Note: This will be a very brief post, since the image is rather self-explanatory.
This chart has many connotations. For example, "New Age" makes us feel hopeful and correlates to an extent with Obama's campaign on change. "Cold War," on the other hand is reminiscent of danger and undoubtedly has a negative insinuation. Similarly, throughout the rest of the chart we can see how the media has framed the candidates in certain ways that serve a greater political agenda; to make Obama more appealing to the undecided voter.
The MSNBC Coverage appears to be skeptical of McCain's decision to suspend his campaign. Tom Brokaw, as a guest to offer commentary attributes this as part of the madness of the election process thus far. At 1:25 especially, Brokaw shifts uneasily in his seat and raises his eyebrows. These actions seem to hint at his uneasiness with McCain's decision and seems to assert that he believes the decision was a political maneuver. It is interesting how they doubt the sincerity of McCain by discussing how he will be handsomely rewarding should he partake in a Republican solution to the economic disaster the US is currently facing. Brokaw seems to be criticizing McCain in stating that the shape of the economy is so much more than a domestic issue. This is immediately after he states that Obama wants to speak to "millions of people" directly about the issue in the debate scheduled for Friday.
More important, Brokaw criticizes McCain's campaign decisions thus far. He refers to it as an "ambush" and example of "guerilla warfare," both which have negative connotations. Brokaw draws light to the unpredictability of his behavior. He perks up his head and blinks slowly, which adds a mocking-dimension to his commentary. When discussing the debates at Ole Miss, he also adds a modifier into describing the Republican Convention as "long," while referring to the Democratic National Convention, simply as is. When he discusses leadership, photos of Obama addressing the press as opposed to when the Republican ticket is shown, Brokaw discusses more substance (previous debate).
Note: Initially I had wanted to find a good "Conservative" twist on the story in order to compare/contrast the two coverages, but could not locate a good story to demonstrate this. If I find one, I will add it.
The above is a video from Pastor James David Manning. He bashes the media for "running with" the story of Bristol Palin's pregnancy. His argument, as we've discussed in class has its merits. However, in my opinion, he takes this too far (I feel safe to say most would agree). I understand his message but by calling Barack Obama's "mama" a piece of trash, and his father, a "pathetic loser" who knocked up women all over Kenya is just absurd. His overall intent of this rant is valuable, by showing Obama and the democratic should not be trying to run a campaign based morality, family values, etc. But in my opinion, he would have been much more successful in toning down his argument. And rather than referring to Obama's mother as a "low-life sleezy, snail-eating white woman,"raise questions about just how "ethical" his background is and perhaps mention a fact or two, (which his speech is lacking in). Should he have chosen to do this, I believe his argument would have received more POSITIVE attention and ultimately, been more persuasive.
Brief Summary: Lynn Forester de Rothschild has thrown her support behind Republican John McCain, accusing the Democratic ticket of extremism and elitism. Her logic was that the McCain-Palin government "will be a centrist government. It's not going to be an ideological government."
I found this article to be pertinent to our class discussion today. Although this is "interesting" news in my mind... could it also be serving to persuade Clinton supporters that McCain is more desirable and suitable to be president? It may be far-fetched but this is something that I would have never thought about or considered prior to this course. The source or writer could be a Republican or McCain supporter who wishes to appeal greater to the Clinton fanbase. I am not sure how/if Yahoo is politically alligned but I am uncertain as to the real motivation behind this fact being deemed as newsworthy. I am interested to see if more left-leaning media sources such as CNN cover this story (by justification, minimization, etc).
[Rant] I am so surprised to have searched around YouTube and found this ad. Republican ads like this, appear to be popular in the South. I found many similar to this one by simply clicking around. Republicans are attempting to establish a link from Obama's pastor's "unpatriotic" comments to Obama and then to Democratic candidates. They are trying to frame their opponents as unpatriotic and radical who are unreligious and hate guns. To me, advertisements such as this have no validity and persuasive effect whatsoever and are merely playing off a stereotype of southerners. I think they are ridiculous and baseless.
This is something I found particularly interesting because I was wondering how Sarah Palin's daugther's pregnancy would affect voting patterns. Obviously, the main question is how evangelical's support would change. As this article shows, however, evangelicals claim to be supportive of the decision and they will not be derailed from the Republican ticket. It appears that these men and women are altering their opinions to justify this in their minds. In a religion that promotes sexual intercourse as restricted for procreation purposes for the married couple (I took a class on abortion last summer), this seems hypocritical. They are simply justifying this case in their minds, and altering past beliefs to conform to the present situation. Nobody said that Palin's daughter and the father of the baby are having plans to be married. And it is pretty obvious that they did not intend to have a baby at such young ages (so it was pleasure, not procreation).
