The first national poll conducted after Barack Obama publicly named Joe Biden as his running mate suggests that the battle for the presidency between the Illinois senator and John McCain is all tied up.
CNN Article
Friday night, Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) announced Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE)as his running mate for the Presidential election. In the most recent polls since this announcement, It appears Obama and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) are now in a dead heat for the Presidency. Now, there is no conclusive way to say that Biden is the cause of this closing of the gap, but it would be awfully naive to believe he had nothing to do with it.
Obama chose biden, despite the 28% of registered democrats who wanted him to chose Sen. Hilary Clinton (D-NY). Recent polls have shown that 1-in-5 of Clinton supporters are voting for McCain over Obama. Choosing Biden only further ostracizes this same group of voters. Furthermore, Biden has failed multiple times to even get the nomination for the White House. He first ran in 1988, but withdrew after accusations of plagiarizing a speech. He has been in the senate for 36 years, so he is very popular with the people of Delaware, but that is not going to help on a national scale. Time will tell.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Monday, August 18, 2008
Spirituality is Not a Political Commodity
"I also believe that talking too much about one's faith and religion, in my view, is something between me and God." - John McCain
CNN Article
Over the weekend, mega-church Pastor Rick Warren, made famous by his best selling book, "Purpose Driven Life," held a forum with the two Presidential candidates. This forum is one of the first times Republican Candidate John McCain discussed his faith in detail. Often one to deflect the question or change the subject (evident in the above quote), McCain very clearly spelled out his spiritual status when he told forum attendees that he is, "saved and forgiven."
This election marks one of the first times that evangelical Christian voters are considered a battleground between Republicans and Democrats. The media has been overwhelmingly interested in how young evangelicals may be leaving their GOP base to side with Democrats on a number of social justice and environmental issues. Ryan Messmore, the William E. Simon Fellow in Religion and a Free Society at the Heritage Foundation, addresses the way that the media has failed to accurately report this supposed shit, noting that these are topics that Christians have shown interest in for years (Heritage Foundation Article).
Sen. Obama has become such a popular candidate among his fellow party members because of his constant reference to his faith and to scripture. Democratic strategists are hoping that he can pull many young evangelicals away from the GOP. While I certainly do not fault Sen. Obama for speaking his faith, I do take issue with those politicians who use their faith as a political selling point. While a number of Republican strategists may have done so with President Bush, which I do not condone, the President himself has only ever mentioned his faith in personal ways and how his beliefs affect his decisions. As such, my problem is with Obama's handlers, not Obama himself (as of yet). Let me again point out that Republicans are often just as guilty, if not more so, when it comes to this.
I believe that all people, regardless of their political aspirations, should consider their beliefs when making any worthwhile decisions. I support those candidates that not only vote their conscience, but also factor in their spirituality. What I do not condone is political mercenaries who use a person's spiritual beliefs as a way to sell their candidate to the masses. You should not have to point out that this candidate is religious, or has views that coincide with certain religious subgroups. You should simply lay out your political views and your campaign platform, and rely individuals to decide if they agree with you or not. God is not a politician, and He is not selling point for your political aspirations. Follow Him, run your race, and see where it takes you.
CNN Article
Over the weekend, mega-church Pastor Rick Warren, made famous by his best selling book, "Purpose Driven Life," held a forum with the two Presidential candidates. This forum is one of the first times Republican Candidate John McCain discussed his faith in detail. Often one to deflect the question or change the subject (evident in the above quote), McCain very clearly spelled out his spiritual status when he told forum attendees that he is, "saved and forgiven."
This election marks one of the first times that evangelical Christian voters are considered a battleground between Republicans and Democrats. The media has been overwhelmingly interested in how young evangelicals may be leaving their GOP base to side with Democrats on a number of social justice and environmental issues. Ryan Messmore, the William E. Simon Fellow in Religion and a Free Society at the Heritage Foundation, addresses the way that the media has failed to accurately report this supposed shit, noting that these are topics that Christians have shown interest in for years (Heritage Foundation Article).
Sen. Obama has become such a popular candidate among his fellow party members because of his constant reference to his faith and to scripture. Democratic strategists are hoping that he can pull many young evangelicals away from the GOP. While I certainly do not fault Sen. Obama for speaking his faith, I do take issue with those politicians who use their faith as a political selling point. While a number of Republican strategists may have done so with President Bush, which I do not condone, the President himself has only ever mentioned his faith in personal ways and how his beliefs affect his decisions. As such, my problem is with Obama's handlers, not Obama himself (as of yet). Let me again point out that Republicans are often just as guilty, if not more so, when it comes to this.
