Is The Media Choosing Our Candidates?
Posted by: Brent James on February 26, 2008 Hot Issues •
This question has been raised repeatedly and rightly so. Some have posed it this way: Should Big Media choose our candidates? Of course not. That would be absurd. But aren’t they, in effect, doing just that? They have the power to exalt or the power to shun and they exercise it relentlessly. But is anyone actually listening? I mean really, who cares what they say. Free thinkers don’t, finding it thoroughly repugnant.
There seems, however, to be an effect. We see it in a turning tide. We hear it in a cleverly coined phrase. And timing is everything. In the first few days of January, an entire month before the Super Tuesday primaries, news outlets began foreshadowing her defeat with subtle suggestions. These became increasingly obvious as more opportunists piled on. “Is Hillary Finished?” appeared up as a question across the Blogoshere. From the likes of Newsweek, MSNBC, and the Wall Street Journal came insinuations that she should quit the race. Now, her team is portrayed as beaten, in shambles.
Call them sharks or piranhas, reminds me of blood in the water and the subsequent feeding frenzy.
Remember Rudy? He was pitched by the mainstream press as the people’s choice. Conservatives rejected that chicanery out of hand and he never gained popular support. He was the establishment’s choice, not ours.
And what of John McCain? It was said that he couldn’t make the grade because he was an angry, liberal, Washington insider that conservatives would not support. Then, seemingly overnight (just as Rudy had faded from wishful prominence), he was the only Republican on the radar. Further, he was lauded as the viable choice (now second choice) for Republicans, generally, and the moderate-independent voters. The media can just as easily create doubt about a candidate’s chances as they can a favorable impression.
Heard much about Ron Paul or Mike Huckabee lately? You might think both had dropped out of the race with the lack of mention either gets from the press. It is un-American to shut them out of the debate. Both have challenging messages we ought to hear, but the media doesn’t support those having, in their estimation, no chance of winning. Here we go again. By following their lead each election cycle, we end up in the same place, different candidates.
Bottom line: Don’t listen to them. They are mostly an opportunistic lot (opportunity for them, not you and me), unstable and misled. All the more important to know the Bible’s prescriptions for voting your godly values.
Next Stops: Ohio, Texas, Vermont, and Rhode Island.
(2) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Hanging On For Dear Life
Posted by: Brent James on February 26, 2008 Hot Issues •
You might not know it, but Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul, and Hillary Clinton are holding onto this race by their fingernails. And for different reasons.
Mr. Huckabee is low on funds, but of course that’s nothing new. He has been since last November. His delegate totals are far behind frontrunner McCain’s and the media scarcely mentions his name anymore. Ron Paul has about $8 million to spend and is extremely disciplined and efficient with his campaign expenditures. His delegates aren’t competitive and once again, the media act as though he doesn’t exist.
Hillary Clinton is a somewhat different story. She too is cash strapped, having to augment her campaign with personal funds, but her delegates and much higher profile are not to be overlooked by the mainstream media. They are quick, however, to stack the deck when things turn south – even by the slimmest margins. There are now reporting that she is fading in Ohio.
These three may be hanging on by their fingernails, but I’ll wager Hillary’s are longest.
Next Stops: Ohio, Texas, Vermont, and Rhode Island.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
What Sort Are You?
Posted by: Brent James on February 25, 2008 Biblical Values •
As you “shop” for our next president, shouldn’t character be the prime consideration? Not the candidate’s character, but yours. Scrutinizing a person’s ability to justly lead our nation is done so through our own personal lens. Most choose the candidate they feel is best based on their values. But aren’t we, in effect, saying much about ourselves in the process?
Would anyone select a president with lesser values than his or her own? That’s courting disaster. Or do we believe that a president should reflect the electorate in every possible way? Voters preferred Bill Clinton to his predecessors because he was “cool.” Somehow, he was more human. He made Americans more comfortable with their own failings. But character matters and integrity never goes out of style.
Some consider it hypocritical to elect a person with higher values than their own. The question then becomes, “Why should we expect more from an elected official than what we expect of ourselves?” Our standard should be exemplary, should it not? The best mankind has to offer.
