Palin and Biden: Ready to Lead?

After scrolling through all of the economic issues that seem to be everyone's top issues these past few weeks and days, I finally found the featured political articles. The Washington Post highlighted two articles that were counteractive to each other in theory. One was about Palin getting ready for the upcoming debates and the other was about Democrats being concerned that Biden would be...well...Biden. In what should be a fairly interesting match of personalities, the debate will be key in persuading people to either side of the political scene.

However, I found it interesting that in the article written about Palin, the author seemed to be poking more fun at her than actually telling how she will be getting ready for the debate and what issues are important. The article featured many mentions of the CBS interview with Katie Couric, which showed Palin's inexperience both of media shows as well as policy, and the Saturday Night Live spoofs of her failure to know much. Overall, it was a very negatively framed article, made to show people just how much experience and knowledge she might be lacking for the vice presidential nomination.

The article about Biden, however, highlighted his go-getting and harsh personality in debate situations and what democrats thought of it, of course with only one quote stating that it might not be a good thing. It's not in the articles themselves that you can see a bias toward the left, but it is clear when evaluating articles comparing the Democrats and Republicans where the paper's true bias lies. Biden, in the article, would be criticized for his roughness when discussing politics, but glosses over this by saying that it could easily throw Palin's rehearsed responses for a loop. either way, it's becoming more apparent as the campaign continues and the issues and time to the election creep closer where the Post's allegiances are.

Debating the Debate and Other Issues

It certainly has been an interesting week, of course, the Washington Post has featured many different articles as well as not mentioned many things that I'm certain other media outlets have. However, no one can claim that it wasn't an interesting week in the news and in the political scene, with only a few weeks left to go before the ultimate Presidential choice. The main issue that I have scene day after day in the Post has been the debate: Will it happen? Why does McCain want to postpone it? Who won? The first question was the big one. With McCain taking a hiatus from his campaign until some kind of decision was reached on the Wall Street Bail out. Also, though, an article that took place on the main page of the Post for a while analyzed Gov. Palin's interview with Katie Couric in which it analyzed her answers quite harshly and questioned her experience in order to be the Vice Presidential running mate of McCain. The Washington Post covered this week in an array of topics and here are the top five for this week.

1. McCain's Campaign Hiatus
2. Cancellation/Postponement of the Debate
3. Obama and McCain's "Joint" Statement
4. Palin's CBS Interview
5. Debate Focus on Economy May Hurt McCain

To debate or not to debate? That is the question.

Friday September 26, 2008

For the last couple of days, the big news has been that Sen. McCain has decided to suspend his campaign and return to Washington until the financial crisis at hand has been settled. This also, in McCain's eyes, meant suspending the debate that is supposed to take place today. However, the Democrats have said that this is a stupid decision to make and that Sen. Obama will be present at the debate whether McCain shows up or not. The Posts' comments are definitely swaying toward the liberal end by showing more of the Democrats' stance on the issue than that of the Republican party. According to the Post, they believe that McCain's stand still is uncalled for in a time of election when people need to be informed about what kind of decisions and policies the two candidates want to enact. This, in their eyes, is a way for both parties to "show them what they're made of" so to speak. However, the Post doesn't have any perspective from the Republican side of things except to say that they're "hopeful" that they will come to an agreement on the bail out sometime this week. Now, of course, we know that McCain is definitely going to be at the debate tonight at 9:00 E.S.T. However, it wasn't his orignial intention. Many are saying that the move to suspend his campaign was a political stunt to send a message that said "Country first." But the Democratic party, and the Post from the way I'm reading it, seems to think that it's a stupid move, he wasn't essential to the planning, and shows that he can't handle more than one thing at a time. Either way, McCain has resumed campaigning even though a resolution on the bill hasn't been reached in order to come to the debate. The Post only said that he decided to "move forward with the face off."

Obama's Surge in Polling

Tuesday, September 23, 2008 10:00 p.m.

