Liberal bloggers versus Fox News

Liberal bloggers are more exasperated than ever at Fox News, especially since prominent Democrats are breaking from the Huffington Post and Daily Kos ranks and appearing on the network.

Mike Allen from the Politico posted today:

The nation’s top Democrats are suddenly rushing to appear on the Fox News Channel, which they once had shunned as enemy territory as the nemesis of liberal bloggers.

The détente with Fox has provoked a backlash from progressive bloggers, who contend the party’s leaders are turning their backs on the base — and lending credibility and legitimacy to the network liberals love to hate — in a quest for a few swing votes.

In a span of eight days, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY.) and Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean are all taking their seats with the network that calls itself “fair and balanced” but is widely viewed as skewing conservative.

And, during coverage of the Pennsylvania Primary election, former DNC head Terry McAuliffe congratulated the network on its fair-and-balanced coverage.

So, what’s going on here? Demagoguery on behalf of the Democrats has been so intense during this election cycle that candidates for the nomination refused to appear in a Fox News debate.

Why are all the Democrats flocking to appear on the network they so routinely criticized over the past ten years?

The simple answer may be they want to reach out to moderates, which if cable news rating are to be believed necessarily watch Fox News. But, perhaps, that isn’t the entire story, especially since it’s mostly devout liberals that vote in Democratic primary elections. And, appearing on Fox News would almost assuredly be a turn-off for devout liberals.

It’s a little unclear exactly what’s going on here, but it’s something I’ll be keeping an eye on.

- Matthew White

It’s a scary world out there

A couple of months ago, before I dropped my Intro to Formal Logic class, I received an assignment that dealt with deduction. The questions were not history questions, but to complete the assignment you needed to know basic history, such as:

            Who is George Washington?

            Who did America battle in the Revolutionary War?

            Who won the Revolutionary War?

Now, I’m not here to come down on any one, that’s not my intention, but after class I went to the professor to ask him for help, even though I had every intention of dropping the class, when I was cut off by a student who needed help on her homework. She asked, “Who is George Washington….”

 

I was speechless. I’ll let the Revolutionary War questions pass, but George Washington? That’s an entire day of Kindergarten, learning about the cherry tree and possibly the most important president this country has ever had. The internal improvements that Washington made, the standards that he set, and this person had no idea who he was.

 

This isn’t the first time it’s happened on Kent State’s campus, one student in my comparative politics class asked the professor after watching a Tiananmen Square movie— seriously, not even going for a joke, had no idea— asked, “Didn’t something happen here (at Kent State) like that?”

 

Well these experiences got me thinking: Which candidate will dumb down their campaign in order to capture the voters who are completely clueless when it comes to history?

 

Then they all did. I was at a friends house watching basketball and he turned the TV to Monday Night Raw. Just before I asked him to change the channel, because only Jeff Russ still watches wrestling, they promoted a segment were the candidates would address the WWE fans.  Like a bad car accident or any VH1 show, I had trouble taking my mind off this potentially catastrophic event in American Culture and politics. This is what they said:

My God, George Washington was worried about the U.S. being entangled in foreign affairs, and now we have three people who could possibly be the next leaders of the free world going on, I’m sorry, but a FAKE fighting show.

 

No wonder there’s people who don’t know AMERICA won the freakin’ AMERICAN REVOLUTION, Monday Night Raw has never fit that between a Macho Man Randy Savage-Hulk Hogan match and the Undertaker-Mankind flaming cage of death match.

 

Obviously, Monday Night Raw consistently has high ratings and it makes sense for candidates to go on and talk about their campaigns, but John McCain, do you have say “McCainiacs.” Hillary Clinton, do you have to refer to yourself as “HillRod.” Finally, Barack Obama, these people watching this show think that those “chair shots” to the head are real; do you think they know what special interest groups are?

 

It’s indeed a scary world out there, and after talking to reporter Juan Williams on Wednesday, when he said people’s attention spans are shorter and gorgeous, well-endowed women are the reason Fox NEWS has high ratings, it’s getting worse.

 

But Oh well, the country will soon implode, college students will think France won the AMERICAN REVOULOTION and Monday Night Raw will dictate public policy. And that’s the bottom line because America wants it so.

 

 

 

Okay, they’re not so bad…

We continue to discuss in this class how important the bloggers have been to politics, popular culture and the way journalism itself is practiced.  Regardless, this will most likely be my last adventure into the blogosphere for awhile.

However, I have learned a few things from doing the blog this semester.  Probably the most crucial fact I’ve learned is that important things can be said on blogs.  I’m still pretty skeptical about blogs being the wave of the journalistic future, but I am convinced that individuals who have their own private blogs are not just nutjobs who like to hear themselves talk (see themselves type).

