Wednesday, September 03, 2008

Let's Talk Politics!

I'm tired of talking about the weather. It's raining... done. Let's talk about POLITICS!

For those that do not know, I love the political system. The service, the plans, the games, and the rhetoric. It's fun to follow.

I had a chat with my General Manager and VP, Tim Ingram, about politics and the media a few months back. I wondered why the anchors on Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC could tell if they were Democrat or Republican, yet we could not. He explained that they are "cable" outlets and we are a "broadcast" station. We have standards that they don't have. Plus, it is company policy for us to be unbiased. Does this mean we don't vote? NO... It just means that we don't go around tooting what man (or woman) we will be voting for in the election. No bumper stickers, No signs, No political fund-raisers.

That does not mean we can't chat about both sides. So, what are your thoughts so far? We have a young man that captivates an audience running with a Senator that has been in Washington for a long time for the Democrats. Then, we have an older military hero running with an attractive Governor from Alaska that nobody knew 5 days ago. Which pairing will run the show for the next four years? Make you comments in the comments section.

Sticking with the topic... I was in the gym this morning watching "Morning Joe". I know it is not "ABC", but I love that show. Anywho, Chris Matthews made the election very simple. He said... It's about the issues. He listed the views of both candidates and said to vote with who you agree with... Simple, huh?

So, here's a test for you. Take this test to see who you SHOULD vote for based on the issues and not on the candidates "likability". You may surprise yourself. If you do not understand one of the topics, Google it and research it.




Feel free to voice your opnion about the election in the comments section.

Off to bed,
Ryan

21 comments:

Jason H said...

This is the first election in history I have no idea who I am voting for. It is even harder than the Bush/Gore election. As bad as I want to I just don't know if I can vote for Obama for some reason, and I really don't know why ?

Brad said...

So I took the quiz and landed heavily in the Obama camp. I guess if I had to vote just Dem or Rep I would go that route. My biggest concern as far as Obama goes is his VP choice. An old establishment VP on a ticket of change seems awkward. Biden also has a sketchy technology record and has someone who makes a living in the technology field there are some precedents on his part that can be worrisome.

After 8 years of Bush I do not feel that McCain is going to provide any different course and selecting the younger Palin doesn't ease my concerns either.

While generally I just don't care for politics at all, in the past my party line has aligned closer with the Libertarian party however the two-party stranglehold in DC and the Libertarians tendency to not come across as extreme as well as their candidate selections makes them a very hard sell on any year.

To quote Lincoln, "government of the people, by the people, for the people." Yet it seems like no matter who wins there are two years worth of rallying people to your side just to ignore them for 4 years afterwards once you have claimed the presidential prize. The people are replaced by lobbyist and other more fruitful voices.

Not until the collective populace of this nation gets fed up of this cycle will real change have a chance to occur.

Anonymous said...

I'm all for healthcare, education, econmy and especially the troop coming home. obama has the pull in those for me. we need something different then what happening now. The way things are looking doesn't look so bright for the future. If not for me then for my children and there children. I get railed up when talking about politics thats all i am gonna say about this!

Anonymous said...

Took the quiz and was suprised, maybe I should rethink who I'm going to vote for.

Wes said...

I'm still at a loss after taking the quiz. I was 50/50 on this.

blondie said...

Interesting test, Ryan. I was surprised that I wound up believing a lot like Obama. Doesn't matter though, b/c as a Christian, the first thing I look at is the moral issues. I'm unimpressed with the candidates we have to choose from this time around, but will go the route of moral issues, so that will be McCain. Thanks for the test. Very interesting to see the outcome.

Stefanie said...

I took the quiz...I knew who I was going to vote for and now I am even more sure and I am not ashamed to admit it.....McCain/Palin '08!! I believe with my whole heart that they are the right choice for our country.

Heidi said...

Disclaimer: Not picking on Blondie with this at all :) But since she brought it up, I'll take the opening:

There's that term again: "Moral Issues"

Moral: 1 a: of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ethical (moral judgments); b: expressing or teaching conception of right behavior (a moral poem); c: conforming to a standard of right behavior; d: sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment (a moral obligation); e: capable of right and wrong action (a moral agent)
2: probable though not proved : virtual (a moral certainty)
3: perceptual or psychological rather than tangible or practical in nature or effect (a moral victory; moral support)

A lot of people automatically equate "moral issues" with Roe vs. Wade, but why does it stop there? As a Christian myself, moral issues go way beyond pro-life vs. pro-choice. It always amazes me how people can be pro life and pro war at the same time? Pro life and pro "no assult weapons restrictions"? Pro life but pro- administration whose policies oppress or exploit the vulerable people in the world? Where's the cognative dissonance?

