Archive for July, 2008

Why it has to be Sarah Palin

Posted by: Jason | July 31st, 2008 · 5:55 PM

(image: flickr)

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin (pronounced pay-lin) has been at the forefront of our vice presidential discussions for well over a year now, and for good reason; we believe she is the only potential copartner in America that could actually win John McCain this election.

While we’ve already commented at length about this earlier in the year, I’d like to reintroduce the topic through a small catalog of reasons in hopes the McCain camp values the opinions of independent blogs such as ours. We hope this makes a small difference.

Women: Forget geography, this election will be about collecting the highest percentages of competing national demographics to ultimately win. While white males may prove to be a staunch ally for McCain this fall, there is another demographic which could be as well, women.

Dick Morris recently ran a Fox News survey which found that while Barack Obama was beating McCain among women under 40 by 13 points, a number normal for a Democrat, Obama was also trailing McCain by 4 points among women aged 41-45 and by 3 points among women 50 and over. Morris called this lead for McCain “extraordinary”, and believes it could be a fault line for Obama this fall.

If this were true, undoubtedly caused in part by Obama’s handling of the potentially first woman president in Hillary Clinton, one could make the case that McCain’s nominating a woman specifically of this demographic and age could capitalize on Obama’s cougar problem. Likewise, women vote in larger percentages than men compared with their total registration numbers, and are less susceptible to weak turnout, something many argue could be a major issue for McCain this year.

By picking Palin, McCain might not only think geographically, but demographically, towards the largest block of voters in America, whether in Colorado, Minnesota, Michigan, or Pennsylvania. Could Governors Tom Ridge or Tim Pawlenty bring that kind of potential?

More >>>

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

On God and Politics

Posted by: Jason | July 30th, 2008 · 7:02 PM

(image: rondicianni.com)

Politics has been awash with themes of Christmas this year, undoubtedly those primary candidates vying for the largest base of celebrating Christians in places like Iowa and New Hampshire. We have Mike Huckabee’s “floating cross” ad, though he claims it’s only a bookshelf, and others less worthy of praise like Rudy Giuliani’s “fruitcake ad”, where he warmly presents us with a laundry list of policy issues. Nothing says Christmas like strict constructionist judges eh?

The question of “where religion belongs in politics” has been especially relevant this holiday season. I was having a conversation with a family member, centered around a television interview of the popular Christian evangelist Joel Osteen. Osteen’s brand of politics is non-existent, in that he constantly warns us of avoiding the pitfalls of asking whether God is Republican or Democrat. But a short discussion, or really, a snippy exchange, took place after a particular question was asked of Osteen by Fox New Sunday’s Chris Wallace.

Wallace asks of Osteen whether Mormonism was a true Christian faith, paying homage to the current media-driven “holy war” within the Republican primary between Mitt Romney, a Mormon former governor of Massachusetts, and Mike Huckabee, governor of Arkansas and former Baptist minister, both running for president.

Both of us taking offense to Wallace’s question for different reasons (not even Fox News is independent of the media’s sensationalizing a non-existent debate over faith within the Republican Party), the age-old disagreement over “separation of church and state” came afterwards. It occurred to me, albeit briefly due to my intention of shelving the touchy subject on a weekend where politics didn’t belong, that the axis of faith and politics, or lack-there-of depending on how you view its current state these days, continues to be one of confusion on the part of those who tend to oppose it.

For the sake of simplification, we should remember the origin of the term “separation of church and state”. While the idea of secular government has been alive since the writing of the constitution, the actual term originates in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut in 1802 during his first term as president.

More >>>

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Flashback: Barack Obama: The New Stephen Douglas

Posted by: Jason | · 3:51 PM

On February 16, 2007, I wrote my first statement at PostPolitical. An examination into the newly established Barack Obama craze, it questioned whether his invoking Abraham Lincoln during a candidacy announcement at the Old State Capitol in Springfield, Illinois was plausible. Charging the senator as hardly Lincolnesque, supporting the status quo over a bold vision for the greatest issue of our time–defense against radical Islam–I believe my skepticism of Barack Obama still stands true one year later.

As an admirer of American history I’ve always had a love for the study of past presidents. Recognizing a select few, the figure dearest to my heart is President Abraham Lincoln. He wasn’t a perfect man, but his actions saved this union and allowed us to recognize and deliver on the dream of a society where all men are created equal.

I was struck heavily by a symbolic gesture to Lincoln this weekend when I watched Senator Barack Obama address the residents of Springfield, Illinois. In the shadow of the Old State Capitol where Lincoln once delivered his famous speech in which he stated “a house divided against itself cannot stand”, I watched as a free black man announced his candidacy to follow in the footsteps of Lincoln and lead the very nation that had once debated the freedom of his ancestors.

As an admirer of our history, I had asked what this meant for the state of politics in the present. Had it affirmed a sign that we as Americans had moved on from the moral demons of our past? Was I, as a 30 year old man, witnessing a generational icon such as my parents did in 1960 when they heard the message of the great John F. Kennedy?