I believe that all people, regardless of their political aspirations, should consider their beliefs when making any worthwhile decisions. I support those candidates that not only vote their conscience, but also factor in their spirituality. What I do not condone is political mercenaries who use a person's spiritual beliefs as a way to sell their candidate to the masses. You should not have to point out that this candidate is religious, or has views that coincide with certain religious subgroups. You should simply lay out your political views and your campaign platform, and rely individuals to decide if they agree with you or not. God is not a politician, and He is not selling point for your political aspirations. Follow Him, run your race, and see where it takes you.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Pelosi Threatens Free Thinking Party Members
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi blasted Sen. Joe Lieberman on Wednesday for making what she called "totally irresponsible" remarks about Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and warned that the Senate might retaliate by revoking Lieberman's committee chairmanship.
SF Gate Article
I am glad to see that individuality and free thinking are so well embraced by the Democratic Party Leaders.
SF Gate Article
I am glad to see that individuality and free thinking are so well embraced by the Democratic Party Leaders.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Candidates Take Different Routes to Same Conclusion on Georgia
Obama later Monday read a statement on camera in which he seemed to come closer to McCain's position, saying Russia's invasion was a "turning point" in its relationship with the West.
CNN Article
As of now, both Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) and Senator John McCain (R-AZ) have pit themselves against Russia over the current hostilities in Georgia. Both Presidential Candidates place the blame for the conflict squarely on Russia's shoulders. However, Sen. McCain was a little quicker in getting to that point.
Just to bring you up to speed, Russian forces invaded Georgia last Friday, after Georgian military forces shot down two Russian military jets. Georgian officials claim the Russian aircraft were bombing Georgian forces in South Ossetia, a pro-Russian region that wants to secede from Georgia. French President Nicolas Sarkozy, the current head of the European Union, claims that he and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev have negotiated a "cease fire" (though Georgia says the violence continues) but not an absolute end to the conflict. Russian forces still occupy territory in Georgia.
"Russia should immediately and unconditionally cease its military operations and withdraw all forces from sovereign Georgian territory," McCain said in a statement to reporters shortly after his campaign plane landed in Iowa on Friday. From the start, McCain was condemning Russia for entering Georgian territory. McCain is known for his biased views against Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, often referring to Putin's KGB roots. While McCain was quick to condemn Russia, Obama was a bit more cautious.
"I strongly condemn the outbreak of violence in Georgia, and urge an immediate end to armed conflict," Obama said on Friday. The Junior Senator from Illinois is currently vacationing with his family in Hawaii, though his campaign claims he is keeping abreast of the situation. While he called for a end to the violence, he did not go so far as to place any blame on Russia...at first. After speaking with Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, Obama changed his tone, but continued to keep a take a peace oriented approach.
"Now is the time for Georgia and Russia to show restraint, and to avoid an escalation to full scale war. Georgia's territorial integrity must be respected. All sides should enter into direct talks on behalf of stability in Georgia, and the United States, the United Nations Security Council, and the international community should fully support a peaceful resolution to this crisis."
So the question here, is who had the best reaction? McCain immediately condemned Russia, now considered by most of the international community as the unwarranted aggressor. Obama refrained from condemning either country until he had all the facts, finally speaking against Russia on Monday. To a certain extent, both candidates reacted in the proper manner.
Obama chose not to jump to conclusions until he had more information (which might have been sooner if he were not on vacation). Taking time to gather the facts is certainly an admirable quality. However, there are certain times when a national leader must be seen as decisive and steadfast. McCain showed himself to be just that, basing his stance off of initial reports, as well as his considerable experience in foreign affairs.
At the same time, if further investigation had shown that Georgian military forces were committing atrocities in South Ossetia, then McCain would have looked like a trigger happy cowboy. However, McCain is an intelligent man (his campaign flops notwithstanding) with a great deal of experience in international matters. He made an initial read of the situation, and took a stand, showing his leadership skills and his decisive nature.
In the end, this is a matter for individual voters to decide, but McCain's response showed him to be the intelligent, confident leader, while Obama seemed to be indecisive and unsure what side to take. It could be for a lack of experience, or it could be a charachter flaw. Of course, this is just one man's opinion.
CNN Article
As of now, both Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) and Senator John McCain (R-AZ) have pit themselves against Russia over the current hostilities in Georgia. Both Presidential Candidates place the blame for the conflict squarely on Russia's shoulders. However, Sen. McCain was a little quicker in getting to that point.
Just to bring you up to speed, Russian forces invaded Georgia last Friday, after Georgian military forces shot down two Russian military jets. Georgian officials claim the Russian aircraft were bombing Georgian forces in South Ossetia, a pro-Russian region that wants to secede from Georgia. French President Nicolas Sarkozy, the current head of the European Union, claims that he and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev have negotiated a "cease fire" (though Georgia says the violence continues) but not an absolute end to the conflict. Russian forces still occupy territory in Georgia.
