Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts

Thoughts: This Fella is the Man

⊆ 4:57 PM by A. Liebendorfer | , , , , , , , , , , . | ˜ 0 comments »

I am not one to divulge my blogspace to spreading Internet videos, but this one ... this one is a doozy.  I'm not entirely sure I frown upon what this man did, and the question comes up, "What would I do?"

The video explains it all.


To bad it was only a size 10.


Just Saying: "...and I approve this message."

⊆ 9:51 AM by A. Liebendorfer | , , , , , . | ˜ 11 comments »

Presidential front-runner Barack Obama has made history again.  Go figure.


The Illinois junior senator simply mauled his previous monthly election fundraising record by almost three-fold.  In February 2008, with the Democratic nomination shifting to his favor, Obama decided to know no longer use public funds for his campaign.  By August he had set the fundraising record as $62 million, only to be eclipsed the following month by $150 in fundraising efforts putting him at $600 million raised.  McCain, who has only raised $84 million, perched from a conservative vantage point at FOX News and questioned the accuracy of this astronomical figure.  And being down nine points in the Gallup Poll, who could blame him?

A graphic attached to a recent article by The Post tries to put in perspective what a $700 billion bail-out really means.  The figures range from 11,667 Baker University Centers and 208 Oprah Winfreys.

$600 million dollars in campaign financing.  At first blush it seems like people are throwing their money at something maybe not entirely necessary.  Whether or not that's the case is debatablt.  Americans have NEVER thrown their money away on things.  But what happens when Obama wins by a landslide?  I doubt any of that leftover of $600 million (which there probably won't be) will be donated to help the Obama administration we're planning for alleviate economic concerns.

We should possibly look into helping and relying on our banks.  I'm not saying donating to a candidate is undemocratic; that's ludicrous.  But democracy is relative.  I'd say the bad karma from people who have already run to the banks and their good karma of getting involved and donating to a campaign even out.

So I end with three quotes from FDR, a rather appropriate voice in our time, I think.

Confidence... thrives on honesty, on honor, on the sacredness of obligations, on faithful protection and on unselfish performance.  Without them it cannot live.

The only limit to our realization of tomorrow will be our doubts of today.  Let us move forward with strong and active faith.

If we can boondoggle ourselves out of this depressions, that word is going to be enshrined in the hearts of the American people for years to come.


Impressions: Sticks and Stones

⊆ 6:47 PM by A. Liebendorfer | , , , , , . | ˜ 4 comments »

My bucket list has been growing since I got down to Athens:

-kill a bear with my bare hands
-be a centaur for Halloween
-drink a gallon of milk in one city
-run a marathon
-make a documentary that I'd watch

Unlike musicals, I used to like documentaries, but like musicals, now I don't.  This doesn't mean that documentaries were my passion and one day they failed me; I just liked to watch them from time to time.  What burst it for me was the one we watched in Journalism 101 about the elections.  It was very well-done, but between dozing off and the slant it was trying to hide, I had the worst neck ache.  I'm not sure what it is, but now that I have a journalism major cap to put on, I've found myself very critical of them.  

Namely the one we watched tonight at our weekly SPJ meeting.  It was called The Fifth Estate: Sticks and Stones.  It's from the Canadian Broadcasting Company and, though I tried being as objective as possible, it faintly echoed the arrogant, American wannabe stereotype to me.

The entire idea was just stupid, rubbish --it was to illustrate how the apparent great partisan divide in American politics and media is tearing our country apart.  Near the beginning, they had some American say that there hasn't been this kind of partisanship since the Civil War era.  How they hell would he know?

And who the hell do they think they are?  I'm not trying to sound elitist, but they're Canada.  We don't go around bashing their media (which evidently sucks if this garbage was on their national cable).  I guess our all-terrible pundits are too sinister to go into a friendly neighboring country and trash-talk their media.

It all feels like a neighborhood alley fight.

The most prominent figure to me that they had was Phil Donahue, if that says anything.  

Some of the material had merit.  I always enjoy a Bill O'Reilly burst and Ann Coulter really is the antichrist.  Entertainment.  Those people really should be publicly embarrassed, maybe even tried for heresy.

