Grand-Slam to the "Man"

As most readers know, many business owners across the country were hanging on to every word on election night anxiously awaiting the outcome of 2012 presidential election. This widespread attention was followed by many policy changes once the world learned that President Obama would hold his seat as the President of the United States.

Because the President had been re-elected for a second term, many of his policies would soon be in full effect in the coming year. This includes the so-named “Obamacare” healthcare option enacted by the 2008 Obama term.

Many small businesses have shown their distaste for the Act to fully be put in place in 2013. Denny’s franchise owner, John Metz, has taken his disapproval one step further by publicly announcing an added surcharge at all of his franchises.

Metz has chosen to add a 5% surcharge to all of his checks starting in 2014, and has stated, "If I leave the prices the same, but say on the menu that there is a 5 percent surcharge for Obamacare, customers have two choices. They can either pay it and tip 15 or 20 percent, or if they really feel so inclined, they can reduce the amount of tip they give to the server, who is the primary beneficiary of Obamacare."

This public outcry has shown the ignorance of many in the United States. One can not predetermine the effect that the Affordable Care Act will have on each small business owner. I personally believe that this was less of an economic decision on Metz's part and more of a political statement.

His opinion is his own, but when he steals from the tip money of his workers it becomes a problem. If he wants to make up for the money that he will be losing in response to the Act being put in motion, he should raise the prices of his own products. This would still place the choice onto the consumer, not of whether they would like to tip more or less, but whether they will buy his cheap, pre-frozen, tastless product in the first place.

But, that's just my opinion.

Election Slipping in Grades

After a seemingly endless build-up to the 2012 presidential election, the show has finally come to a close. Now, the entire world can take a breath of relief. With the lack of election coverage to consume the media, they have turned to the public. Instead of choosing to measure the public perception of the outcome of the election, Huffington Post took the liberty to poll the voting population on their opinion of the campaign process, from campaigning of both Republicans and Democrats alike, to those responsible for covering the campaigns - the media.

In retrospect, the voting population showed their distaste of each party’s campaigning process stating that the discussions were less involved with the issues compared to past elections. In addition, 68% said “negative campaigning and mudslinging were both more prominent than usual.”

When rated on a grading scale, the 2012 campaign received straight C’s across the board, which is considerably worse than the last election in 2008. Take a look for yourself and see how 2012 has proved to be more “frustrating” than anything.

I think this article is extremely interesting because it assigns a grade to each aspect of the election. I think that this measurement can be used to hold the media as well as the campaigns to a higher standard. As a voting population, we should be able to have a voice for the way we would like the election to be broadcast to us and our families.

The Race for Race

Last night, the entire nation discovered that President Barack Obama has been elected to another four-year term in the White House as President of the United States. Although this election was very close, the President made strides in his demographic. Creating a record for any presidential candidate, Obama received 45% of his votes from minority voters. Once the statistics were collected from this election, it is not difficult to see how President Obama made such an impact with the minority populations.

Of all minority groups in the United States, 93% of African Americans, 71% of Hispanics, and a little over 66% of women voted for President Obama.

Despite the fact that Romney won the white vote by 58%, which is higher than any Republican candidate since 1988, he did not have a chance when it came down to it at the end of the day. Why is this?

The Republican party has failed to see that the identification of today’s voter is much different than it was years ago. As our country is becoming more and more diversified, and young minority voters are growing to the legal age to vote, the gap between liberal-minded voters and conservatives continues to widen.

President Obama’s campaign focused their immigration platform on the fact that they had granted a way for young immigrants brought to America by their parents to become a US citizen. Apparently this issue was extremely impactful because it led a record number of Hispanics to the polls on Tuesday – 10% of voters were Hispanic.