As a skeptic, though, I still need more convincing.  Maybe I am just getting old, but I am longing for the “good ol’ days.”  I can’t quite put my finger on what that means, but I know that I have never been more pessimistic about the affairs of the world.  Times like these call for inspirational leaders – heroes.  I believe some of those heroes need to have a voice, and some of those voices may be found on the blogs.  I’m not talking about every Joe Schmo or Susie Highschool with an opinion but actual people with real-life degrees in economics, political theory and maybe American literature for artistic value.

Is this too much to ask?  May I have a smart people revolution, please?  Where are the Thomas Paines and Samuel Adames of this millennium?  Let’s join together to educate the unwashed masses (thanks, Jen) and bring about our own “change we can believe in,” rather than waiting for someone to do it for us.  No, I don’t have anything specific in mind, but everything begins with ideas, and one thing I know for sure, is that blogs are a place for those.

Good night Kent, Ohio!

-Mary K. Clause

The Revolution marches on

Today Ron Paul’s book, The Revolution: A Manifesto comes out in stores. Many people wonder why Paul and his supporters continue their battle in the American political scene. The answer is actually rather simple – unlike McCain, Obama or Clinton, Paul’s campaign has never completely been about winning the nomination for the Republican ticket. Instead, it was a call for change. In his book he admits he did not know if enough people would respond to his campaign platform but was pleasantly surprised with how many did. While the remaining Republicans and Democrats pretend they are not two horns on the same beast, Paul and his supporters have accepted their loss and begun to move on in several interesting ways.

The Revolution: A Manifesto

Paul’s aforementioned book is not a call to arms, but rather his ideas on paper so his supporters can use them:

“The revolution my supporters refer to will persist long after my retirement from politics. Here is my effort to give them a long-term manifesto based on ideas, and perhaps some short-term marching orders.

At the same time, I am also describing what the agenda of George W. Bush’s successor should be if we want to move toward a free society once again. Our country is facing an unprecedented financial crisis precisely because the questions our political and media establishments allow us to ask are so narrow. Whether or not politicians actually want to hear them, it has never been more important for us to begin posing significant and fundamental questions.” Page 7

The book has already begun to become a bible for libertarians and old-school conservatives. Much like the Paul grassroots campaign, his book has already found a hardcore group of supporters who are trying to promote his book. Particularly one group called the Ron Paul Book Bomb is attempting to get the book on the New York Times bestseller list by having people pledge to buy it today.

Paul Ville

Perhaps an idea that is a little more extreme than simply keeping the Revolution alive, some supporters have created a group in an attempt to organize closed gate communities for Paul “supporters and or people that live by the ideals of freedom and liberty.” The idea is much like the Free State Project that was started several years ago for libertarians.

Personally the idea of ‘Paul Villes’ seem a little too cult-like and I believe it would have been better for the supporters to join up with the FSP instead. The Paul Ville people, however, have just made their first purchase of land in West Texas outside of Dell City.

So while the Ron Paul Revolution may be down, it is anything but out. Many of his supporters – at least one of my friends and myself included that I know personally – are still thinking of writing in his name come November, not because he can win but to give a middle finger to the established politico.

Although his bid for presidency may have ended, the Revolution still beats the drum for freedom and change.

-Ted Hamilton

Keeping it together

Stress, anxiety and overwhelming pressure; not just for the democratic candidates to win the nomination for president but for the citizens of the United States to elect the most suitable person into office. The pressure is on and it is an intense time for everyone in this heated election between Senators Clinton and Obama. While the candidates continue to rally and motivate the public to vote for them, the people of America are engulfed in this election and are torn between two apt people running for the same position. One wonder who of the two parties involved has it worse.

The candidates are doing everything in their power to gain more votes than the other. Through financial and emotional support, each of the candidates is able to carry him and herself through these campaigns. It is a great thing that citizens are getting so into this election but this forces one to speculate whether or not there is a limit to all the insanity that are the presidential primaries.

The irony behind the excitement of all the election coverage is that one must follow it all, day by day and week by week in order to fully grasp the messages that the candidates lay out there for the public to see and base their votes on. It is not just stress for the candidates but it is tension for voters as well.

Nonetheless, it is a duty and a liberty to be able to vote and in this time of urgency for a new leadership in the United States, the American people owe to themselves to follow up and make the correct choice so as to electing the most suitable candidate into office.