Near the end they showed that the American press --ahem, my profession-- sometimes take things just fill space.  The example they used were the two or three brief comments about George W. Bush's new Cadillac he rode to his second inauguration.  The CBC seems to think that's trivial, and they're entirely right.  But what else are we going to listen to while we wait for the speech?  Commercials?

This is coming from a country that doesn't even have a president.

For your viewing displeasure:


Election '08: '08, Oh God...

⊆ 9:14 AM by A. Liebendorfer | , , , , , , , . | ˜ 3 comments »

I'm partisan!


"Can I call you Joe?" Washington Hall echoed with derision.  I took this as maybe the only chance I'll have in the next hour and a half to refill my water bottle.  Walking down the hall, every room had the debates on and it seemed like Palin's thick, gerund-decapitating accent seemed to seep through the walls.  People had been practicing their impersonations of her all week; by last night they were getting good.

I heard our next cue: "I thing a good barometer here is we try to figure is this a good time or a bad in our economy is go to your kid's soccer game..."

Watching her --not a hard thing to do-- she was bleeding youth.  She fidgeted a little behind her podium, stumbled on her words.  Don't get me wrong.  Biden had his hiccups, namely struggling through pronouncing I think it was "characterized" and dancing around the Alaskan governor a little too much.  I love Sarah Palin.  She's got the image of who should be president.  It's just... she doesn't even know the NATO commander for Afghanistan.  

"Governor Palin," we hoped the moderator would've said, "is there any way you could be more vague?"  I heard talks of drinking games going on where people would chug or what have you when either of the candidates said their lame signature lines.  There were a lot of sirens last night.  I figured them to be Team Palin suffering from alcohol poisoning.

With all the pundits declaring Palin won by not losing, I can't help but disagree.  I'm with everybody else in the middle class that's completely enamored with Sarah, but she just needs time.  She shifted up too many gears too quickly.  Not to mention, you win by winning.

I think it was McLellan-McKiernan mix-up that ruined my view in balanced commentary.  I realized that I really have specific things I want out this election.  Looking at work abroad, the chair of the senate foreign relations committee just appeals to me.  And that's that.

So with a heavy heart, I end this commentary series.  Punditry has no place anywhere, especially on my blog.

Good thing veep debates barely matter.


Election '08: The Man's an Idiot pt. 2 pt. 2

⊆ 10:19 AM by A. Liebendorfer | , , , , , , , . | ˜ 1 comments »

Anyway, Obama's an idiot.


Barring all Goonies-era verbiage, an Obama-Clinton ticket would've been a real double whammy.

The family image in a dual-gender ticket makes its case on Democrat side too.  Let's beat the dead horse for a minute here and restate that times are tough.  Nobody wants to be lead by parents who are at odds with each other.

Though nothing says family values like this:


courtesy YouTube user: VoteMcCainPalin

Near the end of my senior year we were driving to Law Day of all things and we got stuck behind a car going to our county seat.  On the back so eloquently was written, "Clinton '08: Vote for the B****."

That's how people like Hilary Clinton.  If you talk to a Clinton supporter, not one of them will give an epithet describing how approachable she is.  It's her --forgive me-- ideas that drew people to her.  Though some argue that she's the Antichrist, Hilary's all business, and when businesses start failing, all business sounds handy.

Don't get me wrong, after Edwards said he'd decline being on the ticket, Joey the Shark is second-best.  Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is a strong choice for Obama's assertive platform abroad.

And who can't love a guy that does this?


courtesy of YouTube user: rthuffma

But come on Barack, sign on the b****.

Biden's doing minimal work in filling the gaps in Obama's ticket.  Go to their campaign website.  The outline of the foreign policy plan is shoddy at best and gives next to no details on McCain's stand and sparse ones of his own.  If there were a prequel to 1984, Big Brother's campaign website would probably have more specifics than Obama.com.

Word on the street is that Biden might be stepping down from the spot early this month.  If that's the case, Hil better get back into the picture.  That doesn't mean she has to be president.  Actually, the best way to make sure she isn't president to take her in as veep.  You don't see many vice-presidents throwing out their old running mates.