Due to all of the crazy economic events that have happened in the past week and a half, the Washionton Post, as well as many other sources that I have examined, has seen an increase in Obama's ratings in the national polls this week. People seem to generally believe that in times of economic crisis, the Democratic cantidate is the one that is the better choice, especailly in this case where the current administration is quite Republican. The Post highlights that Obama's "plan" to sit back and see what happens with the $700 billion dollars before putting more information out about his economic stance is said to be a good one, therefore not tying up money that may or may not be there. However, the paper brought up that McCain's campaign has intensely criticized Obama for doing this because he is said to not making critical decisions in a time of crisis. Instead, McCain, as the Post highlights, waffles on every comment made about the crisis and whether or not he would vote for the Wall Street bail out by taking it back to Obama not making a definitive answer to the same question. Whether the bail out passes or not, the article highlights the definite surge for votes for Obama because of the economic times. The economy is one subject that Obama has a lead in and as long as this subject stays in the forefront of the media, I believe that Obama will keep the lead. For the first time in a few weeks, I haven't seen anything about Sara Palin on the front page of the Post. The article on the front page today only mentions her in the capacity that McCain won't let her answer any questions about the economy. Does this speak as to her experience on such things? Will Obama and McCain even out again if the economy is not issue #1 in the coming weeks? Only the media knows...

1-2-3-4-FIVE!

1. Obama's/McCain's View on the Struggling Economy
2. Palin's "First Dude"
3. Saturday Night Live's Palin Skit
4. Sarah Palin's Yahoo Email Account
5.

Getting Back to Basics?

Tuesday, September 16, 2008 4:15 p.m.

With the stock markets tumbling to incredible lows on Sunday and Monday, both of the campaigns are finally talking about the economy as issue number one again. For a few weeks, the news media, including that of the Washington Post, have been distracted by Palin as the new pick for VP, so naturally, there has been much research being done on her experience and values as a person. However, the article that headlined on the Post today in the Election section was wrong in saying that the reason that people weren't paying attention to the economy and the candidates' standings on it because of Palin; where, in fact, the media is the main reason why this focus was shifted in the first place! The Post could have picked apart both of the candidates' proposed economic plan and detailed them for the public to read and decide about. However, they decided that the most important issues of the past few weeks were Obama's lipstick comments and Palin's moose hunting records were more important.

The article on the front page of today's Post talked about McCain's comments about how our economy is "fundamentally stable" and bashed his campaign for not separating himself from Bush as much as he should. The article definitely leaned for Obama but cautioned his campaign to detail his plans for the economy and other things more so that everyone can understand fully what he'd like to do. Over and over again, the column bashed McCain's view of the economy and stressed the importance of what happened over the weekend with Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch. With the election coming up in just 7 weeks, hopefully the Post and other media sources will get to the bottom of the economic plans of both candidates.

Top 5 Week of Sept. 8-14

1. Lipstick on the Pig Incedent
2. Democrats Launch a New "Lie Counter" Site
3. Clinton Campaigns for Obama in Ohio
4. Obama Breaks Fundraising Records
5. Palin's Mayoral Experiences

And don't forget the SNL Skit About Palin and Clinton!

Front Page Palin

Sunday, September 14, 2008 10:00 p.m.

It seems that no matter where you look, Palin is the top story. It's been over two weeks since McCain's pick for his VP and she has yet to go under the radar. With McCain's ratings boosting because of Palin, there's been more and more discussion about this little known Alaskan Governor. The main article in the Washington Post today was a huge laydown of some of the "bad blood" that Palin spilled when she was mayor of Wasilla (population 5,500). This article outlines her top achievement of her mayoral term as the construction and completion of an ice rink, "a project that landed in the courts and cost the city more than expected." But it didn't say anything else about this. No other details. Surely there was something more important than that, or is it just what the Washington Post wants you to think? They want you to believe, whether it is true or not, that Palin didn't do anything as the mayor of the small town or Wasilla and isn't qualified for the second highest office in our country. Even one of the city council members from Palin's term as mayor was interviewed to say that he was "worried about her lack of experience." Although, one thing about the article is that they interviewed another city council member from her term who gave her the thumbs up just because "executive experience is executive experience." I guess it makes no difference if it's for 5,500 or 305 million people? The article, which appeared on the Sunday front page edition, was an obvious lunge at Palin's political experience and slanted very far to the left. It's interesting to see what information the papers and media dig up on people like Palin who probably never thought that they would be in the limelight of such an intense presidential race. Whether the information is 100% true or not, the Post didn't give both sides to the story and just went in with a punch to the gut.