-Lubna Najjar

Making history

One might say that this year’s election for the democratic candidate is one that will hold historical significance in the future due to the undeniable competition between the two nominees. Not only are they both fit for the position as leaders but both Clinton and Obama have loyalty to his/her party to represent it well, if nominated. Neither candidate will back down unless there is a tremendous gap between their supporters and Super Delegates.

Clinton is confident and adamant over winning Michigan and Florida as she presumes she will. Clinton’s campaign sent out an email to reporters stating that she is now ahead of Obama in total votes but according to David Greene of National Public Radio, Obama is still leads by 500,000 votes.

The politic of politics shines through this action by Clinton’s people to show the American people that she is still in the race and that she will continue to strive for that victory. This places a fair amount of pressure on voters to choose the ‘right’ candidate because of all the deliberation in each state. Hopefully the American people will be more encouraged to follow the election coverage on the news and in the papers verses losing interest and letting history make itself.

The future is in our hands and it is up to us to elect a candidate who will represent our country in the best possible way.

-Lubna Najjar

My MTV says I’m a Democrat

Dear Barack Obama,
Hi my name is Eric Horst and I am a person who is thinking of voting for you. My roommate, Joe Harrington said I was crazy for supporting you because I’m not a Democrat.

Yeah, that Joe sure is weird; he said I was blindly supporting the Democratic Party because MTV, P-Diddy and that awesome Paris Hilton tells me I should. Well, I talked to our other Roommate, Jake, and he said that Republicans are just a bunch of people that suck and want to blow up the world. I don’t want that, Barack so I’m supporting you.

But I do have some suggestions for your campaign that I think would help me out; First of all, I’m cheap and have complained about paying my taxes for the past month. I work too damn hard at my landscaping job to give taxes to those poor people in the inner city. Joe, that stupid guy, tried playing devils advocate and told me taxes pay for potholes to be filled. Well I can drive around those.

Second of all, I think you should drop this healthcare stuff, because I don’t ever get sick, so I don’t want to be paying for some other guys’ cough medicine (which he’ll probably just abuse anyway).

Next I think you should avoid that talk about increasing taxes on us rich people, because my family owns a farm and we make pretty good money (you got to see this new snow board I got, it’s the same one John Kerry had in 2004, it’s sweet). Raising taxes would suck, so if you could, don’t do it.

I’ll finishing by saying that I hope you can go deer hunting with me this season, because my dad just bought me this new shot gun (it’s my fifth gun) and it can really blow the snot off Bambi.

If you could send an email to my roommate and tell him why he’s an idiot for calling me, of all people, a conservative Republican because I hate taxes, don’t care about equality and love my Remington shotgun. But hey, I got to run because Jon Stewart is on and Joe says I don’t get half the jokes and don’t realize that I could be a Jon Stewart punch line.

-Peace out Barack, and hope to see you in the White House, your No.1 fan, Eric Horst.

This fictional, but truthful, letter was the result of a conversation I had with my roommate Eric while I was watching Hard Ball. I really could care less about who people support in the election because it’s their choice, but too many students on Kent State’s campus are totally oblivious to what the two parties support.

Eric is an obvious Republican who wouldn’t support stricter gun control laws, higher taxes to support more government programs, and although I have never asked him, I bet he’s pro-life.

The only reason I can come up with on why he claims to be a Democrat is because he is always going to side with the popular pick. So many people are excited about Barack Obama, and what he believes that Eric must think he’s a good candidate.

But deep down, Eric, like many other people on the Kent State campus, who don’t know squat about politics or history, will support Hillary Clinton or Obama just because they think it’s cool.

-Joe Harrington

Obama=JFK

Many people are saying Barack Obama is today’s John F. Kennedy. JFK’s family has even endorsed Obama because they say he reminds them so much of JFK and what he stood for in his campaign. Obama is getting more people involved with politics, especially younger people and he is getting a majority of the African American votes as JFK did.

After reading the book The Making of the President 1960 by Teddy White I have began to wonder even more if Obama is really so similar to JFK. Obama does seem to have the same charisma tha JFK had. He is young and although Obama is African American and JFK was just young, tan and “pretty” they both have physical characteristics that have been elected to the White House.

One of the biggest similarities is religion. JFK was a Catholic and a majority of America did not like Catholics. JFK had to make televised speeches and talk to voters to get them to realize his religion would not affect his role as President. Obama is having a similar battle concerning the church he attends and its reverend, Reverend Wright. Rev Wright has made some anti-American remarks, among other things, that has upset Americans. Obama has had to defend himself and his religion. He has had to try to get people to understand that he cannot control what someone else says and he does not agree with everything Rev Wright has said.