Besides, if we just had that Dream Ticket, we wouldn't be all worried about a close race...


Election '08: The Man's an Idiot pt. 2 pt.1

⊆ 10:03 AM by A. Liebendorfer | , , , , , , . | ˜ 1 comments »

Headaches were abound yesterday at my Religion, Gender, and Sexuality class.  The class is structured around about an hour of review of the reading or expounding beyond the reading followed by a forty-five minute group discussion session.


We finally crossed the no-no border yesterday.  In a class that's aimed at making you comfortable talking about your beliefs, yesterday was the first time we touched on politics.  I elected to take the current presidential race (and what about the congressional one?) philosophically, which proved much more interesting.

Though Sarah's paling in the media, she symbolizes something intriguing on a deeper level.  All this time it was the stereotype that the Democrats would be the first a woman in the Oval Office.  They put the first Catholic there, the first paralytic, and the first man the moon.  Hilary seemed like a shoe-in, but no, we decided to put the first black man this time instead.

Maybe for another blog, McCain's veep pick makes a lot of sense when looking at Republican values.  I've never once heard a liberal stand in front of a crowd and preach about the importance of close families, which is probably Palin's strong point.

The philosophical conclusion I came to while the rest of my group were butting heads and misconstruing each others words yesterday was that McCain is going to be America's dad, and Palin America's hockey mom.  The dual-gender ticket was aimed at making America feeling they were in good hands, Republican style.  McCain didn't only pick Palin to get the woman vote, but also for the imagery and symbolism.  Mom and Dad are going to put a band-aid on the country.

Nothing says American mom more than a mother of five with serviceman for a son, one pregnant daughter, two other daughters, and a son with Down syndrome.  They really are a type of core sample of what the American family is up against these days.

Did it work?  An young, under-qualified governor from one of the country's most corrupt states wasn't the best move.  But wow --I'm not leaning any which way this election--, as a conservative symbol, pure genius.


Election '08: Not Another Debate Analysis

⊆ 12:09 PM by A. Liebendorfer | , , , , , , , , , . | ˜ 0 comments »

This isn't punditry.  A college freshman offering political punditry is almost as absurd as punditry taking over mainstream media.  Knowing well that the debates we're on last night, I was cringing at the thought of waking up and seeing armies of self-proclaimed bloggers-turned-news hubs give their thoughts on how the debates went.  So far, it has been kept to a minimum (I was relieved to see a series on pro wrestling) but just to clarify, I am NOT going to play scoreboard in presidential politics.


The impressions that I got from watching the debates this morning, however, took me aback.   If you didn't have a chance to devote the hour or so Friday night (I call that weekly block of time "kick-off"), I suggest finding it on YouTube.  During the day, more and more posts became more accessible.

In some advanced wisdom, I remember taking the 2004 debates seriously.  They didn't make a lick of difference to me as a high school freshman, but they seemed noteworthy.  I even remember staying up a little later to see one or two in 2000.

It was watching these discolored videos on YouTube that made me realize how grave things are getting on a national level.  While , a few of us Scripps freshmen were sitting on College Green lamenting about the future of our majors.  "It's depressing to hear the professors talk," was said, and I remember saying, "It's like we're getting bachelors in Unemployment, minoring in Useless."

I was taught that debates were about more than just content and regurgitating figures and slamming people, but the candidates themselves.  The debate videos had piqued my curiosity; I took a glance at videos from past debates.

Then it occurred to me: There's a reason plastic caricature masks of Kerry and Bush were so trendy for Halloween 2004.  Amidst the typical "actually, my words were..." and "my opponent's plan..." were a lot of Bush's thoughtful pauses and Kerry's "my fellow Americans"'s.  Politicians were politicians and life was good.

In last night's debate, two people stood behind two podiums and relayed their thoughts.  Watch the videos again.  You can feel the weight of the world squeezing the politics out of them.  Suddenly McCain really was old, and Obama really was young and impulsive.  McCain lectured a little bit and, if you listened closely, Obama snorted into the microphone once or twice.  

Both men scrambled to fit and defend details of their plans into the allotted time.  Moderator Jim Lehrer pointed out that though time was being swapped between them pretty equally, both candidates were using much more than their five minutes.

