ or ‘backstage’ interview.

The interview has become popular now not because of Romney, but because of the situation that came about during the interview. The interview was very different than what you’d expect from a ‘conservative media affiliate’ interviewing someone they would potentially endorse if Romney wins the Primary. Romney talked back to Baier about “getting his facts right” throughout the interview as Baier questioned Romney persistently on his inconsistency on his policies. Specifically, Romney stumbled over what to do with the 11 million illegal immigrants.

Baier went as far as to reveal after the broadcast was released that Romney approached him after the interview was conducted, saying that he didn’t like Baier’s interview.

I, in some ways, sympathize with Romney . For one, Baier spent a lot of time asking Romney some very insensitive and, frankly, offensive questions. Baier went as far as to ask Romney if he thinks Gingrich would beat Obama out of the White House. …too soon…. That’s like asking a semi-finalist Boxer if his opponent would be able to take down the Heavy Weight Champion of the world. And to Romney’s credit, though he stumbled, he kept a path of communication on issues that he could answer.

I found the whole situation very confusing since it is so late in the game for initial interviews to be conducted it feels like. Romney’s clearly setting an image of himself as the only “economist” in the Primary race, but at the expense of his other policies and weak points being broken down and attacked by the media.

"Cain, Cain, Go Away. Come Again Another Daaayyyy"

After all the accusation, after all the drama, after all the petty little complaints and finger pointing, we are finally able to witness Mr. Cain step down from his GOP campaign for Presidency. Cain has been all the talk recently as he has been accused of sexual misconduct and harassment, and criticized on his economic and immigration plans, and now we are treated to a little bit of silence from his team and the media.

Herman Cain’s attention originated from his own vernacular. I personally thing the funniest thing he said was in an interview in the early fall, saying that he was looking to avoid any “sneak-a-taxes” on the American tax payer, which was then tied all into his 9-9-9 plan. His 9-9-9 plan was the forefront of his campaign pledge and stance. He continually defended the plan, and received a lot of criticism and inquiry from people as he continued to support his plan. The attention was lost on his main plan when he struggled to be as specific with any other issue during the debates in the late fall and early winter.

What is left now are two things- The remember and humor gags of Cain’s campaign is the first. But more importantly, HIS VOTERS are now up for grabs by the other GOP candidates. New Hampshire is coming up in a few months, meaning that the time to gain supporters is NOW. The other Republican candidates are fishing for Cain’s supporters in order to secure a fair chance, and they hope to do so by upsetting the Romney and Gingrich campaigns, who have over the last few weeks have influenced their way to the top of the polls of the Republican race for a Primary winner.

The underdogs, or…just dogs, of this campaign are Michelle Bachmann, Ron Paul, and that other guy… I mean Rick Santorum, and hoping to snack Cain supporters despite their own low percentage rates in the race. The one way I can see this happening is because Cain was a supporter of small government, and hoping the Tea Party supporters would lean toward the Bachmann campaign for her notoriety in it.

What challenges me with the results of Cain’s abandonment of the Primary race is how much energy we focus on him…and for what? A friend of mine refrains from political race talk because he claim’s “it’s too early for anything to matter.” In some ways, yes I agree with him. There is no certain outcome for any of the candidates. After all, the three months of media attention that Cain has received is now irrelevant and will be forgotten about in 2 months. Yet, it is not too early in some ways, for his supporters now have a very difficult task to undertake: they must re-adjust their views to someone else. Refer back to a post I published I think it was last week: our beliefs and ideals make a hollow hold for someone to fit into- a candidate can’t fit the mold perfectly, so we must chose who fits it best. In the next week it will be interesting to see where they readjust and to whom.

(Bonus points for anyone who can write the next line to the Song that is featured in the title of this post!)

Bad Lip Sync

This is quite funny- just a little humor for your Thanksgiving week. If you mute Rick Perry speaking, and try to read his lips, supposidely, this is what it looks like he is saying. Enjoy!

Low Balling Our Priorities

I was walking out of my building with a friend of mine and we were discussing the recent events surrounding the Occupy Wall Street movement. I expressed my own personal views on the matter, and she in turn immediately asked if I was a conservative or a liberal.

Doesn’t that bother you too? What does my views on a movement have anything to do with my political identity.

I’ve decided that we now live in a world known as the “File Cabinet” World. Our society as freaked itself out so much to the point where we need to know where everything goes- we need to know what everything is, how it works, and where we ourselves fit into everything. People like a sense of identity with an opinion, and to know that there are other people who share that opinion. …Is it just me, or does that sound limiting?

