The first Presidental Debate

Two days ago, Obama and McCain heartily greeted each other in the University of Mississippi for the first presidential debate of the 2008 election. However, the warm welcome soon chilled as both candidates began to valiantly argue their stances on foreign policy, national security, and the global financial crisis. After watching the lengthy debates of both Obama and McCain, one can easily see that McCain based the majority of his arguments with ethos while Obama centered almost all of his arguments with pathos.

When McCain started speaking, he instantly appealed emotionally to the audience by stating that Kennedy was in the hospital as a possible tactic to distract them from the previous statement spoken by Obama. Also, as the debate ensued, McCain spoke about his boundless experience as a politician and the lacking of experience from Obama. Yet when Obama spoke in the debate, the majority of his statements focused on logic. While McCain argued his point throughout each question, Obama would rebuttal with facts and data that favored himself or invalided the statement.

After watching the first debate, who was more persuasive? Was ethos a stronger argument than pathos?

Personally, I believe that Obama’s logical arguments were more effective. Although McCain strengthened his stance by tapping into the audience’s ethos and pathos, Obama’s decisive planning and calm mood allowed me to understand more clearly the issues he wants to resolve. As Obama specifically pointed out each part of his plan as president, which I agree with most of, I found it agreeable compared to McCain’s way of expressing his plan of action which I felt looked more like a hidden agenda. In most cases, I would have had a predilection towards an argument that was based on ethos and pathos, but for a presidential debate, I felt it was not exactly the place to appeal to emotions. Rather, it was important to justify and explain clearly the stances each presidential candidate held, and why the way he handle the issues would be more beneficial and effective for the country than any other.

The debate can be found on youtube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjmiF5uoYe8

Priorities over Politics

As you all know the stock market has recently experienced a major set back. Washington Mutual has gone bankrupt and now the government must come up with some sort of solution to this national crisis From this crisis we have seen two opposing view points on the state of the presidential campaigns. Obama has been clear it that he plans to continue with his campaign and not with hold the debate schedule for Friday. McCain on the other hand has planed to suspend his entire campaign and focus on the economic issues. McCain has received stiff comments from American critiques about his recent decisions. My question to you is this; do you feel that McCain’s decision to postpone his campaign was a matter of “Politics or Priorities”?

I personally feel that it was admirable for McCain to be willing to suspend his campaign to focus all of its energy and resources on fixing a national problem. He justifiably feels as though the U.S. needs to see politicians who put politics to the side and focus on the main issue which affecting America. However it is going to be hard for him to stray away from the idea that he was attempting to run away from yet another public engagement. With his constant last many cancellations, voters are going to grow suspicious of a candidate who cannot follow through on his word. Also the ability to handle multiple responsibilities is going to be an important quality for the president to have. Voters may see this decision as a representation of how he will handle multiple problems as president. Not being able to handle more than one emergency may prove devastating for him. Tell me what you think?

click on links to see video footage

Does Having More Money Actually Help You

Much of this election focuses on your money. The candidates have debated issues ranging everywhere from how much you make to how much of it you can retain. For the most part, Obama and McCain have focused on and debated about tax cuts. However, both candidates have ideas about another topic that affects your income--the level of the minimum wage. Although no candidate emphasizes this issue, it is very likely that it will come up again within the next four years.

Barack Obama is a strong advocate of raising the minimum wage. In fact, his plan to fight poverty includes raising the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour by 2011. He believes this will insure that full-time workers are able to earn a "living wage" that allows them to pay for basic needs such as food, transportation, and shelter. He also claims that because families will have more money to spend, they will be able to boost the economy. The economy would then be able to produce even more jobs for even more workers. Thus, the number of people on welfare would be drastically reduced.

John McCain, on the other hand, is strongly opposed to a high minimum wage. In fact, he has voted against raising the minimum wage nineteen times. McCain's reason for voting against an increase in the minimum wage is that there is no evidence that such an act would help the economy.

