Filibuster Proof

I'm sure that those of you who follow politics are aware that the last couple races for the Senate are extremely close. The Democrats need to win out in order to have a filibuster proof majority (sixty seats). Supposedly sixty is the golden number. I'm not a big fan of Al Franken so I could care less if he loses and I really do not know the candidates from Georgia. My post is to point out how ridiculous filibustering is.

Filibustering, to my knowledge, has been going on since this country was founded. I recall hearing about someone reading from a dictionary for hours. All to avoid voting. It just doesn't make sense to me. Why is this still being allowed? Filibustering seems like a juvenile way of avoiding your opponents. I hope that filibustering becomes illegal or that it just fades away into history because it does not help our country.

How Angry?

How angry will Hillary Clinton supporters be if it turns out she is not offered Secretary of State? Almost fifty people have been interviewed for the job by Obama, but I would be shocked if she did not get the nod. It is almost as if Obama is required to offer her the job, unless he wants to divide his party. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

I'm a little disgusted that the media got a hold of this story because it could inhibit Obama from selecting the best person for the job. I am not saying that Hillary is not this person, but I do not want a high position, such as Secretary of State, given to someone to appease a constituency.

Election Day

It's election day, get off your chair and go vote.

ACORN

ACORN is a community based organization that has been around since 1970. They have recently been under scrutiny for their involvement in what some have labeled as voter fraud. ACORN is being investigated because they have registered fake names, dead people, and some people more than once. While this is illegal, can it really be called voter fraud? ACORN is a non-partisan organization (although they are on the more liberal side of the spectrum as a whole). Their problems with fraudulent registrations was not a attempt to steal an election.

The motive behind the fraudulent registrations was simply their employees trying to earn more money. ACORN is at fault for this because they pay their workers by how many voters they register. Obviously this is a bad idea. I would not call this voter fraud, I'd call it stupidity. It's important to note the difference. Labeling it voter fraud is misleading.

Proposition 8

In this country, church and state are separate entities. Marriage is not solely a religious ceremony, this is obvious because we are in fact voting on the definition of marriage in November. If marriage were solely a religious ceremony, people would not need to get marriage licenses before getting married. Religious people who think homosexuality is a sin should take into account that not everyone in this country holds this view. These people should think about how they would feel if they were forced to abide by the rules of someone else’s religion. That would be absurd. Morality should not be legislated because it is not our government’s role to protect us from god.

Same sex marriage should be allowed in this country because it is not harmful to anyone. If something is not harmful, why should it be illegal? Many proposition eight proponents have argued that religions can be sued if they do not allow homosexual couples to be married in their buildings. This is a fabricated argument to justify their position. If there has been a successful lawsuit religions would in fact have their freedom of religion infringed upon. However, I have yet to see any such case because such a lawsuit would be unconstitutional.

Proposition 8 proponents have also claimed that schools will teach our children that same-sex marriage is okay. Their “beef” is not that same-sex marriage is legal, it is with the curriculum for enforcing teachers to teach about morality. Morality should be taught in the home, not the school. This rationale is not a reason to ban same-sex marriage, it is gimmick to get same-sex marriage banned.

Passing proposition 8 will infringe on the rights of law-abiding citizens. Homosexuals have the right to be happy just like anyone else. They should not be treated any differently under the law. If you do not see this as a civil-rights issue, you are only kidding yourself. Civil unions are not the same as marriage. Separate but equal is not equality at all.

Bill Ayers and Why He Does't Matter in this Election

Bill Ayers is was a member of the Weather Underground, a group responsible for many bombings forty years ago , including one at the pentagon. Before the Weather Undergroung, he was the leader of a non-militant group called the Students for a Democratic Society.

The WU were a confused bunch of left-wing activist that evolved from the SDS. The WU had noble ideas that they tried to accomplish using foolish tactics. Protesting the Vietnam war by bombing government buildings is no way to accomplish anything. Bill Ayers was part of this group and is not exempt from these attacks.