Ok… let’s put the bong down for a second. After considering these larger themes which tugged at my emotions, I couldn’t help but ground myself in questions of a more practical nature. I can’t deny the excitement that I had experienced personally, I think largely due to a general love of politics and the witnessing of something new and fresh, but who was this man, Barack Obama? He was certainly a handsome figure with exceptional speaking skills. I had known this from the time I watched his speech to the 2004 Democratic National Convention. He is likewise probably the first black American politician who we can all honestly say has a real chance at the presidency, but who is he? What has he voted for in his senate experience both at the federal and state level? What does he believe in?

I then began to think about the symbolic gesture that was used by Senator Obama when he invoked Lincoln’s “house divided” speech. Like today, America in the 1860s was torn in half by a highly divisive issue. I’m not to suggest we’re in danger of another civil war, but like today our nation is divided and asking itself about the direction of the future.

Today we face those same challenges. We are fighting a war in Iraq that is largely unpopular among the electorate. Like the year 1858 in which Lincoln gave the quoted speech, our nation is indeed a house divided. I then asked myself, where does American go from here? But more importantly, in regards to the senator and this great debate of our time, whose message really represents the boldness of President Lincoln, and likewise, whose represents that of his infamous opponent Stephen Douglas?

More >>>

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Artificial Crisis: Confronting the Myths and Realities of Global Warming

Posted by: Jason | · 11:35 AM

(image: extreme mortman)

Throughout man’s relation to the earth, we have questioned the boundaries between progress and ethics. Like every other generation in human history, we face those same challenges today. While advancements in communication and travel have made the world a smaller place, they have also increased our need for energy and technology.

The world is using more of its natural resources than ever before, but are we trading something in return? Many scientists today claim that man’s industrial creations are to blame for global warming, that our greed and contempt for the planet have compromised the future for life itself. They sight examples of common daily luxuries such as automobiles, new development for homes, and techniques in farming, as dangerous to the greater globe. But is there alarmism within this message? Are these same projectors of a future to fear not guilty of their own contemptible actions in the areas of political power and financial gain?

More >>>

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

On Visionary Leadership

Posted by: Jason | · 2:13 AM

(image: harrisonburg)

“Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith, let us, to the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it.”

Abraham Lincoln, Cooper Institute Address, February 27, 1860.

After Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address of 1863, dark days loomed over the fractured union. We tend to forget that conflict had lasted a while longer, as a warm spirit began to lift the nation ever so slowly towards peace. Spawned undoubtedly by those powerful words uttered by Lincoln at Gettysburg, we had passed an inevitable destiny in our life as a nation, only to become reborn.

In so many ways, beyond the men who gave their lives, the munitions spent, or the tactful positioning of troops, the right of God in the affairs of man should receive the glory for our nation’s healing after the Civil War. Further, that God uses man in His plan for the human race. Perhaps this nation, and a people with a long heritage of belief in divine intervention, believe that Abraham Lincoln was one child of God, instrumental in His plan for us.

The very words of the Gettysburg Address, words which many argue to have calmed the nation, and allowed us the opportunity for a broad and lasting unity, themselves the work of God’s vision through man. For the cause of the United States of America, as Thomas Paine once said, indeed is in a great measure the cause of all mankind.

Too often than not today, we as Americans live in a state of fear over loosing our self-interests, an inability to sacrifice for the greater good. That statement isn’t a call on my part for a national moratorium on our individually held principles, but a correct recognition of a reality I see that’s dividing this country. For too long, we’ve embraced the notion that those running for office must clone our specific structure of thinking on all parts, for anything short of entire allegiance is not only unacceptable, but somehow a mythical threat to the future of our parties, God forbid they cease to exist.

In the fog of this ridiculous way of considering our choices for public office, we tend to forget what has always made America great. What kind of men made this nation what it was. It wasn’t the meek or the conservative, and it wasn’t the calculated choice. It was picking a mediocre general who would later become father to our young nation. It was an orator, a mere lawyer from Illinois and former two-year congressman, who emancipated not only an entire race of enslaved men, but a nation held captive by those who feared compromise and a sacrifice of their own self-interests.

More >>>

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Two New McCain Ads

Posted by: Jason | July 29th, 2008 · 8:36 PM

McCain as Churchill/Roosevelt (and somehow it works), and Obama as Brad Pitt.

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Video Killed the Political Star

Posted by: Jason | · 10:17 AM

(image: ngb)

“To be a gentleman is to think and act like a gentleman, nothing more”.

Gordon S. Wood

This quote was written about the 18th Century age of enlightenment in early America. In his description of how the founders were different, Wood describes a time of change, where men were concerned with things such as manners with one another, and in the world of politics, a man’s nobility was determined not only by his personal successes (mild as they were as compared to English nobility), but by his cordial nature with his fellow gentlemen.

How times have changed in American politics. Most notably, with respect to the way in which we select our leaders, the times have become almost unrecognizable to the 18th Century American. In those days a man’s intellect ruled, as our political leaders were also our social, moral, and visionary leaders too.

More >>>

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Cheney vs Edwards: The Asswhoopin’

Posted by: Jason | · 12:35 AM

Never in the history of politics has their been an asswhoopin’ like the 2004 vice presidential candidates debate between Vice President Dick Cheney and Senator John Edwards. If you recall the wet doll with nice hair to your right, Edwards, you’ll remember him being mentally tossed around the stage like a child being schooled by his father in the woodshed.

The conversation has arisen between some friends of mine over what a potential debate between John McCain and Barack Obama would look like. As in the case of Cheney vs Edwards in 2004, the exp