Hot Issues
Deciphering the “Bump”
Posted by: Ryan Sanders on April 22, 2008 Hot Issues •
Stephen Colbert, the personality of The Colbert Report on Comedy Central, the man that brought the world the Best-Selling book I AM AMERICA (And So Can You!), the Ben & Jerry’s Americone Dream, and the word truthiness to our dictionaries, has put himself on the map for comedy and politics. Yes, Colbert has succeeded in making politics fun, or at least he has made an art out of poking fun at and with political pundits.
Colbert appears to be the epitomy of non-partisan politics, or rather, should I say, partisan. He equally sides and calls out both Democrats and Republicans. You might remember what Colbert termed the “Colbert bump” a couple of years back. Perhaps you watched as Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee appeared on The Colbert Report multiple times and preceded to go from fifth in the primary’s to second in the process. Was it the “bump” or simply astute campaigning?
If you’ve never watched a show of the Report, take notice of this article from LiveScience. Andrea Thompson, staff writer for LiveScience points out that there is some truth to the “Colbert bump,” whereby guests see a boost in popularity or notoriety by simply appearing on the show. In advance of the Pennsylvania primary, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama made appearances on “The Colbert Report” recently.
When folks such as James Fowler, a political scientist at the University of California, San Diego studies the evidence; rest assured, there is something to the phenomenon. Make no mistake about it, before the presidential campaign is over, the person that we will call president will have more than likely traveled through The Colbert Report on his or her way to the White House.
When voters stand at the booth to vote in November, it’s ludicrous, but ultimately plausible, that some voters will cast a ballot by how familiar the candidate is to him or her. Please, I’m begging you, do not vote this way. Watch all The Colbert Report episodes you want; but please, take time to do some research on each candidate. I don’t care if John McCain co-host with Colbert for the remainder of the season, please understand why you are voting the way you are voting.
First Thessalonians 5:21 says, “… but test all things. Hold on to what is good.” Don’t let the “Colbert bump” turn into the “Colbert dump”, as Stephen might call it.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Primaries & Doldrums
Posted by: Brent James on April 18, 2008 Hot Issues •
The Mississippi Primary on March 11 didn’t do much in the way of deciding who will be the Democrat’s presidential nominee, but that’s nothing new in this election season. As expected, both candidates will most likely arrive at the finish line in somewhat of a stalemate. That isn’t to say one might not have a decided advantage. But advantages are like the wind being quite hard to keep. In Mississippi, Barak Obama won 61% to Clinton’s 37%. The delegates went 19 and 14, respectively.
Looking at the results, it is most interesting to see how few voted and of those who did vote, how many of them chose to write-in other candidates, apparently dissatisfied with the current national choices. While the percentages of those preferring other candidates was small, they do provide a glimpse into what is becoming a rather unusual election.
Some Christian leaders remain steadfast that all believers have a spiritual-moral duty (civic duty perhaps being easier to prove) to cast a vote in November. Others are not so inclined, strongly proclaiming our currently slate of candidates (on both sides of the aisle) unacceptable.
One thing we do know, the remaining primaries are just as unlikely to provide a distanced frontrunner. The pressure is on Clinton to win all of the upcoming contests in order to legitimize her claims that she is the one to lead us. Only thing is, the numbers aren’t there. Coupled with the way delegates are apportioned to the Democrat contest winners, there is no way to overcome Obama’s lead. They will be delivered to the convention floor with options in the works. And there are still the superdelegates, of which Hillary’s commanding lead has shrunk to 34. Of the 795 total, only around 330 remain uncommitted.
The Pennsylvania Primary, coming up next week on April 22, in the latest Zogby poll has it: Clinton 45%, Obama 44%, with 12% still wandering. The effect of Wednesday’s debate is unlikely to change those results.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Zogby, Rasmussen, Gallup?
Posted by: Brent James on April 17, 2008 Hot Issues •
Who do you trust in the race to the White House? Right now, it’s not necessary that you trust anyone as this contest has more than six months left. I used to think it was excruciating to watch a mile race, that is, until I became a miler. Then, it seemed fast.
Polls are amusing, but not particularly reliable over any period. There are simply too many variables – and those change daily. Any number of mishaps or minor revelations could erupt into a feeding frenzy, dropping a candidate’s numbers overnight. As we have seen.