In this case, the story/narrative they are telling are of a young couple, who happily decided to keep the baby in an unselfish manner. This is ignorant considering they are not addressing the emotional feelings and turmoil the teenagers are most likely experiencing at the moment. Secondly, they are framing it in a way that ignores the reality of premarital sex and justifies the situation by emphasizing the positive (i.e. "Thank God they decided to keep the baby").
Note: I can honestly state that these feelings are coming from the class I took this summer.
After seeing this commercial on TV this morning, I felt compelled to include it on this blog and offer some comments. Props should be given to the Barack Obama Campaign for utilizing such a popular and catchy song to their benefit. It is distinct in this regard, compared to the rest of the arguably dull and monotonous other campaign ads.
This advertisement is directly aimed at the “typical American” who is feeling the brunt of the weakening economy. The Obama camaign has capitalized on a quote by John McCain and sends an overall message that HE “don’t know much.” This phrase implies John McCain is unintelligent in two respects; (1) through the simple and screamingly obvious grammatical error and (2) that he is not knowledgeable in the workings of the economy. As discussed in class, politicians take one misspoken statement and simply run with it, prying as much influence on the voting population as possible (just as the Republicans have done with Obama’s statements in San Francisco about Pennsylvanians). And this ad is no exception.
Visually, the pictures will certainly resonate with Americans. By showing signs of gas pumps and foreclosure signs, the campaigners are trying to identify with middle-class America, and nowadays, who isn’t concerned with making payments? Furthermore, by adding lyrics about McCain’s poor understanding of middle class hardships, he is building off his previous bashes against McCain (which is demonstrated in previous commercials) that he can’t even recall how many houses he has.
[[ Sidenote: I actually can remember how many… John McCain has seven homes. So I guess his previous efforts had worked!]]
More importantly, this commercial sends another message; that John McCain and George Bush are the same. By showing the two men looking happy together and even embracing one another, viewers may question if these next four years will be any different if McCain is elected. If I were campaigning for Obama, I would take this even one step further or perhaps create another television advertisement that used Bill Clinton. People tend to associate President Clinton with a strong, prosperous economy. Whether you love him or you hate him, he is connected (economically speaking) to a time of growth and opulence. And by creating a link between the democrats and wealth, Americans will recall the 1990’s and contrast it with the economic hardships today. This, in my opinion, would make this ad even more successful in its persuasion.
Once John McCain announced Sarah Palin as his running mate on Friday, August 29, 2008, America responded with a giant "WHO???" In order to address this big question and create a name for herself in Washington and American politics, Palin made a conscious effort to focus on her personal life at the Republican National Convention. While some condemn her for doing so, (i.e. "What does a stable family life and lots of children have to do with her ability to be Vice President?") I found it to be necessary. Other than hearing through the media that she is young, attractive and Governor of Alaska, I was undoubtedly clueless and eager to know what this woman is all about.
Through her speech, I learned of her intense character and personal background. I now have a greater sense of an appropriate answer to the question of WHO? and in all practicality, will gain even more insight as November 2nd approaches. Cleverly, Palin "killed two birds with one stone" or had a dual purpose to her life discussion. She used her personal background as a political tool to both bash the Obama/Biden ticket and appeal to more voters.
For example, Palin repeatedly reminded America throughout her speech that she is “small-town” and proud of it. She attempted to distinguish herself from her opponents by mentioning Obama’s comments about the residents of Scranton, PA who “bitterly” cling to their guns and religion. She promised to ensure their (small-towners) proper representation in Washington and hinted at her “down to earthness” and genuine nature. She presented herself as a typical mom (e.g. signing up for the PTA) with poise and intellect. In my opinion, she did play the sympathy card in choosing to discuss mentally disabled children. However, this should not be scorned upon. Her ability to care for this child is remarkable and undoubtedly difficult, and who can rightly take away her personal motive to make this a more prominent issue in America?
Finally, while listening to Sarah Palin speak, I was curious as to how or even if she would address women voters. With the defeat of Hillary Clinton, many were and still are for that matter, worried that feminist-minded Americans would simply not go to the polls to vote for Barack Obama. In her speech, Sarah Palin seemed to hint at this (at about 1m50s in the YouTube Clip) by saying “every woman” has an “opportunity” in America. Perhaps this subtlety is enough for Hillary supporters… we will see.
Read more thoughts about the issue of Hillary supporters voting for Obama on another blog here.