With the Republican primaries well on their way, the American public looks on to see which candidates express the ideals and values that are shared with the voter themselves. This is such a controlled environment of forming opinions: we are seriously restricted by the 2 party system.

With the 2 party system, we tend to vote for the candidate that best fits our wardrobe based on our own values and beliefs. But even more so, we need to shrink our ideas to FIT our CANDIDATE. It’s a shame that sometimes we have to cut down our wants and needs to fit a candidate. Suppose a conservative voter also believes in pro-choice, in our present system, that person has to sacrifice their opinion on that matter, since majority of their other values are supported by one party. But by doing so, issues and opinions are never heard or represented in the White House or government. We then turn into a society of dropped matter and indifference. This is where our “my opinion doesn’t matter anyway” disease comes from, because society doesn’t believe in their candidate due to missing representation of ideas that actually hold some merit.

Another way to look at this is to say that we form our ideas based on what is available. If Mr. Jones wants to see a reform in education, but no candidate seems to pay attention to it and rather supports health care reform, how are is Mr. Jones going to fight for his voice to be heard on the importance of educational reform? Probably not too much, since his candidates don’t give his idea that much validity, and that in turn diminishes the importance of the subject until a candidate can actually represent it for Mr. Jones. But until then, Mr. Jones will patiently wait, and settle for someone with any small interest in his belief.

We have a large society in the country, and it is made up of ideas and values of every single American. It’s a shame that we have to limit our priorities simply based on what candidates are available to us. Personally, I’d love to vote for Adam West as president, but until then I will wait patiently for my opinions to be fairly represented in a presidential election.

Pie Charts

When in doubt, just show the Amercan people a good old fashioned pie chart. It's scarey to think that this valid way to show information would be barbaric today if done in this way. Imagine Rick Perry explaining a pie chart! Anyway, here's the clip.

Obama- Student Votes= Trouble

The members of the Obama campaign are trying to square down on their supporters from the 2008 campaign win that sent Obama to the White House. With a majority percentage of his supporters being Hispanic and African American, the second big part of his supporters came from young people- college and post college students. As many people in society are aware, the University student can be one of the most opinionated, and supportive person a politician, idea, or movement can have.

There was a recent article I discovered in the New York Times which interviewed students from several different American Colleges, and asked them if they still would vote for Obama in the upcoming election. The conclusion I drew from it is that Obama has lost some of his most powerful supporters.

I think back to when I was a freshmen in college and the election was taking place, and how the “Obama Boom” took over the entire college. It was almost as if you HAD to vote for Obama simply because you were in college. However, 4 years later, the generation of University students that originally voted for him are now in a very different place in their lives. In four years, 2008 student voters find themselves not in a classroom- but in the job field, not in a dorm room- but in a home, not in a school system- but THE system.

One of the students interviewed in the  NY Times discussed how she was an active volunteer for the Obama campaign, doing all sorts of jobs to help in any way she can. Now, students like her are skeptical on whether or not they got what they voted for. Now comes a time in their life where these things matter- where good health care matters- where having a job matters. And it is not just a commentary or opinion matter anymore. After graduating college, graduates can’t enjoy the comfort of forming opinions and taking stances on things that they don’t have to live through themselves.

Students need jobs. America needs jobs. Does Obama expect to keep a majority of his student supporters when now they are actually part of his unemployed pool of potential voters?

“Yet even Mr. Obama’s supporters say it seems unlikely that the president- given the difficulties of these past three years and mood of the electorate of all ages- will ever be able to replicate the youthful energy that became such a defining hallmark of his campaign.” Says the article written by Adam Nagourney.

I’m not sure how much this has hit my own University yet, but I do know that my own thoughts are squirreling around. How much longer do we need to wait in order for change to actually happen?  

Romney Economic Goal

 Remember this guy??!! The Rent is Too Damn High Party in the New York 2010 debate? Check it out

So as The Rent is Too Damn High party leader Jimmy McMillian says, there are very realistic problems with our economy. Yes, problems that expand out of just the struggles to pay the rent. Though his argument is very funny, aren’t there some real issues that he is skimming on? He mentions people getting laid off, families not being able to afford the basic necessities of life. What it comes down to is the creation of jobs and the rebuilding of the American economy.