After these attacks, Bill Ayers became an elementary education activist. His recent work is for a noble cause, a cause that he recruited Obama to help him with.

The sound bite, "We didn't do enough" is a statement grossly taken out of context. This statement was a response to a question about his involvement in protesting the Vietnam war. The soundbite we all have heard many times is a complete distortion of Bill Ayers' position. In fact, he wrote a letter to a city lawyer (Richard Elrod) injured in an attack made by the weatherman to express his condolences. The lawyer is quoted as saying that Bill Ayers was "Remorseful".

We know Obama and Ayers knew each other more than Obama expressed to at first. If Obama is going to be attacked, attack him here for not being completely honest. Don't attack him for knowing this man, in fact, Obama said his actions in the WU were dispicable. They were on a board together to improve the community, not to blow things up.

Rowdy Crowds

The media is beginning to show more clips of rowdy crowds at both presidential rallies. After hearing one of these remarks, McCain stopped for a second to address the issue. He said that he knew Obama was ultimately a good guy. Very big of McCain to calm down a rowdy crowd at a rally. I commend McCain for that.

My issue is not with the candidates, or even those spewing the hatred at these rallies. My problem is when people shake it off and say, "well the other side does it too." Big deal, it still happens and should not be ignored. My biggest objection is with people like Michelle Malkin and her drones who comment on her blog. People who point fingers and say things like, "that's what liberals do" or, "what would you expect from a Republican" are too blind to see any issue for what it truly is. Generalizations hold no truth.

2nd Presidential Debate

In your opinion who won? What were Obama and McCain's strong points?

The V.P. Debate

In a few minutes, the V.P. debate is going to start. Biden is expected to blow Palin out of the water. That being said, the Republicans played this perfectly because now, she has low expectations. I saw a clip of her debate before she became the Alaskan Governor and she did very well. If Biden does now win by a large margin, Palin wins the debate due to handicap.

The moderater has also been quite controversial. She supposedly is an Obama supporter. I think she should have stepped down from her spot not because she will be unfair, but because it will take away a lot of confusion. This way the right could not use this as an excuse if their candidate does not perform too well.

Overall, I think this debate is going to be very exciting because it is the only V.P. debate, so both candidates will be leaving everything on the table. I hope both candidates remain civil, with both sides using nothing but fact to make their arguments.

Last night's debate

Last night's debate was a spirited exchange and ultimately I think it resulted in a tie. Both candidates performed equally well, and there wasn't a great sound byte that the modern media can't live without. I believe Obama got the better of McCain while debating the economy and McCain was the clear winner in debating foreign policy.

On the foreign policy side, I would have liked to see Obama hammer McCain a bit more on the initial vote to go into Iraq. He made the point, but it was overshadowed by McCain's focus on the success of the surge. In my opinion, Obama has a foreign policy issue about which history has proven him right with opposing the war from the start. He should have hammered it home.

On the economy, McCain allowed Obama to play the left's classic game of class warfare while discussing the McCain tax cuts and the sub-prime crisis. Moreover, he didn't challenge Obama at all when Obama stated that this credit crunch is the cause of deregulation. This is a hotly contested topic between economic interventionists and advocates of the free market, and allowing him to say that unchallenged allowed Obama to state it like it was fact. If McCain doesn't squash this populist overtone early in the debate on economic policy, he is in for a long night and doesn't stand much of chance of winning that debate. A Republican candidate cannot win a debate on economics if he concedes the merits of free market capitalism simply because of tough economic times. Ask George H.W. Bush how that works....from 90%+ approval rating to losing an election to a virtually unknown governor from Arkansas.

The MOST interesting thing about this debate in my opinion, is the amount of misinformation both candidates spread about their opponents. I took a look at fact check to see what they are saying about the debate. I have linked it here. for those who are interested. It is truly astounding what they get wrong....even about themselves!!

Palin vs. Biden

I am wondering when we will stop nominating least-common-denominator candidates to lead us...or better yet, dump the two-party system altogether.