Lipstick Jungle

If you've watched the news at all this week, you've heard about the "lipstick on a pig" comment by Barack Obama in which he was refering to the Republican party. This was blown entirely out of proportion, but indeed it was the main headline today on the Washington Post. This article harshly criticized McCain's campaign for picking at Obama's speech and saying that he was speaking about Gov. Palin instead of the Republican party's failed policies. This article definitely leans to the left explaining that McCain promised a fair and honorable fight for the Whitehouse and then goes about highlighting things like Obama saying an age old phrase that could be taken as offensive. What he failed to tell everyone, though, is that he used the same exact expression when campaigning last year when he thought Hillary Clinton was going to be the Decmocratic contender for President, but the article points out that no one took it offensively then. McCain's campaign ads are just using the riducule to make the popular Gov. Palin out to be the victim. This, in theory, would make people on the fence angry that he would say such a thing about Palin and hopefully vote for McCain/Palin. Obama has come back to say that he has used this phrase multiple times, and even before Palin was on the scene, so whatever it is that McCain's campaign is trying to do, they should stop. In my opinion, aren't there more important things to focus on, yet again, besides lipstick on pigs? Here's the real clip from the rally...

GOP Enthusiastic About Palin

This morning, I looked at the top story on the Washionton Post website only to find an extensive article on how the Republicans are more than excited about McCain's choice for his Vice President, Sarah Palin. The news that she has a daughter who is 17 and pregnant has been quickly passed by for the most part with the claim that there is no such thing as a traditional family anymore (see my previous post). The article, though, started out rather neutral in my eyes, with the author speaking about how the GOP was getting excited about Palin's values, specifically her views on abortion. (She's pro-life all the way.) But toward the end, the article began to talk about how she might have picked up voters in Virginia, but there are still tons of people who decided to register to vote because of Obama and presumably will vote for him in November. One of the things that bothered me and was definitely spun was one quote that was pulled from an interview with a man in Surry, VA. After a few words with him about his enthusiasm about McCain's VP choice, he said "She's right good-looking -- that's all I need to know." Now, coming from a woman, I find that very offensive because that just means that it doesn't even matter what kind of politics that Palin agrees with or what she even stands for. Just as long as she looks good...that's what matters. I know that this quote was intentionally pulled out just to make people like me angry that just because there is a woman cantidate that she will pull more people if she was pretty. But on to less shallow things. More and more people have started to wonder with all of the enthusiasm for Palin, isn't it more of a Palin/McCain ticket instead of McCain/Palin? No one seems quite as excited whenever McCain steps out on stage, but when Palin comes out, there is a ceremonious roar from whatever crowd has shown up. The media has a lot to do with that though. There was so much of a to-do made over the VP nominations with McCain trailing Obama, the party needed a boost, and it looks like they may have gotten it. The Post, however has been constantly ridiculing the Republicans ever since the Convention started. But that would be expected seeing as they're left leaning. It should be interesting to see what the top story is tomorrow.

"Traditional" Family Up For Discussion

Picture perfect families are indeed a thing of the past or just for the lucky few percent that actually stay together for more than 15 years. The Palins are no different, or are they? The Washington Post's main article today in its Campaign 2008 section outlines that there isn't really any kind of "traditional" family anymore. Mom goes to work, Dad stays at home with the kids, kids have kids, kids live with grandparents, and the list goes on and on. That's something that I've definitely noticed since my parents are teachers and see all sorts of functional and dysfunctional families throughout their years in the school system. The Post, however, talks about the mission of both parties to send numerous shout outs and thank yous to their families to establish their family based values within the election. Also it discussed the variety of different types of families that are in this election from McCain, on his second marriage, to Palin, five kids and one pregnant one, to the Obamas, a generally "traditional" family if you will, to Biden, who is also on his second marriage only for different, more tragic reasons. Like most articles I've found in the Post so far, this one tends to be rather party neutral until you reach the end of the article. Of course, Palin's daughter Bristol will be brought up since she is only 17 years old and very pregnant. The article comments on the fact that if Republicans still are all for Palin and supportive of her daughter, it means that they therefore believe that God it is okay for all 17 year olds to have sex and become pregnant even though these are very against their party's core beliefs. They even highlight Bristol's pregnancy as what was used to be called a "shotgun wedding" which is sort of out of line in my opinion. They highlighted, in order to counter this, that Michelle Obama has a demanding career, which doesn't really counter the comments at all. They're trying to lean the news so it sounds like the Obamas are and were doing everything that they should have been doing while Palin's daughter was out getting pregnant. Not that I really agree with the way that Palin has potentially ignored her daughter's youth and not given her enough discipline to keep her from going out and getting pregnant at 17 years old, but give her a little bit of slack. Everyone's got some kind of skeleton in their closet.