By the ease and eloquence in their speech, I don't think the slow pace was tactic.  Rather, it showed that we now have people who connect with Americans and care.  

I'm no more optimistic about the state of our country.  I'm still not used to personal candidates, and it worries me, but in the same token, come January, there's going to be a little more work be done on Pennsylvania Avenue.

So, to parody Eliot:
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but passionate politicians


Election '08: The Man's an Idiot pt. 1

⊆ 8:02 PM by A. Liebendorfer | , , , , , , , , , . | ˜ 2 comments »

The second part in this series will focus on the Obama, the man that was too good to pick a woman as a running mate; but now, let's take a look at McCain, the man that pulled a beauty queen with a pockmarked reputation out of his you-know-where.


The killjoy to any good Young Republican rant is the Obama supporter's infamous factoid: Though John McCain graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy, he was 894th out of 899 people in his class, not to mention he lost five jets while in the military.

It's hard to dispute something like this when you take a look at select parts of his energy plan, namely the clause about nuclear power.

John McCain Will Put His Administration On Track To Construct 45 New Nuclear Power Plants By 2030 With The Ultimate Goal Of Eventually Constructing 100 New Plants. Nuclear power is a proven, zero-emission source of energy, and it is time we recommit to advancing our use of nuclear power. Currently, nuclear power produces 20% of our power, but the U.S. has not started construction on a new nuclear power plant in over 30 years. China, India and Russia have goals of building a combined total of over 100 new plants and we should be able to do the same. It is also critical that the U.S. be able to build the components for these plants and reactors within our country so that we are not dependent on foreign suppliers with long wait times to move forward with our nuclear plans. 

JohnMcCain.com

I'm sorry, I was doubled up on floor after I read this.  By the time I was back on the chair soundly, I felt insulted.  Let's break this down.  Hammer Time.

Skipping the horribly capitalized title, nuclear power is, in fact, not zero-emission.  Nor is any way of making electricity.  Don't get me wrong.  The actual process of making nuclear power is far more eco-friendly than the other ways.  According to the Energy Information Administration, nuclear power generates 3.1 grams of CO2 per kilowatt-hour while hydroelectric power produces 11 grams, 600 grams for natural gas, 900 grams for oil, and 950 grams for coal burning.

What this doesn't consider is the CO2 it takes to do all the behind the scenes things.  Nuclear plants are made of very big pieces of machinery and a lot of large-scale transportation, not to mention mining and enriching the fuels.  Don't worry it's still lower than most, but not by nearly as much as you'd think.  Leading chemist Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen says that the whole nuclear process could emit from 80 to 480 grams per kilowatt-hour, up to almost 160 times what many think.

That myth disproved, let's move on.

The countries mentioned all have something in common.  They are all rapidly expanding and two of them are providing electricity to some areas for the first time.  The United States already has an energy infrastructure to work off of.  China and India each both have more than three times the population of the U.S.  McCain's website makes it sound like we're running behind in the nuclear industry, but actually, we're still the world's largest producer of nuclear power.  No.  No we shouldn't be able to do the same.

Now it's time for the chuckle.

Forty-five new plants by 2030.  Considering there are 66 plants operating as of the beginning of 2008, the eventual goal of 100 new plants sounds like a a good idea.  That would make nuclear energy the main way the U.S. would get its power.

However, comma...

Unless the price tag for nuclear power plants, this solution from the McCain campaign is an outright fairy tale.  As a reference, the Olkiluoto power plant that is slated to go online in Finland next year, is priced at roughly $5.5 billion.  This is top-of-the-line, state-of-the-art, something a McCain administration would argue America deserved.  Keep in mind here: 100 of these in the next thirty years.

A little work on Wikipedia goes a long way.


Sources:
"Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Generation of Electric Power in the United States." CO2 Emission Report. July 2000. Energy Information Administration. 23 Sept. 2008 .

Van Leeuwen, Jan Willem Storm, and Philip Smith. "The CO2 Emission of the Nuclear Life-cycle."Nuclear Power: The Energy Balance. 2005.

A note:
Sorry about the shoddy MLA sources.  I thought better few and bad than none.


Older Posts