I think this topic is very important to touch upon because the age of the white voting demographic is over. Our country is becoming more and more diversified with each coming day. Although the average white man may not agree with the decisions that President Obama made while in office, they no longer have the power as a single unit to alter the vote. I am interested to see how elections in the future will turn out. When our country becomes progressive enough to elect two African American candidates for the Republican and Democratic parties, I wonder how the voting public will react. Because 93% of African Americans cast their vote for the President, I believe it is safe to say that many of these votes were cast blindly without education on the topic. I do not want to sound bold by stating this, but I wonder, if the African American people had a choice between two African American candidates, if we would see more intelligible debate over the ideals of each candidate.

Whatever the outcome of the election is, I believe it is our responsibility as United States citizens to remain secure in the decision of our country as a whole and to show a whole-hearted confidence in the elected President. It is our country who nominated the candidate in the first place and it is our hands that placed him in the office. I believe that Barack Obama will continue his efforts grow our economy and make our country stand for equality during his remaining four years in office. I am excited to see where these next four years will take me and my country and I anxiously await the events of tomorrow and the days to come.

Kennedy for Me!

As I was observing the videos on the website "The Living Room Candidate" I stumbled upon a video in particular that caught my eye. I have always had an interest in John F. Kennedy. At 43, he was the youngest man to ever be elected as the President of the United States. His youth is apparent in this television ad in particular. I have never seen such a jubilant, upbeat, jingle - or even any jingle for a presidential candidate - ever! Although his age would normally be considered a weakness among voters, Kennedy used this to his advantage and turned the tables on his 1960 opponent, Vice President Richard Nixon. With quotes from the jingle saying, "Do you want a man for President who sees it through and through, but not so dog-gone seasoned that he won't try something new? A man who's old enough to know, and young enough to do?"

He made his age seem like a strength of his, remarking to his ease at change and ability to have the endurance to maintain his Presidential duties. This implies that Nixon may be too old for his position in comparison.

The images portrayed in this video were also very happy and youthful, further making the politician's point. The cheers in the video made it seem like others were also joyful and supportive of this vote.

Given, this advertisement was made in a time when the United States was thriving and was fairly peaceful in comparison to most other election years that had occurred. Kennedy appropriately recognized his audience and knew the way to get their attention.

Overall, this ad did a great job of putting its viewers in a considerably happier mood than the other ads I have seen that have been used to attack an opponent's views or past history. This jingle was extremely catchy and I found my feet tapping to the beat - wanting to run to the nearest voting booth and write the guy in for the 2012 election!

<object width="434" height="370"><param name="movie" value="http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/flash/player.swf?id=3973"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/flash/player.swf?id=3973" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="434" height="370"></embed></object>

Governor's Media Reception

On Wednesday of this past week, Governor Steve Beshear hosted the Governor’s Media Reception at Centre College for the Vice Presidential Debate taking place the following day. This event was held for each of the media outlets that traveled in to Danville, Kentucky to cover the events of the debate. One of the main sponsors for the debate, the Kentucky Distillers’ Association (KDA), provided much of the entertainment for the night. Each member of the KDA-owned Kentucky Bourbon Trail had booths set up with samples and memorabilia from the events of the week.

The hosts of the events are hopeful that the attendees have a great time because the media are regular guests to receptions similar to this. It is the hosts’ goal to make the event memorable, which is where the Kentucky Bourbon Trail members come in to play. Some of the members of KDA that had booths set up at the event were Heaven Hill, Jim Beam, Maker’s Mark, Four Roses, Wild Turkey, Woodford Reserve, Bulleit, and Town Branch.

The governor himself spoke at the event, which was swarming with secret service agents. It was a great experience seeing each of the political figures and local news anchors in a somewhat casual atmosphere. As President of the Kentucky Distillers’ Association joked, “I always knew the way to a reporter’s hearts is through their livers.”

Up In Smoke

The other day I saw a video from the events of September 11^th that chilled me more than any other image had since that fateful day eleven years ago. The video was of the firsthand account of a family living within eye sight of the towers in the heart of New York City. When I say within eyesight, I should really say that they lived close enough to safely hear the crash, watch as the second plane hits the second tower, and react in a close but safe proximity while the aftermath of the crashes ensues.