Mitt Romney has been out of the spot light for a little bit now, but none the less, has still some potent ideas for boosting the jobs and economy. Romney, a business man in his own right, has proposed a jobs plan on his website that introduces plans for this “Day One” plan. “Day One” is a promise of 5 acts he plans on taking on his first day in office.

One of which is to reduce the income tax to 25%, entitled the American Competitiveness Act, and having a free trade agreement with Colombia, Panama and South Korea through the Open Markets Act. There are several other things listed that he intends to do on his first day in office including an order to eventually end Obamacare and empowering American Businesses and workers by reversing Obama’s orders favoritism of organized labor, even as far as government construction projects.

The overall goal of Romney’s Day One plan of action is listed on his website as: “The goal: restore America to the path of robust economic growth necessary to create jobs.” In general, Romney is looking for a way to get the government out of the way of the economy.

What I have trouble with is that Romney is an economist, not a politician. And many believe there are two ways to see Romney’s approach to getting into office. It’s a little nerve racking to see a businessman sitting in the seat meant for a huge political figure. After all, we’re trying to re work a country, not a business. However, the biggest concern on the American public’s mind is the economy. If this is the case, doesn’t it seem appealing to have someone who understands money and the economy in that position of power in order to create the buffer between big government and business? After all, it is not an uncommon thing to mix match the political seat with a someone of none political background per say. In the after effects of the Korean War, the American people elected Five Star General Eisenhower into office.

Perhaps we still don’t know what we want, but we need to prioritize what is important to us right now. Is it really healthcare? What hurts more right now, the other issues, or the economy. Romney still remains quiet on this front, but who knows how long that will last.  Romney may not be an "expert in karate" like Jimmy, but he knows rent is still too damn high.

What Should We Look for in a Debate?

John Buckley offers some insight on why the Presidential Debates are very important in the election process. In reference to the 1988 election, he says that people should be given clear ideas by the candidates, for this is a forecast to what the public will expect on a daily basis if their candidate is elected. Though he speaks specifically for 1988, these ideas are very important today, and hopefully still hold water.

Vice President Debate 1984

This segment is pretty interesting. I'm very drawn to Vice President Bush's tone in how he answers this question on the Soviet Union and international weapons control. I'm trying to remember if the vigor was there in our most recent debates, even on the Vice President level.

1984 Immigration

Why does this all sound so familiar? It's kind of crazy to think that exactly what they are talking about in terms of Immigration are very similar to what we've heard so far in the primaries. When will something get done? The issues if yesterday and those of today.

Perry Ummmmmm

This last week at the Republican Debate, Rick Perry stunned the crowd when he forgot some very vital information on his own government plan. He was speaking on what government agencies he would eliminate if he was elected President: Commerce, Education, and Ummm.

Maybe he’s fooling us. For all I know, “Ummm” is an actual agency. I think it has something to do with the agency that oversees the investigation into bigfoot in the mountains of America. “Ummm…?”

Anyway, Perry had an epic brain fart. He clearly passed all the qualifications for his blunder to be recognized as a fart- 1) Surprised that it happened 2) Laugh because you farted 3) React to people based on how they react to the fart. It’s fact.

Perry didn’t try to cover up the fact that he forgot what the third agency is. He actually asked himself out loud what the third one was. Other candidates began to shout in different names, the loudest being the EPA. When EPA was heard, Perry simply agreed that the EPA was what he intended so he could feel less awkward. It was a quick bail out and reaction to the brain fart based on someone’s reaction.

The seriousness of the moment came when the moderator continued to hound Perry on what the third agency actually was, to which Perry replied “I can’t. The third one, I can’t. Sorry. Oops.”

We often look at our presidential candidates are super powered people, who need to be perfect in order to run a country. We look for a seamless version of an all knowing and wise person to take the oval office. And through these expectations, we forget that they are human beings too.

This whole Perry slip moment at the debate has made me think about what our standards are for “mistakes”. When people discuss Hermain Cain, some are disgusted at his sexual accusations, or the possibility that he had done something like that. Some people don’t excuse his comments on building an electric fence. However, though embarrassing, I feel as though Perry took his slip gracefully, and we are in the process of excusing his mistake and branding it as simply a mistake. It’s not the greatest thing to see a front runner completely lose their train of thought, but that’s why presidents read off a teleprompter in real life. Perry’s slip was disheartening and disappointing, but I have to admit, I think it’s understandable. If anything it showed such a human side to him- off script, off agenda.