First Lady Fashion...Newsworthy or Not?

As I mentioned in my last post, I'll be following the Washington Post throughout the exciting election. Today, however, the election took a back burner to Tropical Storm Hanna that hit and completely flooded most of Washington D.C. Although this was taking up most of the front page of the Post, I continued down to the "Campaign 2008" section of the paper only to find an in depth report about the first ladies and their fashion choices. Hmm. Now, I know that looks can help or hurt candidates, just look at what happened with the Kennedy/Nixon debate that was televised, however, I didn't really think that this was a very newsworthy article to be brought up when there are more in depth issues to be covered. What about new information on Sarah Palin, the new Republican VP? Why can't we see some kind of comparison about Obama and McCain's education plans? Well, of course, the answer is because we're too busy talking about Laura Bush's elegantly embroidered cream Oscar de la Renta suit that she wore at the convention!

After I continued into reading the article, though, I began to think a little bit more deeply about the candidates' wives fashion choices. As the article outlines, Michelle Obama has donned clothing made by a native Chicago designer that isn't very well known. In a way, this shows that she is loyal to the area from which she came out of her political shell. Her style is very much more relaxed and hip than that of Cindy McCain, who has been found wearing suits, harsher fabrics, and more structured looks. But these fashion choices are also in line with their husband's party and visions. Republicans are known for being the conservative party, which goes well with the completely covered suits and structured dresses with more conservative color choices, like the mustard one seen above, whereas the democrats are more liberal and more into change, which agrees with Michelle Obama's more relaxed, free flowing fabrics and outstanding color choices like bright purples.

I sort of threw away my opinion about this subject because I wouldn't think it would matter, but what about all of the women out there that just care enough about fashion to say that they wouldn't vote for a candidate that dressed in a certain way or wasn't up to the minute in fashion trends. Unfortunately, there are people in the world that base important decisions on things like these. Women specifically can be very judgemental about fashion sense and appearance, especially in the great United States. It just shows how carefully thought went into the fashion choices of Cindy and Michelle, because you never know who will be looking. Obviously someone is paying attention if the black and white dress that Michelle wore on talk show The View completely sold out. Maybe these ladies' intricately detailed fashion senses will help to win votes for their husbands, and maybe not, but the issues should still be discussed as a little bit more important than the designer of Sarah Palin's most recent suit.

Sources, Sources, Sources

Throughout the election, I will be following one media source in particular, the Washington Post. Before I started in on this interesting expedition for the "truth" about what really should be in the news, I needed to do a little bit of research on the Post. I found that the paper, which is based out of Washington D.C., is known for being a liberally leaning newspaper that was founded in 1877. It was the first newspaper ever to be published all seven days out of the week. It's the largest and most circulated newspaper that comes from our nation's capital and it even is considered to be one of the United States' most important newspapers, regularly competing nationally with such papers as the New York Times. It's coverage is very general news however, the Post tends to put an emphasis on national politics and international affairs. After all, what would a newspaper from our nation's capital be without that kind of reporting? But, it can't be denied even in the time that I have looked at the Post for the last few days that it definitely leans to the liberal side. The paper has even been criticized for being too biased, however, so many people still tend to gravitate toward the Post for information, whether it be on the upcoming election or just their daily reports. With numerous Pulitzer Prizes under their belts, from commentary to feature reporting, there is no doubt that the Post is a noteworthy newspaper. Even with the liberal bias, it will be interesting to see how they spin their side of the news in the upcoming months.