All of the images of 9/11 that I have seen show the towers from an aerial view, and while enormity of the damage being done to the city is not overlooked, it seems much more impactful viewing the attack as an average bystander.

Throughout the video you hear the woman holding the camera commentating more or less on the events unfolding before her eyes.

I was ten years old on September 11^th. Because of this, I didn’t fully understand the impact of the events of that day. Through the viewing of this video, as the smoke from the collapse surrounds the windows of the buildings, the solemnity of the day is visualized.

Romey: 1 Obama: defeated

Last night was the first presidential debate of the 2012 presidential election between President Barack Obama and the Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney. As Thursday morning has rolled around, many say that this debate has altered the narrative of the entire race.

As commentary for this debate has flooded in, a vast majority of pundits agree that Mitt Romney was the clear winner of the debate.

So what statement, observation, plan, or presence by the candidate constitutes the general voting public to declare a winner and loser in such a complicated issue?

Some would say it is a combination of all of the above, while others will purely judge a candidate on their physical presence in the debate. After viewing the debate myself, I found myself being drawn in to Mitt Romney’s discussion much more than President Obama’s. My guess is that much of the viewers of the debate felt a similar way.

From the beginning of the broadcast, Mitt Romney had a visible plan to answer all questions precisely and to make eye contact with the camera in order to make his presence felt in the homes of the families viewing the debate. Mitt Romney was extremely prepared to defend his own plans and to dissect President Obama’s current policies. Each time the President would state a negative impact a policy change from Romney’s campaign, Romney would respond with a level and descriptive defense. As the debate continued in this fashion, Romney seemed to become more confident as Obama became timid and somber. Governor Romney would look to Obama after proving his point and playfully smirk in his direction. As President Obama would listen to the opposing side, his head would dip down and he would rarely make eye contact with his competition. By the end of the debate, the President seemed defeated.

One continued remark that I would like to point out from the President was his apparent intention to compare himself to his opposition. When explaining his policies and hopes for the four years to come, President Obama would say ‘[Governor Romney] and I agree….’ on certain issues. In my opinion, as one of only two candidates, President Obama and Governor Romney should try to make themselves sound as opposite from each other as possible. They obviously have very differing views, and so President Obama’s comments, to me, make it seem like his is not confident enough in the policies that make his views so much different from his competitor’s.

It is the presence and the perceived preparation of the candidate that leads reporters to declare Romney the winner with less than half of the debate still left to unfold. It was what led me to choose Romney as the winner within minutes of turning the debate on.

In the end, we would like to think that the candidate with the best policies and genuine ideas for the country will win, but as the voting population watches these debates their intentions are transparent. The public is looking to see which candidate looks strongest, and use this observation to decide the winner of each debate. It is this, and only this, conclusion that will decide the fate of each candidate in November.

News Parody Shows Serve as News Source for Most College Students

As September draws to a close and one month stands in the way of the quick approaching date of decision, it is difficult to avoid the looming presidential election. The television and media in particular have taken the liberty to be the informants of each political change over the past several months. With so many young adults connected to the media, it is hard to say that what the media puts out does not have an effect on a young voter’s decision.

At a recent fundraising banquet the Republican Presidential Nominee, Mitt Romney, was recorded discussing his views on the voting American public and their inclinations to vote certain ways depending on their economic status. In particular, he addressed the percent of population that does not pay income taxes to the federal government. The now infamous quote can be seen below.

“There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it -- that that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. ... These are people who pay no income tax. ... My job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

The obvious over-dramatization of Mitt Romney’s statement was picked up by multiple news and cable programs across the television world. As news is expected to state the facts as objectively as possible (which is not done nearly as much as it should) cable networks have the freedom to take a specific side of an argument and speak their mind. One program in particular, The Colbert Report, is notorious for its left-winged stance on many issues regarding our nation. In a recent episode the ‘lead anchor’ in the show, Stephen Colbert, discussed the quote from Romney extensively.  After hearing Romney’s perspective on the voting population, Colbert summarized his impression in the opinion that Romney considers “47% [of the voting population] are mindless moochers”.