Quick quiz:

What's more ridiculous?

Sarah Palin's pathetic "I have foreign policy experience because my state borders Russia" statement

OR

this moronic (yet hilarious) gem from gaff master extraordinaire, Joe Biden?

The Debate

Today, McCain announced he will suspend his campaign to focus on the economic tribulations. He is also seeking to have the debate scheduled for Friday postponed but Obama has yet to approve.

To find this out was truly angering; I'm tired of politicians pulling cheap political stunts to win over voters. I would not be upset if the debate was postponed for a good reason, but what does McCain plan on doing instead of facing off with Obama? What could postponing the debate possibly do to make this economy better?

If Obama caves and agrees to postpone the debate and suspend his campaign, I will lose my faith in his "new politician" image. He has already started to revert to the old style of politics, but this would be the last straw for me.

Voting

This was posted on a different thread and I thought it would be appropriate to post on the front page. If you are unsure at all about your voter status please visit this site.

Mark

Also, I'm pretty sure the deadline to register is October 20th.

[Subject] StateDemocracy.org Equips You for the 2008 Elections

Dear Citizen:
Are you ready yet for the November 4th Elections? How about your friends, family, and neighbors?
More Americans are expected to vote this year than ever before in history, so don’t be left out! Be sure to ask everyone you know the following questions:
 Are you registered to vote? If you moved recently, have you updated your voter registration?
 Did you apply for an Absentee Ballot? Do you know your state may not require any reason?
 Can you find your local Polling Place? Do you know it may have changed from last time?
The answers to these questions -- and all your voting needs -- can be found at www.StateDemocracy.org -- the FREE 1-Stop citizen empowerment portal that Delivers Democracy to your Desktop! StateDemocracy is among the Internet’s first (since 2001) and most encompassing civic empowerment tools.
In order to boost voter participation this year, StateDemocracy.org is offering FREE widgets for all 50 states. You can simply download and embed these widgets into your own website so your visitors can register to vote, get an absentee ballot or find their local polling place.
Lobby Congress Via StateDemocracy

Sincerely,
Ken Laureys, Executive Director
StateDemocracy Foundation
Ken.Laureys@StateDemocracy.org

VP Bounce

Which vice presidential candidate has helped the ticket the most?

Obama's vp choice was announced in the middle of the night after a day full of media speculation. McCain announced his vp the day after Obama gave his acceptance speech; steeling the spotlight of media attention. McCain unarguably had the better timing. Biden was an expected pick; not very exciting. Palin was a historical pick that the media is still buzzing about. Again, McCain's pick wins the media spotlight. Palin also helps McCain pander to disgruntled Hilarry supporters, another big bonus after a week that was supposed to reconcile the party at the national convention. Overall, I believe McCain will win more voters with his vp choice.

I have already mentioned in an earlier post that my posisition is vp choices should be chosen to help the nation; not to win an election. I, as an Obama supporter, am hopeful the nation will eventual see why Palin was chosen; to pander and receive votes. Obama has lost all momentum and I hope the debates are going to be a turning point in this presidential race.

Lipstick

After Palin made her comment about the difference between a hockey-mom and a pitbull, Obama said, "Well you can put lipstick on a pig." At first glance this would seem like a despicable attack on Palin. At a closer glance it is obvious Obama's comment was not directed in any way at Sarah Palin.

McCain tried to paint it that way by calling for an apology from Barack Obama. Of course Obama has nothing to apolize about since he was not in the wrong. McCain should apologize to Obama for his blatant lies.

No Right to Health Care

While watching Senator Obama on the stump this morning in Pennsylvania, he kept talking about working families and their right to health care.

Hmm, a right to another tax-payer picking up the tab for your health care? I don't recall reading anything about health care in the Constitution / Bill of Rights. That's because you do not have the right to health care. The founding fathers never intended that the President of the United States would sponsor a program that takes wealth from one tax-payer in order to pay for a welfare program for another citizen. That's redistribution of wealth...fine for China, not for the United States.