Another comparision is the issue of assasination. Unfortunately in November of 1963 JFK was assasinated in Texas. I hope that no president ever gets assasinated again it is a terrible thing. People have, however, said that they feel if Obama is elected it may happen. A British Nobel Prize winner told a newspaper in February, the article was later posted on The Huffington Post.

 Yes the man who said it is 88 years old, but he is also a well educated person. He is not from the U.S., so he does not know the politcal system as well as an American would. He did go on to say that the best thing for the Democratic Party would be if Obama and Hillary Clinton ran together.

I do think Obama and JFK are very similar for the good reasons, though. He has gotten people who have never been interested in politics before, interested and he has brought a new hope to the Democrats, just like JFK did. Not only that, if the Jfk’s own family sees similarities between Obama and their own family member how could anyone disagree? The Kennedy’s knew JFK better than anyone and if they think Obama can do the things JFK did for this country, maybe he can.

-Liz Laubscher

Who really lost the ABC News debate?

Obama supporters point to Clinton and vice versa, but who really lost the debate?

While one of the candidates may have done better than the other, the real loser was the media. Instead of the questions being about policy the moderators mostly focused on politics. Obama’s “bitter” remark about how some Senator Pennsylvanians “cling to guns or religion” and the make-believe bullets that rained down around Senator Clinton when she visited Bosnia as the First Lady in the 90’s.

Throughout the 2008 election the media has continually made a mockery of itself. The only relevant outlets seem to be ‘The Daily Show’ and ‘The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer’ – the others rarely focus on the issues, instead they treat the election like a horse race. For a political science project I monitored several different media outlets from January to mid-march and the trends were the same in every medium except those making fun of the news medium (‘The Daily Show’) and the (partially) publicly funded ‘NewsHour’. Time Magazine, the New York Times and any cable news network focus a lot more heavily on the campaign strategies of the candidates than what the politicians stances are.

As a journalist-in-training this is a tragedy and think the media should be partially blamed for the some of the ignorance among the ignorant masses. The Huffington Post reported the Vice President of ABC News said the reason the moderator, Charlie Gibson, was booed was because they were going to commercial and not because of the questions he asked. Logically, the audience would not have booed the final commercial coming if their thirst for some sort of knowledge has been quenched. Maybe less questions about bullets and more about economics? Less about “bitterness” and more about pork barrel spending?

Looking back at how much more substance pre-broadcast news actually had, maybe ABC needs to take a look back and take some advice from their slogan. It’s time for them to “Start Fresh.”

-Ted Hamilton

The differences between John and George

It’s clear the Democrats will seek to label John McCain as the second coming of George Bush in the general election. Both Democratic candidates have already adopted this line of attack and it’s reasonable to expect whichever candidate emerges from the primary will escalate its use in commercials and sound bites.

But, in some very important ways, George Bush and John McCain are nothing alike. And, while the MSM isn’t saying so, this attack has the same ring to it as criticizing Obama for the words and conduct of his pastor. That is, criticizing McCain for Bush’s conduct is the same as criticizing Obama for Wright’s conduct.

But, I digress.

The first way that Bush and McCain differ is in their personal service to the nation. George Bush attended Yale and then Harvard Business School before joining the Texas Air National Guard. While in the Guard, Bush lost his flight status. In comparison, McCain made at least 23 bombing raids over Vietnam before having his plane shot down and spending years in the “Hanoi Hilton.” Unlike Bush, McCain truly put his life on the line for the United States.

A second, striking difference between the two men can be found in their personal approach to government spending. McCain has been called “a taxpayer hero” by Citizens Against Government Waste. The Club for Growth, an organization that rates lawmakers on their spending restraint, gave McCain a score of 76 in 2005 and 2006, making him better than 71 other senators both years. In comparison, Bush has expanded the government at levels not seen since Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society program.

In a test of conservative priorities, spending and enlarging the size of government are issues that McCain excels through his great restraint. In comparison, Bush consistently fails.

With the Iraq War, Bush and former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld adopted a light-footprint strategy that essentially allowed U.S. Troops to make gains quickly in the initial invasion but left them without adequate manpower to control the situation afterward. McCain, the war hero, consistently called for more troops, something that evolved into our nation’s current surge strategy. McCain was also openly critical of Rumsfeld when Bush stalwartly stood behind the embattled public servant.

On matters of abortion and gay marriage, McCain generally believes in leaving the decisions up to the states. He cites the 10 Amendment to the Constitution, which reserves unenumerated rights to the states.

So, in some very real ways, McCain and Bush are very much different individuals with different positions. In an election year, though, this doesn’t really matter – it’s all about gaining an advantage with voters.

- Matthew White