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.