Moreover, the very idea that government can administer an efficient and low cost health care program is laughable. I can't think of a single industry in which government got involved and the price went down. Nor can I think of one industry where the level of service remained the same as in the private sector after government got involved...ever been to the Department of Motor Vehicles?

Sarah Palin

Bristol Palin, daughter of the Republican presumptive vice presidential nominee, is pregnant at seventeen years old. How is this relevant to the current presidential race? Some are saying it reflects and Gov. Palin's ability to run an office, because she clearly cannot run her own household. How ridiculous is that? If that is the argument, why is this even an issue?

Barack Obama said it himself and defended Bristol Palin claiming, "the families of the candidates are off-limits." End of story.

Now the claim that Obama is inexperienced is called into question with this v.p. pick. McCain continuelly makes claims that Obama is clearly not capable of being the president because he does not have the experience. Republicans are still making this claim in spite of the v.p. pick. Some even go far as to say Palin has more experience than Obama. Lets take a minute to compare their resumes.

Obama:
U.S. senate; 2004-present
Illinois senate; in 1996-2004

Palin:
Governor of Alaska; 2006-present
Wasilla Mayer; 1996-2002
Wasilla City Counsel; 1992-1996

Joe Biden

I hear a lot of people criticizing the choice to choose Biden to be Barack's running mate. I have heard people saying he will bring nothing to the ticket. Do people actually believe this?

Whether that is true or not doesn't matter too much. My point is vice presidents shouldn't be picked on the basis of winning over voters; they should be chosen by measureing how they will perform in office. I comend Obama for his choice in this moderate democrat because he was chosen not because he will nod his head and smile at everyone of his ideas. He chose him because he has the ability to challenge him.

Recognizing Racism

There is no getting around it; some people will vote for Obama because he is half-black and some people will not be voting for him for the same reason. The people that fall in these categories are irresponsible. Voters should be voting based on character and policy.

It bothers me every time I hear someone (Ann Colter mostly) call Barrack Obama by his middle name; Hussein. When asked why they use his middle name, most respond; "because it is his name, why can't I use it?" It is obvious why they use the name; it is to spark fear in people.

A Clinton supporter stood up at the DNC and yelled "Hussein, Hussein!" He was later interviewed.

"We just finished getting rid of a guy named Hussein in Iraq and why are we trying to elect someone with the same name?" said Zhivotovsky. "Everybody thinks if you're against Obama you're racist."

It is apparent this guy is a racist. And I'm sure Obama supporters do not label all McCain supporters as racists, only the ones who use his race agaisnt him.

The "Born Alive" Scandal

There has been a lot of talk about Barack Obama voting against a bill to protect children that born alive after a botched abortion. Many are criticizing him for not protecting these children, claiming he would rather let them die than helping them. This accusation is false. The bill he voted against was not necessary, considering there was already legislation in Illinois that required these children to be cared for. Many other people voted agaisnt the bill, including some pro-choice Republicans.

For more information about this click here.

Obama's VP decision

He has chosen, who do you think it will be? I think he will choose Biden. I guess Hilary is back in the VP talks, but I doubt she will be put on the ticket.

McCain is also trying to select his VP. He has promised to choose a guy with his same values, implying that he will choose a Pro-Life candidate. Even after this claim, Leiberman's name still comes up in talks. I think if he chooses Leiberman, he will lose credibility and thus lose the election by a landslide.

If you would like state who you think it will be go ahead!

Flip-flopping on Issues

When and when it is not okay.

Whenever I hear a pundit accuse a politician of flip-flopping I laugh. It is funny to me that politicians are not allowed to change their minds on issues. Why can't these people have a change of heart? It is okay for anyone to change their mind on an issue if they have received new information. But, it is not okay for candidates to change their mind on an issue to pander for votes.

Abortion Policy

This is an issue that I do not pretend to have an answer to. People are always going to have different feelings about it. I do not believe that policy should be passed to eliminate abortions in our country. My reasons for this are as follows:

1) People have different morals. How can a government legislate ones moral over another's?