All peoples are prone to human failure, an unfortunate characteristic of the race. We would do well to emulate a higher standard than one of our making. Though many Christians identify with King David, it is Christ’s unfailing example to which we should aspire.
“Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.” Acts 17:11
Apparently, people of noble character do their homework.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Making Progress
Posted by: Bobby Reed on February 22, 2008 Biblical Values •
From politics to the pew, and throughout American history, the issue of race has been a thorn in our nation’s side. Memories run deep and the sting of racism is not forgotten. Many who supported the institution of slavery mistakenly looked to the Bible for support. Yet the abolition of slavery and the Civil Rights Movement were birthed out of biblically based principles that hold that all people have equal worth before God.
While there are many areas in American society that still need to improve regarding the issue of race, the fact that a non-Caucasian is a leading contender for the office of President of the United States indicates our nation has made great strides in this arena.
In his well-known “I Have a Dream” speech, given on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963, Martin Luther King, Jr., said, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
In this election season, it is important as ever that we heed Dr. King’s call. As Christians, it is our biblical duty to educate ourselves on the important issues of the day in light of Scripture’s teaching, evaluate the candidates based on these issues, and then vote, not based on race or skin color, but on our values, beliefs and convictions.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Get It Over With
Posted by: Brent James on February 22, 2008 Hot Issues •
The more valuable information we have with which to make decisions, the better. In this contest, even the unsavory claims merit. Quietly sifting for useful dirt, the operatives would do well to spare us the time and trouble (not to mention contributions) by springing their surprises now, rather than in October. But these things take time, you see. Revelations work their way to the surface slowly, sometimes by coincidence, often by calculation. I suspect as the conventions draw near, most will come on cue.
The sharp exchanges of Thursday’s debate in Austin were more about the next round of primaries than any alleged differences between the candidates. Texas and Ohio could extend a lead or crush a dream. Beyond March 4th, the string of primaries runs until June 3rd after which we have five months of waiting for the general election – a seeming eternity to gather facts or become disillusioned.
Expect this period to be punctuated by harsh claims and brutal assaults. After all, this is war. Be not anxious for the next shoe to drop. Gee, how can you help it?
A friend who owns a sick snake exclaimed, “Believe me, there’s nothing worse than a thrown-up mouse.” Well, I can think of one – an October Surprise that knocks your choice out of the race.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Here’s Where They Stand
Posted by: Brent James on February 20, 2008 Hot Issues •
After the February 19 Primaries, here’s where the candidates stand.
REPUBLICANS Primary States: Wisconsin & Washington McCain won both, bringing his delegate total to 942 compared with Huckabee’s 245 and Paul’s 14.
DEMOCRATS Primary States: Wisconsin & Hawaii Obama won both bringing his delegate total to 1319 to Clinton’s 1250. Both totals include those pledged superdelegates.
BONUS Question: What about the undecided delegates and those pledged to candidates who have left the race? Who gets those?
Actually it is not that simple. Party rules decide how these are awarded. Delegates pledged to Romney in Michigan were reapportioned to McCain and Mike Huckabee at a Republican state convention. The eight Wyoming delegates pledged to Romney are now undecided (un-pledged) delegates. The have the choice of whom to support with their pledge provided they are seated (confirmed as officially participating) at the National Convention in September.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
1 Down, 3 To Go
Posted by: Brent James on February 14, 2008 Hot Issues •
1 Down, 3 To Go
Getting lean is what its all about. Thinning the pack is a good thing, unless of course, your dog got booted. Rough to say, but that’s the reality of this gig. Last man standing.
Here’s where we are:
Over the weekend, Barak Obama & John McCain swept the state primaries of Virginia, Maryland, and Washington D.C. for their respective parties. The current delegate totals won by each candidate, as well as the number needed to win the party nomination, are listed below.
REPUBLICANS (1191 to Win) McCain 921 Huckabee 243 Paul 14
DEMOCRATS (2025 to Win) Obama 1275 Clinton 1220
NEXT STOP – Wisconsin, Washington, and Hawaii (Dems Only) on Tuesday, Feb 19th.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Supersaturated Tuesday
Posted by: Brent James on February 5, 2008 Hot Issues •
If you just woke up and realized it is Super Tuesday and you’re not sure if your state is involved, we’ve got your back. Well, almost. You’ll still need to find your polling place.