Colbert continued with the one-sided coverage of the story by addressing the thoughts of Peggy Noonan, a well-known conservative writer for the Wall Street Journal, who has been quoted saying “It’s time to admit the Romney campaign is an incompetent one.”

Of course, this broadcast has been inserted with moments of hilarity as Colbert discusses important political topics to keep his viewers interested. This makes the show extremely enticing for the young voting republic. As a writer speaking purely out of observation, I want to discuss how this political image will impact the voting decisions of the young voter demographic comprised of mostly college students and young professionals.

The popular consensus among the American people is that several college aged voters are liberal thinkers. Many would argue that it is because a student becomes more rounded as an individual and will meet a variety of dissimilar minded people during their college days. In my opinion, pop culture plays an extensive role in the development of opinion among young people. Shows like The Colbert Report that are immensely popular among the younger generation as well as liberal-minded people will inevitable affect how these show’s viewers will perceive political candidates as well as the social and economic issues that surround them.

It seems to me that the act of voting has moved from an educated decision on who more accurately mirrors your views and goals for this country and rather, who is more popular among voters, and who is perceived as well-liked. Will the age of technology enhance or prove to be the downfall of our government as we know it? Only time will tell.

Click Here to View the Full Video

Origin of the 'Left' and 'Right'

Have you ever wondered why some words are associated with ideas that differ from their true meaning? I just read an interesting article that explains the origin of the ‘Right’ and ‘Left’ definitions for Conservativism and Liberalism. The answer isn’t that surprising! It seems like most of our democratic ideals came from the French. Think about this next time you talk about your Right-Winged neighbor or Left-Winged daughter-in-law; who knows they could have just as easily been water and fire, or cheese and crackers!

Why Do Left and Right Mean Liberal and Conservative?

All It Takes is 140 Characters - Obama Takes a Twitter Tumble

With website like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram it’s difficult for anyone to shy away from the limelight, specifically, if you’re a presidential candidate.

These days, the public expects politicians to track every move they make through their social media. If they choose not to, they are not thought of as relatable. The people demand their representative to be ‘one of the people,’ and each politician does their part to fit that expectation.

Therefore, it is not surprising that both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have a Twitter account. Of course, the catch-22 is that it would be unwise to actually tweet from these accounts. The president and presidential candidate have much more important things to occupy their thoughts than to worry about whether they are generating enough tweets-per-hour. The voting population expects President Obama and Mitt Romney to have a Twitter account, but would be livid if they took the time to actually ‘tweet’ from it. For this reason, each man has a team of campaign officials to fill that role.

Because of Twitter’s wide spread impact on the population – Twitter scored its 500 millionth user in February – the opportunity to sway voters is recognized by both campaigns. This also means that the ability to maintain a positive public opinion is that much more complex.

Last Tuesday was the 11-year anniversary of the events of 9/11. Twitter feeds across the country were filled with lamentation over the lives lost on that terrifying day. Of course, the world turns to the president to receive words of respect and humility about the day, and President Obama did. At 8:46am, the time the first plane struck the North Tower of the World Trade Center, the President and First Lady bowed their heads in remembrance on the South Lawn of the White House. This was preceded, however, by a tweet at 7:07am from the @BarackObama account calling for more campaign volunteers.

The Twitter world took this tweet as a sign of disrespect from the President, and the opposing side took the tweet as an opportunity to further enhance their public opinion. Almost immediately, tweets were posted about each candidate’s first post of that day. Each post can be seen below.

Social media is a clever campaign strategy and an easy way to promote the ideals of a specific candidate. The overwhelming number of positives from social media, however, comes with a price. If the campaign officials are not paying attention, they could dramatically lose their candidate’s positive opinion in a matter of 140 characters.