2) Abortions are going to happen anyway. True, the number of abortions will drop considerably. But abortions are in turn going to be preformed in a more dangerous manner.

3) Possible health risks to the mother.

An Essay on the Potential of the Internet

Revolutionary Medium

The Internet is the newest medium in which people can attain information. More people are getting their daily news from the internet instead of other mediums, such as newspapers and television. Those who use the internet have access to vast amounts of information. Unlike television, the internet allows users the ability to search for what they want, instead of limiting them to what is on it at any specific time. The internet allows its users to engage in conversation and political debate, a feature the television and the newspaper do not offer. The internet does not undermine political participation; it takes participation to the next level by allowing people from all types of backgrounds to engage in political discussion through weblogs and online forums.

The internet is the only media source that allows regular people to discuss any type of issue. Anyone can get online and discuss current events through forums, discussion boards, and weblogs. Online forums give citizens who want to have a greater participation in politics the ability to do so. They can contribute more than just their vote by participating in online discussions on any news network websites. People can give their opinions, anonymously or not, on websites that potentially hundreds or even thousands of people will read.

Watching television and reading printed newspaper do not permit people to voice their opinion. These forms of media decide what they are going to report, giving the people receiving the news little choice in what they learn. People attaining their information on the internet are able to choose what they view. Additionally, they are able to discuss what they have just viewed, depending on which website hosted the news. A survey, conducted by Annenberg School for Communication, showed that eighty percent of internet users age seventeen and older considered the internet to be an important source of information. Television, radio, and printed newspapers polled at sixty-eight percent or less (Annenberg 2008 Report 84).

Internet usage invites civic engagement. Users can access the internet at any time during the day. Newspapers update only once a day and television does not consistently report news throughout the day. News usually reports on television in the mornings and throughout the evening. Twenty-one percent of people surveyed in the Annenberg 2008 Report say they have cancelled newspaper subscription because they receive the same content online (79). This statistic shows that the same information in printed newspapers is available online, making the newspaper less valuable. The internet helps people to become informed about political issues because it forces users to become more literate; internet increases the likelihood of voting (Mossberger 27).

Weblogs are an effective method to publish ones views. Creating a weblog is a simple and free process, which allows its authors to publish anything they would like to write (Shirkey 40). Weblogs can be used to express political views, to discuss class projects, or even to tell the readers about ones weekend. Clay Shirkey claims that bloggers are more successful when they post weblogs for their friends to read instead of posting the same blog designed for the public to read. He asserts that having friends read the submission gives the feeling of a conversation. Weblogs take political participation to the next level by allowing the user to do more than just take in knowledge; it lets them express feelings and opinions as well.

Current.com is a perfect example of how the internet allows its users to engage in politics through this new medium. The viewers run the site; it is up to them to post the stories that are then voted on by the rest of the Current community. These votes decide what stories are most pertinent and worthy of viewing which helps to keep the quality of material viewed up. After the stories are submitted, people can choose to view them and even participate in discussions about them. This site promotes regular people to be journalists, which allow the material to cover anything newsworthy. Brazen Pantic claims that professional journalists are paid to cover what sells, which could lead to important stories being left out of the media because they are not sensational enough (57). Current journalists have no personal agenda; what sells has no relevance because they are not paid by how many views they receive. This ensures Current users will cover any newsworthy topic, even if it is not popular.

Many other websites share the same concept. Facebook groups allow users to discuss practically any topic. Youtube permits people to discuss videos. These sites share the concept of discussion that Current has, allowing its viewers to give their opinions, which could eliminate biases because any view can be voiced. The viewers engage in conversation with each other, which allows them to debate what is being viewed.

Search engines can be a valuable resource when researching virtually any topic. Some would argue that the information found using search engines are inaccurate and unreliable. It is true that some informational sites are unreliable sources, but it is easy to sort out the accurate from the inaccurate. Little additional research about the viability of the information can deem the source reliable or not. In order for people to effectively use the internet, they need to sort out the bad information from the good.