I said before that Perry handled the situation with grace. The next night, Perry appeared on Late Night with David Letterman and did the famous Top 10 Countdown. Perry presented the “Top 10 Rick Perry Excuses”. And all with good humor and recognition that it was a genuine mistake. How do you think the public sees Perry since then, now that he’s been out from behind the podium, and embracing his faults and humor?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pz7JDSW0u8

Pulling the Country Forward

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57320162/bogle-tough-sentences-would-keep-execs-in-line/?tag=contentBody;cbsCarousel

I was watching the CBS Evening News today, and there was a very interesting segment that was featured. I encourage everyone to watch this 5 minute segment. Think about it. Thank you, CBS, for actually featuring something with substance.

Cartoons!

Political cartoons have always been a big part of American politics. However, now they have become "ambient", sometimes over looked at the power they have at portraying our political figures online, in news papers, and reflecting on current events surrounding these candidates. Here's a quick example of this form of (entertaining and creative) media

Google in Washington

A few words on GOOGLE. We are all familiar with the power of google. But in terms of media, this discussion is on how google because a distributor of news, but separates the buyer from the provider. Also discusses the easily accessable data that cannot be found with newspapers anymore.

Flashback

This is Matt Drudge, who is an independant journalist and online writer. This is from the late 90s when the media was shifting from majority paper press, to an internet outlet. He discusses the benefits of (early) internet journaling and how it operates with newspapers.

Fun Facts

I’ve realized that I’m falling into a little trap. More often than not, when people talk about the American Political System, people feel the need to become cynical. And frankly, I’m sick of hearing this dumb “self pity” American perspective. Listen people- cut your whining and your moping. Crying over the things you disagree with will not change the system, if you feel it needs change, nor will it elect a president.

And it’s this mentality that I feel I, and other bloggers, are tempted to go toward- and not necessarily because we are criticizing anything, but because it’s easier to write from that perspective. So, in honor of breaking that trend, this little blog is on some fun facts I came across in an article by Colleen Kane of CNBC.com. Here are some information on our Republican candidates’ homes and estates.

According to the article, Mitt Romney owns the most estate out of all the candidates. Specifically, his lodge in Utah is quite impressive. Romney bought the house for over 5 million dollars. The lodge itself is equipped with 9.5 bathrooms, 7 bedrooms, and 9,500 square feet.  Yes…9,500 square feet. This is not the only property that Romney owns- in 2009 Romney owned 4 other estates.

Another interesting house to take a look at is Michele Bachmann’s! She bought her 4 bedroom, 4 bathroom home in 2008 in Minnesota. At that time, the home was worth $760,000. Her home now overlooks the 18^th hole of a StoneRidge Golf Course. The house itself looks like an “extreme makeover” home. Unfortunately, Romney still beats her out in the square footage, where she only stands with 5,200 square feet.

Now here is my all time favorite candidate house. Though only a 3 bathroom house, with just over 5,000 square feet, Rick Santorum’s home in Virginia actually made me laugh. Though his home is gorgeous, you can tell he doesn’t spend much time outside… In 2007, his house cost $850,000.

So there are three homes that, otherwise, are just a little bit of fun facts about some of our candidates. But what I’m actually interested in is what the houses say about the candidates. For example, look above at Santorum’s house. It’s exactly who he is, right? Kind of bland- dry cereal in the morning- plenty of room but not much going on around it. Honestly, it’s a house that would be passed and unrecognized too. Unfortunately in my opinion, that is Santorum in a nutshell: a candidate that is kind of on the back burner. Romney’s house is the other interesting item on our list of personality homes. We know Romney to be the business man, a corporate man. His houses certainly reflect the image of a wealthy business man with the luxury of being and working in an upper-class system.

I’m not taking credibility away from any of the candidates here. I’m offering that these little fun facts can maybe hold water in a case for the way a candidate is. “The way you do one thing is the way you do everything” is a phrase that automatically comes to mind when I see these fun facts. If anything, they are consistent with the people we are seeing in the Primary debates right now.

http://realestate.yahoo.com/promo/homes-of-the-gop-candidates.html

Cigarette, anyone????