In February, a general election Rasmussen poll showed McCain losing to both Democrats by a few points. Pew Research indicated similar findings. By March, Zogby was reporting a stronger McCain beating the Democrats by fewer than 10 points. That same month, Gallup reported Hillary and Obama each beating McCain by similar margins. There were some likely reasons, however. Into the mix went Obama’s Pastorgate, Hilllary’s Bosnia sniper story and the Obama remarks attacked as “elitist” by McCain and Hillary. Shakeup and take some more polls.
The most recent Zogby, Rasmussen, and Gallup polls show strong similarities for the general election results. Separated by a hair’s breadth, in order, are Obama, McCain, and Clinton. Even the electoral math, based on the individual state contests, has Obama winning 280 delegates to McCain’s 258.
Depending on where you stand, this could be encouraging or discouraging, but don’t count on these numbers staying the same. There’s just too much time left and too much money left to spend. My only wish in all this is that the billion dollars that will have been spent campaigning would’ve been given to support Christian outreach the world over.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Organized Movement
Posted by: Ryan Sanders on April 16, 2008 Hot Issues •
Today was no different than must days. I made time to read on the Internet news and blogs on things that interested me. One thing stood out. Like most days, a thinker challenges me. One such thinker that happens to blog. You may know him, his name is Seth Godin. Although I’ve never met him, I know that I like him. I like him because he challenges me to think. Not only does he challenge me to think, but he also challenges me to think bigger and differently than the status quo.
Today, he asked his readers an important question, a question that we all should ask ourselves. He wrote, “What happens when we organize?” While the spring season is upon us, he wasn’t necessarily speaking of the traditional time for cleaning as much as he was pointing toward the idea of organizing people around an idea.
As he pointed out, “Most power occurs because one side is better organized than the other”. Generally, as Godin clarifies, “Labor is usually less well organized than management, criminals are usually less well organized than the police and customers are always less well organized than producers.” He continues by making the claim that one person can make a complaint to a company and have nothing change. Add 10 people or 100 people, and suddenly, things begin to change. New rules begin to take shape.
The last sentence of his post reads, “The system doesn’t know what to do with a movement.” Dictionary.com defines the noun “movement” this way, “a change of position or location … a progressive development of ideas toward a particular conclusion … a principal division or section of a sonata, symphony, or the like … motion; rhythm; time; tempo.” It’s interesting to ponder movement with regard to music for a moment. Yet what if we organized our ideas politically? What would be our most important issues? If we could design a movement such that, 10 people or 100 people in a given community or state not only knew biblical values, but those same, informed people also voted their values?
Then, we’d change the system … for the better. Now, get let’s get out of the garage and start organizing!
(1) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Cowboy Boots and Common Folk
Posted by: Ryan Sanders on April 9, 2008 Hot Issues •
Think you’re ready to make your own bid for the presidency?
Before you say yes, think on this. While I’m no strategist for a political party, for several years now I’ve been interested in what it takes to live and make decisions in the White House in the District of Columbia. If you were a fan like I was of the television series The West Wing, you got a taste of what is necessary to become president.
In the car the other day, I flipped on the radio. I didn’t listen long until an interesting piece came on the air regarding what the next person to make it to the White House would have to do in each state across the nation.
We’ve all seen candidates’ apparel, when in Rhode Island, they don the ‘Rhode Island’ sweater. In Texas, you’ll notice cowboy boots or hats worn by the candidate. With this idea is the attempt to appeal to the common man or woman. Yes, whether you’re from Yale or Harvard, the candidate must get down and visit the ‘commoners’ from time to time.
With Pennsylvania coming up in the Democratic campaign, candidates have had to renew their zeal for all things Philly. Obama made a remark about having goat cheese with his Philly-cheese steak, a big cultural no-no apparently. And Clinton, while confident in her bowling skills after Obama’s run of gutter balls days earlier, was also sure to get the Rocky metaphors out as good as any candidate.
It’s not that all of this is bad. I think the next president should be able to appeal to the common person. Who doesn’t want to be able to sit down with the president and be able to talk with him or her, and be comfortable doing so?
Here’s my question, how would you do it? Would you be as overt or a little less up front than the current candidates? The fact is, you can watch all The West Wing episodes, as I have, and still have only a touch of an idea of what the candidates are going through in attempting to appeal to EVERYONE.