I'm not saying I am for or against any of the above -- there are gray areas with everything, as far as I am concerned -- and I'm not saying either party's record on those issues is better than the other. I don't affiliate with any party because I think there is a danger in joining a group and the following that lead to the ends of the Earth (which is what many people do). For that matter, I find I have a hard time voting for ANYONE, ever. Do I really want to feel responsibility if this person gets into office and does a horrible job, or worse, wrongly damages this country or another? It's a struggle for me.

In any case, this "moral issues" thing is something that has bothered me for years. I usually would not openly talk about my feelings on political stuff because I don't really like discussing things that are inevitably "thorny." With that said, I do wonder about all the people out there who vote a certain way just based on a their party's or candidate's position on singular issues: Abortion, gay marriag, gun rights/control, etc. I like the quiz you linked, Ryan, because it requires weight to be given each issue. That's what everyone should do if they're going to vote.

I figure I better stop writing sometime, so I'll end with this: I read part of an interview with Lee Iacocca a few weeks ago; he brought up the idea that candidates should give voters some idea as to their plans for a cabinet. Why doesn't this ever happen? We all know how important a Secretary of State, Deffense, etc. is to the country. I know I would feel a whole lot better about voting for someone if I had an idea of who was going to be on their team.

adam said...

In response to "heidi," being a Christian the moral issue is very easy to me. The way I look at it, there have been 4,000+ deaths in the Iraq war in the last five years, but on average over 3,700+ abortions are performed daily. One candidate wants to end the war immediately but repeal every abortion law created since Roe vs. Wade, and also supports infanticide. The other candidate is against abortion, but wants to make sure the Iraqi government is stable before a pullout, and unfortunately some lives will be lost as a result. I would morally feel better about the candidate I vote for saving a lot more lives then lost. I don't want this blog post and comments to become religious/one point of view, but I thought that might help explain "blondie's" viewpoint as well.

Jen in NEA said...

I cannot vote for Obama, McCain/Palin is the way I will go.

Anonymous said...

No need to take the test, McCain/Palin WILL get our vote!!!

Heidi is stepping back from the discussion said...

Adam: I see what you're saying, but you're not counting civilian casualties.

On the candidates positions, I'm reminded of Tim Ingram's "Consider This" of a few weeks ago. There's a lot of "information" floating around about both candidates; anyone can take specific instances and use that to promote whatever they want, if they're creative enough. "Information" about a candidate that's forwarded in an email or put together as a montage on YouTube, or that stems from a source that is noted for leaning strongly in one direction is not something I trust, because there are almost always alterior motives at work, transparent or not. It is really hard to get an unbiased source of information these days.

I've linked to factcheck.org for a longer explanation on the "infanticide" issue. I have no way of knowing if it's totally unbiased or not, but I would consider what I read there before I would anything that ends up in my inbox. :)

Anonymous said...

John McCain falls much closer to my viewpoint. I do not have a high income as some do but I made this path myself. If I fall I do not expect a handout. As far as I know, before FDR's depression helps (Soc Sec, Welfare, etc) there was really nothing anywhere that provided a safety net if you fell on hard time. Well, besides neighbors helping you. The times have changed, people now except this handout from the government. Gone from a good number of Americans is the the work ethic that we once had.

I think the Democrats viewpoint has been much distorted by the liberal lobbyist that pretty much run the party now. "Kill your baby if you want to, but you leave that deer alone and don't you DARE cut that tree down!"

Look people, lets also be honest, Roe V. Wade is here and it's here to stay. There are way to many people who would have a fit if we took it away. Besides, even if we did have an administration that took it away, how long do you think it would take the next administration to re-instate it? I hate it but I'm not going to fool myself into the idea it will be overturned.

I do think McCain is enough of a maverick to buck his party when it needs to be done. My ears also perked up when I finally heard a politician say we needed to start getting things done and not care which party takes the credit. Democrats do have great ideas sometimes as do Republicans. Throughout our history you see that great things have been done when we look past our party lines and focus on what the people ask. I truly do not see Obama doing this. I see an ego driven man who thinks he brought himself up higher than the rest of us. Honestly, why could he not spend his time in the senate doing his job and creating or helping to pass legislation instead of writing his books? I didn't see a good speech giver on thursday night in McCain, but I did see a man who genuinely wanted to help his country, not build his resume or put a feather in his hat.

adam said...

Blondie, with an average of 3,700 abortions a day, that's 1.37 million abortions a year (http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html). Over five years that's 6.85 million deaths. I cannot find an estimate on the civilian deaths due to the war, but in five years when there is the same number of abortion deaths as the Holocaust, and one candidate supports it's continuation, I can't vote for him.

I read what you linked to, but it never stated whether he was for or against infanticide. However, when he argues against legislation that will give "child" status to a fetus born alive through a failed adoption, it's hard to believe that he is against it. And no, I didn't get an e-mail saying he supports infanticide. But making the arguments he has made opposing legislation, and not being openly against it, and only voting "Present" on the passage of bills instead of a firm Yes or No, I not hard to figure out.

blondie said...