I was watching the Letterman Show the other night with my dad, and Letterman brought to Herman Cain’s most recently advertisement. I may have never been more dumbfounded in my life. For those who have not seen it, it features Mark Block – Cain’s chief of staff- stars in the leading role. He discusses the campaign himself, and offers that Cain’s promises will bring a unity to the country and other wonderful things. The best piece of action is by the last 10 seconds of the 1 minute clip, Mark Block takes a drag from his cigarette, while looking directly at the camera. That image then transitions to Herman Cain smiling. Check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5lfsENdYzU

As expected, people have gone crazy over the image of Block smoking on screen in such a big advertisement. It may just be part of the ideological trend Americans are on right now. What I mean is this- 40 years ago, majority of people smoked cigarettes and cigars on screen. Now today, with new information on the effects and image of smoking, very little is seen of it. It is almost kept as a personal secret. However, thousands have lashed out at the Cain campaign and criticized their strategy. I found a clip of Cain defending the ad, saying that they believe in “let Block be Block”, and capture the image of the true person that they are. He admits they didn’t expect such attention from the 1 minute advertisement.  Check his response out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_L9CiWsxoo&feature=related

The image of Block smoking in the end of the video has done no good for the campaign. If anything, it’s hurt it and brought to light just how little his team considers before advertizing Herman Cain. What’s funny is, I’ve already forgotten what Block said in the beginning of the commercial. All I remember is his cigarette. No, it doesn’t mean that they endorse smoking. But by presenting it in such a fashion, it gives the impression that the campaign does.

When it comes to ads, you don’t want your ad to cause someone’s mind to wander against what you are selling. For example, everything in the commercial needs to reflect what you are selling. Let’s face it; a “SLAPCHOP” is really exciting! And so is their spokesman. It’s a clear image of what you are selling and makes me believe that it is an exciting product. The Cain ad has caused people’s minds to wander about why that image is so inconsistent with anything Cain represents.

The first thing that came to my mind was that a tobacco company has given the campaign money and they need to represent their brand. My second impression was that they’re all incredibly inexperienced commercial managers.

Having an ad that starts with a testimonial on Cain’s strengths, and ending with cigarette smoking is like mixing Apples and Oranges.... and that just doesn’t work.

Bachmann's Borders

I’ve been looking up a lot of information on Bachmann right now, specifically on her views on Immigration. It’s funny that we consider Immigration an issue, despite our nation’s history with immigration. Let’s face it, majority of our families cannot be traced back prior to the 1800s. And if yours can, then that’s awesome! My family came from Puglia, Italy. I also had some family come from Austria.

But historically speaking, our country grew out of immigrants. For New York specifically, New York City comprised of Dutch, German, Irish, English, and African American in the early 1700s! Only until recently in the last couple decades has Immigration been a serious problem in the American eye.

Though we’ve progressed and found dignified ways to discuss the issue, the first thing that comes to mind when someone mentions “immigration” is building a fence. How primal. In fact, Michele Bachmann has outspokenly committed to building a fence along the entire southern border of the country. In doing so, she believes this will prevent illegal immigrants from entering the country from Mexico via land. The sense is this action would be done on a national level, or making it a nation action of sovereignty and control. However, she also begs for the government to support State’s action in the fight against illegal immigration, to such degrees as Arizona’s state immigration enforcement.

But yes she knows that stopping illegal immigration takes more than a fence. She has taken a stance on denying benefits that attract aliens to America in the first place. In a GOP debate, she mentions student discounts and commercial job opportunities as a main attraction, or magnetism, is a main drive for people to come to this country illegally. As far as pathway to citizenship, she opposes the process of granting citizenship to those who’ve worked and lived in here illegally and rewarding them with citizenship.

What boggles my mind over the whole question of immigration is that they AUTOMATICALLY think of Mexico as the problem. Though there are more illegal people coming from there, don’t you think it’s unfair to put up a border on ONE land border, and not the other one? I think there’s something really messed up about that. Think of our northern border, is there a problem up there with illegal immigration? There are roughly 70,000 illegal Canadian immigrants here, working jobs and not paying taxes. Am I sickened to say think that no one thinks of this as part of the problem because Canadian immigrants white? ….

That statement may seem horrible to assume or even publish here, but I find it to be an interesting topic of discussion. What if millions of people were coming from Canada? What if Canada was transporting illegal drugs through their border too? Would we build a wall up there? Would Bachmann grant them citizenship? I’m not entirely sure myself.

Media Network Bias

VERY good clip about the media and bias opinions in major networks in terms of the national coverage of presidential elections. He states that there are very little conclusions made on news converage simply because each network upholds their own ideological opinion. Check it out!