So who is right? The answer may surprise some, but it is indeed McCain. Barack Obama's "sweet talk" make it appear as if raising the minimum wage would give parents more money to spend on raising their children. However, data shows that most minimum wage workers aren't parents working to provide for their children, but in fact teenagers still living with their parents who work to buy personal wants. In the entire United States last year, only 3.9% of all minimum wage workers were parents or guardians of children. Also, if you think about it, raising the minimum wage could be a disaster for the welfare program. Instead of taking people off of it, it is very likely that more and more adults would go on welfare. Most minimum wage jobs are physical demanding jobs. Because they would have to pay so much more every hour, employers would be tempted to hire more energetic/physically fit individuals such as teenagers. This would reduce the amount of jobs available for older adults trying to get off of welfare. Also, there is a strong possibility that it would also increase the drop-out rate for teens. Why go to school if you can make good money without sitting through boring lectures or taking hundreds of tests?

Finally and most importantly, the minimum wage should not be raised because raising it does absolutely nothing. Why have food prices soared over the past two years? The answer is simple, it costs more to produce them. Farmers must now pay workers the increased minimum wage to plant, tend to, and harvest crops. So instead of paying $0.99 for a pound of tomatoes, you must now pay at least $1.99. The only thing increasing the minimum wage does is increase inflation--and reduce the use of the penny. A six figure salary working a minimum wage job sounds great, but what good is it if you have to spend $100 on a gallon of milk?

Economic Crisis

Given the current economic crisis America is facing, I thought it would be appropriate to talk about the economy. I thought this video was funny, informative, and definitely biased, but Ron Paul makes a good point at the end. 

Whoever is elected will come into office facing one of the largest economic fall outs in American history. I think that the American people will be looking especially towards the new administration to set the economy back on track. Thus, I thought that our current economic state will probably have some effect on the election, whether it be helpful to McCain or Obama, or it may have no real effect.

However, Ron Paul makes a point that, while good economic policies are important, the president does not need to be an expert economist to set things right. This would then suggest that McCain's "lack of knowledge" in the field of economics wouldn't hurt his chances as president.

 Personally, I think that as this financial crisis persists, the economy will become by far the greatest issue of this election. I think that this will give Obama an edge in the election, as the people will grow antsy for change in the White House and stray away from voting for McCain, who offers "more of the same." This could perhaps be one of the best things to happen to the Obama campaign.

My question is, do you think that the current state of the economy will aid McCain's campaign, Obama's, or neither, as Ron Paul suggests?

 This article is also interesting, but a bit biased as well. Still, I found it amusing and think it's worth taking a look at.

Funny Palin Add

Hi guys, I just saw this funny advertisement. It features Matt Damon talking about Sarah Palin. I thought it was appropriate given our recent discussions on gender. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6urw_PWHYk ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6urw_PWHYk

Straight from the Personal Narratives and Images of American-ness file...

Sarah Palin as American Girl Doll? Check out the latest from Lily Koppel at the Huffington Post...










































And how in the world should we reconcile the above images and the narrative they allude to with this PhotoShopped fake?


And this illustration?


What motivates these mixed messages? Is it naive to assume that different motivations lie behind each of these representations of Palin?

"Still"

On Friday, the Obama campaign released several new advertisements attacking the McCain campaign. The Obama advertisements initiated three different attacks on McCain: criticizing him as an out of touch, lobbyist supporting geezer who offers more of the same policies. Most important of these advertisements is one entitled “Still” . As the title suggests, the promotion for the Obama campaign brings to light that McCain has not yet adapted to the changing times. As both parties try to promote their candidates as the faces of change, “Still” reveals that McCain shares many of the same beliefs as well as the technological prowess of some of the politicians two decades ago. As an attempt to win back some of the momentum in the campaign, “Still” does mediocre job of presenting Obama’s case. It is ineffective in presenting McCain on subjects that matter, such as the economy, and spends time describing his technological ineptitude.

The images of McCain when he first entered Washington in 1982 present an almost comical image of a time long gone. With horn-rimmed glasses, a disco ball and an antique computer, McCain is compared to many technologies that have become obsolete. While the advertisement is a change from the recent advertisements that focus on the candidates' biographies, its credibility as an argument is doubtable. Although the Obama campaign does present the similarities between McCain’s and Bush’s policies well, it does not go into enough detail to convince an informed voter of why they should vote for Obama. Although the world we live in has become increasingly technology oriented, McCain’s lack of political savvy is not a major indicator of his skills as a politician. Also, the thirty-second clip claims that McCain does not understand the economy because of his tax policies. It does not follow that McCain is ignorant about the economy because he favors reduced taxes and smaller government as a solution to our economy’s problems.