themediamademecrazy.com

i had an interesting conversation this weekend with someone who is related to a whistle blower in the whitewater affair. we discussed the personality characteristics of the clintons and the clinton machine; they can get very ugly when anyone creates speedbumps to their plan, but i think that we are all aware of these tendencies. in general, i have defended hillary’s conniving nature as expectant of the US president. furthermore, i still believe that the characteristics that have been heralded as necessary for president are often defined as bitchy, which works against hillary. however, i had an epiphany this morning…

i really don’t think that anything is going to change. i understand that this is a historical election, but i really don’t think that the system will change, and if this is the case, then i think hillary will be a better president to maneuver through the preexisting bureaucratic structure. however, i understand that only the voters can create change, in which case, obama offers the promise of change. but i question his ability to retain this idealistic stance once faced with the trials of the system. in addition, i think that his distinct negative shift in his pennsylvania campaign under the stress of the election offers evidence to my point.

in addition, he claims to be running a “clean campaign,” which apparently means that he refuses to “go negative” in attacking his opponent. however, when asked about clinton’s bosnia fiasco, he said…

OBAMA: And, you know, I haven’t commented on the issue of Bosnia. You know, I…

STEPHANOPOULOS: Your campaign has.

OBAMA: Of course. But the — because we’re asked about it.

Which begs the question, is the candidate a separate entity from their campaign?

i watched the debate on wednesday night in pennsylvania and i must admit that it was fairly unimpressive. perhaps because i’m so inundated with this primary process, the candidates have simply become parodies of themselves. i know what obama is going to say before he opens his mouth, and i know that hillary is going to attack him for it. since then, he’s been commenting that the debate did not get into the issues for 45 minutes, going on to chastise the debate process for focusing away from the issues with a desire to create controversy. however when they begin to discuss the issues, they only talk about issues that they agree upon. so what’s the point?

if we have nothing more to debate and you have no real issues on which to separate yourself from each other, then clearly you must separate yourself on character and an appeal to the affective component of the american people. that’s why you campaign. not because you’re looking to share your ideas, but instead to get people to rally and be emotionally drawn. obama should know that more than anyone. furthermore, in florida, where campaigning was prohibited as well as media ads, obama managed to run ads through an “oversight” in national television time purchasing, and he still lost. i think that this is indicative of obama’s need to to reach voters on an emotional level thereby bringing them over to his side (hillary as well, i would simply argue that more people had some affective response to her at baseline). alternatively, some would claim that “clinton” has name recognition whereas obama was less known… really? really? it seems since he announced his bid for presidency,  obama is one of the most popular names in american culture (granted, a manipulation over time):

research question: during this campaign season (january - denver), has barak obama been mentioned more times than hillary clinton; a content analysis of the names “hillary clinton”, “clinton”, “barak obama”, and “obama” across major news media (i suppose the easiest would be major print media). or a primetime section of major cable media from say 7-11pm over sample weeks from now until the primaries. i understand that news networks make a concerted effort to balance their time, but biases exist, and often they manifest on this subtle level

just a thought for everyone with all that free time.

obama supporter, texas state senator kirk watson was unable to state ANY of obama’s accomplishments in the senate on ‘hardball with chris matthews.” it’s a remarkable piece of footage, right down to the studio laughter in the end. somewhat painful to watch, but necessary…

however, i would also like to post the question: when did “white voters” become a significant demographic? weren’t they always just referred to as “voters”? i love progress.

i was debating on even voting at all, since a default vote is not appropriate during the primaries… i could explain this to you or you could just watch the video on realnews.com

after the democratic debate in south carolina on martin luther king jr. day, i was prompted to create a fun game to spice up the future debates, although they’re getting pretty feisty as is. introducing: debate bingo!

on each of these 6 cards, catch phrases and major subjects are categorized by candidate. when any of the candidates mention a phrase, you get the square! is a 6×6 design (i apologize for any of you who will miss the center square), which may take a little longer, but they’re pretty long debates [smile]. these cards are specially tilted towards the california debates on cnn, thursday, january 31.

they are all self explanatory, but just a few clarifications…

“green” is in reference to green technology, or green collar jobs. or any use of the term “green” as an adjective implying eco-friendliness
“i met a (wo)man in…” is a nod to any anecdotal story they recite about everyday americans that they meet on the campaign trail whose story “really touches” and “embodies the goals of this campaign.”
“day one” is specifically in references to the first day of the presidency
i think you can figure out the banter that requires a “he/she said” moment.

if there are any confusions, work them out with your fellow viewers, i leave content validation for your discussion.

also, much love to nick saponara for the graphic design. by the way, he recommends that you use pennies to mark your squares. i think i want to get a little donkey stamp.

stay tuned for the republican cards (california debate on cnn, wednesday january 30).

Democratic Debate Bingo Cards
Click to download all 6!

today, south carolina announced that the state would move its primary to january 19 in response to florida’s recent shift, ensuring its role as the first primary in the south.

NYTimes: South Carolina G.O.P. Moves Up Primary

i’m excited for this primary leapfrog, i think that it keeps the the candidates on their toes. instead of skipping from state to state based on its position in the primary ranking, they must now focus on major issues that will speak to a national audience, changing minds through national media. of course there is the argument against a 9-month general election; that’ll suck pretty bad, but i can’t see how it would be worse than the current campaigning culture.

tomorrow is still technically SPORT DEATH DAY. nestled among a historical week of tragedies (virginia, oklahoma, waco, columbine), i understand the potential arguments for and against “sporting death.” however, for those of us who are in the know, we are aware that this phrase, this symbol, and (what i had hoped for) the day has the potential to be a show of support, individuality, and nerd power. having said that, i will be wearing my pin, [and i did put those in the mail this week for anyone that requested them (see pictures)] but perhaps wearing SPORT DEATH to work may make life difficult for my fellow haüsmates.

so if you do choose to sport death tomorrow, please do so with love and in memoriam. do send pictures if you can, and i still intend for this to be an annual day. and i hope to see even more pictures next year.

SPORT DEATH DAY

NOTE: i suppose this is less of an issue for those of you on campus, but if it is, i’d love to hear about it. cause there are a lot of folks at MIT that just don’t get it.

in dick cheney’s exclusive interview with wolf blitzer on wednesday (the day after the president’s state of the union speech), wolf asked the vice president to comment on the fact that his lesbian daughter, mary, is pregnant without a husband. dick refused to answer the question, stating that it was “out of line.”

i found that remarkably offensive; he claims that this should not be part of the discussion, but it was he and his religious fervor that raised this issue and submitted it to american debate. he should have to answer since he forced his ideology into other people’s homes. his family should NOT be exempt.

said during the hearings last week that america is both the problem and the solution in iraq. it was the most perfect comment i’ve heard yet about this war. and i really didn’t think that it was possible to be both the problem and the solution, in any situation, but its true.

so what now?

a day in the life of an american revolutionary youth…