Occupy [your passion].

On Wednesday I had the opportunity to listen to a lecture given by a self proclaimed artist and activist named Blithe Riley. For an hour and fifteen minutes she discussed her involvement in the “Occupy” movement. Much of her energy has been put into an organization known as “Occupy Museums.” As an artist, she shows particular distain for the actions that large museums make when much of their decisions are incentivized financially. I, however, had to search online to really discover what “Occupy Museums” as an organization believes in because the lecture was not very educational.

Ms. Riley discussed what measures the group has taken to promote their beliefs but never fully explained why they existed. Leaving the lecture, I questioned why the other attendees seemed to be impacted positively from the speech – a speech that contained multiple second hand accounts and seemed to run in circles. Those who share an interest for journalism would agree that if a source is not direct the information, despite its accuracy, is not credible. Much of my struggle stemmed from my lack of trust in her understanding of the “Occupy” movement as a whole. Many of her explanations contained gaps and seemed to be contradictory.

As disappointed as I was from the speech, it was clearly evident that Ms. Riley had a passion for what she does. I am thankful that I was able to attend because it is always enlightening to listen to people who are unlike you. I look forward to attending more lectures in the future and will actively continue to develop my ever-evolving outlook on the wide-ranging topics that concern each lecturer.

To form your own opinion of the "Occupy Museums" movement, please visit www.occupymuseums.org for more information.

Republican National Convention

When analyzing at the visual media that the Republican Party chose to use to display during their time in session at the Republican National Convention, one cannot help but attempt to speculate what their goal was when choosing pictures and videos to post. The RNC Flickr account followed the Republican National Convention for its entirety and had also done so in 2008. One recurring theme of the photographs posted were large landscape shots displaying the magnitude of the convention and the complexity in its design.

This may have been done purposefully in order to display the extent of the commitment its members have to the Republican party. From the initial set up of the convention conference rooms, to the large media gatherings, and finally the packed full conference halls where the notable party leaders were scheduled to speak, each picture displayed the immense support that the Republican party has in this country.

This idea is maintained when Clint Eastwood, a prominent Hollywood icon, came to the podium to deliver his speech, debatably the most talked about speech of the entire convention. I will not elaborate on the opinions I have of his speech, but I however did notice a few things about the support he received from his peers. As you observe the video, please take a look at the cheers and wide camera angles used during the time he spends speaking. Each time the camera pans out, the viewer has the opportunity to gaze over the wide audience captivated by his words.

The RNC Flickr account has done a great job marketing their organization in a positive light. As discussed in my last post, the earliest form of politics is to find your way to ‘fit in.’ As many of you may have concluded, what better way to show someone that you are the ‘in crowd’ than to show how popular you are?

Introduction to Politics

Politics is a very difficult to define as a general term. As the range of population applied to the definition grows, the meaning of politics expands as well.

To a high school student, politics may be the complicated series of emotions felt and actions performed between peers in order to find acceptance and ‘fit in.’ As a knowledge base is built and a young adult becomes more interested in the culture of America and how we interact within our world, the meaning of politics may evolve. This evolution will begin to encompass a collection of decisions that the young adult will need to make about his or her actions. They will also begin to understand how their actions affect others, and how, collectively, we all must be cognizant of our behavior and its impact on the general public. This is the beginning of a mindful awareness that can effectively develop an opinion on how our country should be structured.

I believe that politics has nothing to do with which party a person is affiliated with or what decisions he or she makes concerning social or financial issues. Politics is the delicate relationship that each member of the human population shares with one another. Although this relationship, at times, may be extremely volatile when juggling vast and strong opinions, we find a balance and recognize that as a unit our views must be set aside to progress the nation as a whole. We do not have to generalize politics to a strict right-winged- left-winged description.

Politics, to me, is the complicated process in which our nation of over 300 million people can reach a compromise for the common goal to maintain our strength as a single entity.