"Russia should immediately and unconditionally cease its military operations and withdraw all forces from sovereign Georgian territory," McCain said in a statement to reporters shortly after his campaign plane landed in Iowa on Friday. From the start, McCain was condemning Russia for entering Georgian territory. McCain is known for his biased views against Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, often referring to Putin's KGB roots. While McCain was quick to condemn Russia, Obama was a bit more cautious.
"I strongly condemn the outbreak of violence in Georgia, and urge an immediate end to armed conflict," Obama said on Friday. The Junior Senator from Illinois is currently vacationing with his family in Hawaii, though his campaign claims he is keeping abreast of the situation. While he called for a end to the violence, he did not go so far as to place any blame on Russia...at first. After speaking with Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, Obama changed his tone, but continued to keep a take a peace oriented approach.
"Now is the time for Georgia and Russia to show restraint, and to avoid an escalation to full scale war. Georgia's territorial integrity must be respected. All sides should enter into direct talks on behalf of stability in Georgia, and the United States, the United Nations Security Council, and the international community should fully support a peaceful resolution to this crisis."
So the question here, is who had the best reaction? McCain immediately condemned Russia, now considered by most of the international community as the unwarranted aggressor. Obama refrained from condemning either country until he had all the facts, finally speaking against Russia on Monday. To a certain extent, both candidates reacted in the proper manner.
Obama chose not to jump to conclusions until he had more information (which might have been sooner if he were not on vacation). Taking time to gather the facts is certainly an admirable quality. However, there are certain times when a national leader must be seen as decisive and steadfast. McCain showed himself to be just that, basing his stance off of initial reports, as well as his considerable experience in foreign affairs.
At the same time, if further investigation had shown that Georgian military forces were committing atrocities in South Ossetia, then McCain would have looked like a trigger happy cowboy. However, McCain is an intelligent man (his campaign flops notwithstanding) with a great deal of experience in international matters. He made an initial read of the situation, and took a stand, showing his leadership skills and his decisive nature.
In the end, this is a matter for individual voters to decide, but McCain's response showed him to be the intelligent, confident leader, while Obama seemed to be indecisive and unsure what side to take. It could be for a lack of experience, or it could be a charachter flaw. Of course, this is just one man's opinion.
Thursday, August 07, 2008
McCain Better Fit For Teachers Unions?
The top goal of both teachers’ unions is driving a stake into the federal No Child Left Behind Act. That stake, however, is far more likely to get pounded in by John McCain than by Barack Obama, who won the overwhelming endorsement of both unions.
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/08/08/45read.h27.html
Richard Whitmire, an editorial writer for USA Today, makes a fairly novel point in that both the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) endorsed Senator Obama for President, despite the fact that McCain may actually serve their interests on No Child Left Behind better than Barack. Whitmire looks at Obama's speeches on NCLB, noting that he does not actually address anything in the law, instead relying on useless rhetoric to gain support from the leftist unions.
When you break down the issues, McCain and Obama are both useless in the areas of federal education spending, school choice, and performance pay for teachers. While McCain would not raise spending, the Democratically controlled Congress holds the power of the purse, not the President. On school choice, there are too few optimal choices for public school swapping, leaving Charter Schools as the only viable option. Obama is a strong supporter of charter schools, so that would put him at odds with the unions, along with McCain. Both candidates have come out in favor of performance pay for teachers, so that just leaves NCLB.
This is just another case of political entities (which is all the NEA and AFT are) following the status quo of supporting a Democrat, regardless of his policies.
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/08/08/45read.h27.html
Richard Whitmire, an editorial writer for USA Today, makes a fairly novel point in that both the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) endorsed Senator Obama for President, despite the fact that McCain may actually serve their interests on No Child Left Behind better than Barack. Whitmire looks at Obama's speeches on NCLB, noting that he does not actually address anything in the law, instead relying on useless rhetoric to gain support from the leftist unions.
When you break down the issues, McCain and Obama are both useless in the areas of federal education spending, school choice, and performance pay for teachers. While McCain would not raise spending, the Democratically controlled Congress holds the power of the purse, not the President. On school choice, there are too few optimal choices for public school swapping, leaving Charter Schools as the only viable option. Obama is a strong supporter of charter schools, so that would put him at odds with the unions, along with McCain. Both candidates have come out in favor of performance pay for teachers, so that just leaves NCLB.
This is just another case of political entities (which is all the NEA and AFT are) following the status quo of supporting a Democrat, regardless of his policies.