Blondie, with an average of 3,700 abortions a day, that's 1.37 million abortions a year (http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html). Over five years that's 6.85 million deaths. I cannot find an estimate on the civilian deaths due to the war, but in five years when there is the same number of abortion deaths as the Holocaust, and one candidate supports it's continuation, I can't vote for him.

Did you mean this for Heidi or for me? I am 100 percent against abortion as I stated in my previous post. Heidi's comments were not offensive to me at all. I know she didn't mean then personally against me. I appreciate people taking up for me, but I vote my conviction, and that's all I was saying. I did not discuss the war earlier, but even though I think we should pull out and get our guys and girls home, I still cannot support Obama due to my previously stated beliefs over abortion and homosexuals. Nothing is black and white. I will never agree with a president/party on every issue. I just try to vote these convictions and pray God will be allowed to do the rest.

Del Grunde said...

Heidi,

On the whole "cognitive dissonance" thing about "moral issues". Nice impact but poor follow through. Having the intellectual upper hand, presumably, in a debate or conversation should not provide an excuse to be sloppy with your argument quality. Moreover it should have an effect to the contrary. Which is why I am posting. To keep nice folks like yourself honest. Not so much from a facts and figures perspective but from a reasoning perspective. But I digress. For example: positioning abortion and war casualties as being similar in moral consequence? *sigh* Come on! See that's just laziness. Need a little help? Um.. combat adversaries can usually defend themselves while an unborn baby.. well, not so much. A little simplistic perhaps. I know it doesn't address the depth of your.. well I don't know what to call it. Your intolerance for perceived inconsistencies?
And then your intellectual honesty rode right off the cliff into a ravine of political agnosticism powered by the narcissistic notion that you would feel personally responsible for voting in someone that does a bad job. You see, the real tragedy here is that you are the victim of your own argument. This is why argument quality and the fidelity of your points and justifications is so important. This thinking is allowing you to disqualify yourself from the political process because, wait for this one... it's not perfect?!?! Oh I know you didn't say that and I'm not quoting you but isn't that the problem? Perfectionism? Let me liberate you from your guilt by saying that no one cares enough about what you think for that to ever occur externally so free yourself and vote!
Ok now I'll be more helpful and dissect your error for you. The political topics usually fit neatly under one of three headings: social, economic, and national security/foreign policy. You see Blondie is clearly a social conservative and I think you are too only just a little confused. I'll explain. Social conservatives will usually list abortion, gay marriage, and the like as priority issues for themselves. These are social issues. The word "moral" is a clue. Theories on national defense, gun rights, how to fight terrorism, etc are issues of national security/fp NOT SOCIAL. Admittedly this does not preclude the possibility of a rare case when these topics can be discussed together but are almost always issue silos. One example would be humane treatment of POWs. If we were half as mean to prisoners as our enemies, it's an overnight scandal due to, of course, moral ramifications. Look at the case in Gitmo a couple of years ago for example.
I hope this is helpful to everyone in that it may encourage us all to think (a little longer) before we post.

-del

adam said...

Sorry Blondie, I meant to respond to Heidi with my last post.

Anonymous said...

The left wing and the liberal media have been waiting for an election like this for quite some time... by putting Obama in the White House they will have a field day of reporting because America WILL change dramatically and, in my opinion, not for the better... Just two examples... If you are all for the legalization of ANY form of abortion and want to make it available anywhere/anytime AND if you want to see marriage redefined to no longer be between a man and a woman - then vote for Obama.

This guy is for the MCCAIN/PALIN ticket!

brad said...

if you want to see marriage redefined to no longer be between a man and a woman - then vote for Obama.

While I do not approve of abortion the second point does not bother me any. Folks get such in arms about the definition of marriage. It should not be the governments place to legislate stuff like that. They can't manage the topics that they were Constitutionally created to deal with more or less marriage.

The government needs less control not more.

Anonymous said...

Took the quiz and was not surprised that I should be voting for Obama/Biden; however, I won't be voting for anyone because honestly I don't think we have ANYONE worth voting for. We are screwed regardless of who wins this election.

Brian T said...

Man, I these are the longest comments I've EVER saw posted on Ryan's Blog Page! And almost the MOST! He's right! Folks Did get fired up over politics! lol
I love it, ha ha..

btw, with all due respect, in all honesty, i'm not sure who I'm voting for yet...The quiz revealed Obama Badly for me.. lol
Although, it would be nice to make history this year with the first ever female VP.
On the other hand I like the Obama viewpoints better thand I do McCain's...
And seeing as how I missed much of both the republican and democrat conventions I really can't say at this point which way I will go, It's as Jason Said, this is the first election in history I haven't already made up my mind..hopefully one of them will respond with something amazing that makes up my mind, Otherwise I guess I'll just go with the one I feel and at this point in time, I'm not really sure which one that should be..Hmmmm....I thinkn it's behind the media research time..