There are 43 contests in 24 states – that’s because not every state has a primary for both parties. The 19 states with both Republican AND Democratic primaries today are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Utah.
In the Super Tuesday states, Montana and West Virginia are involved in the Republican primaries ONLY, and Idaho, New Mexico and Kansas are Democratic primary states ONLY.
If you’d like some last minute details, the New York Times covers it pretty well.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
2 Down, 4 to Go
Posted by: Brent James on February 5, 2008 Hot Issues •
Guiliani’s gone. Edwards exited. A lot of political commentators got it right. Big deal. Now comes the harder stuff. Who’s next?
Do any of the pundits know more than you or me? I’ll admit they have the connections and as such, are privileged to the kind of inside information you and I would probably have to pay for. Still the answer is ‘No.’ In the end, none of them know what is going to happen in this race. And race it is. Down-to-the-wire campaigning and last minute stops to pull out all stops.
As the dust gets kicked up, please don’t let mention of early voting results sway you in your decision to vote. Your values-based vote helps balance those cast by the beauty contest crowd. And for all their reporting, the media seems to prefer that you know as little as possible. Well, less of all things substantive, that is. Have you noticed some candidates are repeatedly overlooked. Most news outlets fail to even mention them. Is it really due to their insignificant polling numbers as claimed or is some agency trying hard to shape the results? Your guess is as good as mine.
But we have a good idea, huh?
(1) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Spending Into Oblivion
Posted by: Brent James on February 4, 2008 Hot Issues •
If you were the American president, what gift would you give these Untied States before riding into the sunset? My guess is that most of us would want to leave office having secured an increased financial stability and a prosperous economy. That way, regardless of who succeeds you, be they Democrat or Republican, the country has a better chance of moving forward with hope and a positive momentum. A bit of breathing room while we continue to fight (checks and balances work).So what’s with President Bush proposing the country’s first $3 trillion budget – the largest ever. Whatever happened to the idea of smaller government? So much for good intentions. This budget holds the line on spending for most government programs, increases defense spending to fight terrorism, and the only proposed savings would come from slowing the growth of health programs. Oh yes, the tax cuts are still part of the deal. This neat summary the Office of Management and Budget explains in over 2000 pages.
If enacted, this bill would supposedly balance the budget by 2012, assuming the economy suffers no unexpected downturns. But in light of recent market news, that’s too much to assume. We may already be "downturning." And why 2012? Why is every "fix" to be realized at some future date? Because government can’t live in the present like we citizens are expected to. Because Congress refused to balance the budget each and every time the effort to do so has been made.
Joel Kaplan, Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget, had this to say about the 2007 budget, “The President is also proposing again to hold discretionary spending growth below the rate of inflation, cut discretionary spending that’s not related to national security, and slow the rate of entitlement spending growth. Last year the Congress delivered on all three of these proposals for spending restraint – we’re hopeful we can do it again this year.” Spending restraint? Please. They’re politically bound. Read Mr. Kaplan's informative exchanges. They are telling big government speak.
Foolishly, Americans and American businesses have followed our government’s lead by borrowing to spend another day. Now, like them, we are in real trouble. Rather than saving our money, we are going to foreign countries for cash. Know why China has money to lend? Because they save and we don’t. Our complete lack of fiscal restraint is endemic. Remember, government can’t fix anything – especially that which it least understands, our free market economy. Words of advice from the business sector: Get out of the way, stop spending money you don’t have, stop asking for more tax revenues, and stop trampling our potential with endless growth-stifling policies. The market will heal itself. Read a businessman's perspective.
Who would’ve thought President Bush would be presiding over this kind of reckless government spending that has come to characterize his administration? Not those electing him to office. I voted for him, but I am reminded by those more experienced, that I didn’t listen closely enough. I didn’t have discriminating vision. The information was there, they say, it was just cleverly tucked in between what he actually said while campaigning. His many policy and program ideas/proposals had at their center a government solution. These days I have a much keener set of eyes. That’s why knowing the candidates is crucial to your vote this November.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