This is no small task; and unless something changes, Clinton, McCain, or Obama will be our next president. Let’s pray for all three of them today. I think I have my vote ready. But the fact is, I don’t want any of the three remaining candidates, to be wearing cowboy boots with the wrong motives. As Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 10:33, “Just as I also try to please all people in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many” (HCSB).
I want the next president, at the very least, to be genuine, not seeking their own profit. This will be difficult for them to live out, but refreshing for us to see. We’ll need to keep watching and watch closely. My point is, cowboy boots are cool and very fashionable. What other reasons are there to wear them?
(1) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Letting Your Voice Be Heard
Posted by: K.D. Hastings on March 24, 2008 Hot Issues •
A news report on our local CBS affiliate addressed a bill recently introduced in our state legislature that would further regulate what kind of smoke detectors homeowners can install in their houses. The report referred disparagingly to “high-powered lobbyists,” hired by smoke detector manufacturers, who were resisting the legislation that called for new restrictions.
So what’s wrong with “high-powered lobbyists” or “low-powered” lobbyists, if one exists? I recognize that the tobacco and liquor industries have lobbyists that have at times wielded far too much influence, as have gambling groups and unions. Yet at the end of the day we all have at least one “special interest”: ourselves. And more than likely, there are one or more special interest groups with individuals assigned the responsibility to share your interest in the capitol building.
The wonder of our government, as a participatory republic, is that our voice matters. And if we really want to make an impact, we can join our voice with other like-minded voices. It’s the power of one—multiplied!
So before we raise our voice complaining about the influence lobbyists, no matter their “power,” have on our elected officials, we need to ratchet up our own voices.
Share your values out loud! And at the polls on Election Day.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
Our values will always find us out
Posted by: Dwayne Hastings on March 13, 2008 Hot Issues •
Eliot Spitzer, who brought down giants of crime as New York State’s attorney general and was a powerful and respected governor, was brought down by the frailties of his own flesh.
The very real possibility exists that Spitzer will someday go on trial for money laundering. It is ironic, if not fitting, that Spitzer’s extramarital trysts were uncovered when his bank reported unusual money transfers by someone using the name of the New York State governor. (The governor had been known to use this same method to expose illegal activity among businessmen.) Turns out it was Spitzer, not an impostor, forwarding cash to a prostitution ring.
Although Spitzer initially said this was a “private matter,” most people, including many New Yorkers, disagreed. Can a man (or a woman) who is a public figure have a high, impenetrable wall between his private life and his public life? Should there be such a high wall in any of our lives? Can we be a mild-manner school teacher or bus driver or accountant during the day and live a no-holds-barred, illicit life at night? When does who we are in secret bleed over into who we are by day?
New York voters had no idea Spitzer, who was applauded for his successes in fighting organized crime and political corruption, would someday cheat on his wife when they elected, and then overwhelmingly, reelected him to office. They probably couldn’t envision he would take such a tremendous risk, soiling his office and crippling his marriage.
Voting values is critically important for our family and our nation; living our values may well have eternal ramifications. We can’t cage our immoral side, letting it “out” only when no one sees.
It is said –erroneously—that the bigger they are the harder they fall. While millions of Americans are aware of Spitzer’s moral indiscretion, the pain and heartache that results from anyone’s failures is just as deep and just as real.
We all share one thing with the disgraced governor of the Empire State—a sin nature. A never ceasing tug to rebel against what is good and right, to do what is wrong even though we know it is wrong. It has been getting us humans in trouble for years.
It is when we believe we are in charge that we find out how wrong we really are.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
What’s It Worth To You?
Posted by: Brent James on March 12, 2008 Hot Issues •
How much does it cost to stay in the presidential race? As someone with campaign experience will tell you – “a whole lot more.” All I know is, if I was running low on cash, I wouldn’t be able to use personal funds to extend my opportunity. And even if I did, that might only keep me in the contest for an extra five minutes.
Contributions are just about everything. Remember last year when John McCain’s campaign was strapped? He was performing poorly and many suggested he would soon be left on the sidelines. Now look at him. His campaign is sitting in the enviable position of saving money while his Democrat opponents burn through their millions.
Numbers reported for February show that Barak Obama raised $55 million to Hillary Clinton’s $35 million. McCain’s campaign declined to disclose February figures and Ron Paul’s are unknown though he is thought to have $8 - 10 million on hand. And we still have nearly eight months to go.
(0) Comments | Permalink | Tell a Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top of page.
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.