Online forums and weblogs connect people across the country. People, that were previously unable to, can now engage in conversation (Payne). This enables people with vastly different lives to talk with one-another, an ability that is not easy to do without the internet. This is important because this is a way for Americans to connect across the country. It allows Democrats to unite with fellow Democrats, and Republicans to unite with fellow Republicans. It also creates a place where people can debate topics that they would not normally be able to debate.

The internet provides a more in depth coverage of events than any other form of media. News programs often advise their viewers to seek additional information on their website when they are unable to cover every aspect of a story on the air. News shows are given an allocated amount of time and are not always able to cover every current event in the designated time. If a person is watching the news and wants a greater understanding of a topic, it would be more time consuming waiting for the topic to come on the air than to go online to seek the information. The television can be a quick way of getting current events, but the internet is a far superior source for receiving the full story.

Television stations can have a biased analysis of the news. Some television stations do not give both sides to important issues, this can be remedied by going online to receive other opinions on the same issue. Manuel Castells suggests that media politics create scandal politics, claiming that “negative messages are much more effective than positive messages” (142). I agree with this statement, I would rather receive news that has actual meaning. This type of news can be found on the internet when the media is reporting scandal politics, unbiased news has to be sought out.
Technology is formed around the needs of the people who use it (Castells 136). The internet improves civic engagement by giving the people a new medium in which to communicate. The internet has the same capabilities the television and newspaper with the additional ability to discuss the news country and worldwide. If this did not attribute to our needs, it would be a fad and would have died out. The fact is, forums and weblogs are revolutionary methods of conveying personal opinion. The internet invites political participation by offering more ways for the user to participate in politics.



Works Cited

Annenberg 2008 Report: Annual Internet Survey by the Center for the Digital Future. Annenberg School for Communication. 2008. 73-84.

Castells, Manuel. The Network Society: From Knowledge to Policy. Washington DC: Center for Transatlantic Relations. 135-146.

Mossberger, Karen, Caroline Tolbert, and Ramona McNeal. Digital Citizenship. Cambridge: The MIT Press. 25-34.

Pantic, Drazen. “Anybody Can Be TV.” Reformatting Politics. Ed. Jon Anderson. New York: Taylor and Francis Group, 2006. 55-66.

Payne, Will. Lecture. UC Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz. 25 Apr. 2008.

Shirkey, Clay. “Power Laws, Weblogs, and Inequality.” Reformatting Politics. Ed. Jon Anderson. New York: Taylor and Francis Group, 2006. 35-42.

The Corporate Media

It is no surprise to anyone that Fox News is a right-wing news station. Likewise, it is no news that MSNBC is a left-wing news station. My question is; is this a problem? And if so, what cant hey do to fix it.

My view is; corporate news stations should not hide behind their non-partisan claims. They should be up front about it so they do not pass what they say off as facts. This will allow the viewers to make a better choice about current issues without being led astray.

$5 Million a Year is Rich

Those of you who watched the Saddleback Forum witnessed McCain make this ridiculous comment that people are defined as rich if they make at least $5 million a year; but he was obviously joking. There was no doubt he said it in jest.

Barack Obama later commented on McCain's remark as if it was what McCain actually thought to be true. He covered his bases by saying, "Maybe he was joking." This was a cheap trick that does not serve his "New Politics" claim. I was hoping that Obama was serious when he claimed that he was going to introduce a new way to run politics. Perhaps he is another typical polititian.

Same Sex Marraige

Why shouldn't SSM be allowed? How can people deny others their rights? The role of the government (obviously in my eyes) is to protect their people from physical danger. This is an umbrella definition because this can be from any number of things, such as; violence, poor financial situations, theft, and even oppression. The government should not be responsible for spiritual protection, which is why our constitution states that we should separate the church and the state. Religous beliefs do not belong in politics.

What is the harm in allowing all people the ability to marry whom they want?

If you want to, please feel free to comment.