Obama Wins Debate--Sort Of...

I noticed several things while watching last Friday's Presidential debate, but one detail that stood out the most was the fact that neither candidate really took the offensive-- as is discovered in this blog written by Joe Klein.

As a John McCain supporter, even I feel that Barack Obama came off as the victor in this debate, not necessarily by his own doing, but thanks to the overly aggressive tactics of McCain, which seemed to fail him repeatedly. Klein explains this point brilliantly when he says "McCain was clearly the aggressor in this debate and that may have worked to his advantage—Obama graciously admitted when he agreed with McCain; McCain rarely acknowledged Obama in that or any other way. The problem with McCain's aggressiveness was that it almost always involved misstating Obama's positions—on offshore drilling, nuclear power, talking to our enemies, raising taxes on the middle class, attacking Pakistan." 

I must admit when first watching the debate, especially when discussing relations with Pakistan and Middle Eastern countries, Obama seemed almost nasty when responding to McCain, but the Republican nominee came off as so, almost condescending, towards Obama at points, that it was hard for almost anyone to pick up the Democratic nominee's extremely defensive manner.

One of the most interesting topics that arose in the debate came from the question "What is threat from Iran to the U.S.?" Obama brought up some fascinating points, including talking about how we should meet with allies and enemies. McCain criticized Obama for saying how he would sit down with Communist leaders of the world without "pre-conditions,"and while Obama seemed to skirt around the pre-conditions inquiry, he clearly explained why he would do it. Obama said that when the United States broke off ties with North Korea, that country increased their capabilities of nuclear war and violence, and how when we began to talk with them again they cleaned up (slightly). When McCain answered back, he seemed jumpy and off topic, including talking about height differences between citizens of North and South Korea, an answer that, in my mind, had little or nothing to do with the question. 

My overall impression of the debate was very similar to that of Klein. I personally felt that while Obama wasn't perfect, he made less noticeable mistakes then McCain did, and refused to look rattled. Klein felt that  "Obama did everything he had to do, with few if any mistakes. I thought McCain did less so." He then goes on to say that "the early snap polling seems to agree with me," and indeed, it seems the media agrees with him, Obama won the debate. 

In fact, many news sources gave Obama the win. The Detroit Free Press had a fascinating article talking about how Obama won despite being "spanked" by McCain, insinuating that the media feels that Obama won, but McCain's tactics actually allowed him to not lose, but also not to win. "But what McCain doesn't understand is that a tie in the only debate he was expected to win could cost him the White House."

All the major media outlets were in Mississippi fir the debate, and all had several analysts to do the instant analysis. In fact, The Washington Post had live fact checkers researching and proving or disproving statements made by the candidates. It was front page news on all major news sources. Overall, the debate was big news, and since it was covered so well it was easy to see when the candidates failed to capitalize on opportunities to attack.

Obama was and continues to seem weak on foreign policy, but when he left the door open by not really improving on it for the debate, McCain chose to focus more on domestic policy, rather than really putting a stranglehold on the foreign policy issue. The debate was mostly more of the same. McCain failed to seize what could have been a big opportunity to control the debate. In the end, this seemed like a debate that McCain did way too much to help Obama win. The question now is how it affects the elections.

Work Cited

Brown, Willie. "Obama Wins Round 1" San Francisco Chronicle 28. Sept.2008. Accessed 30.Sept.2008. <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/28/BAAG135POG.DTL>

Dobbs, Michael. "The Fact Checker" 26.Sept.2008. Accessed 30. Sept.2008. <http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/09/debate_live_fact_check_starts.html>

Klein, Joe. "Obama Wins Debate on Tactics and Strategies" Time 27.Sept. 2008. Accessed 29. Sept. 2008.<http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1845114,00.html>

Luna, Jorge. "Obama Wins Debate, But it Seems Unfair" Miami Law & Politics Examiner 27.Sept. 2008. Accessed 30. Sept. 2008. <http://www.examiner.com/x-948-Miami-Law--Politics-Examiner~y2008m9d27-Obama-wins-debate-but-it-seems-unfair>

Riley, Rochelle. "Obama Wins Debate After McCain Spanks Him" Detroit Free Press 27.Sept.2008. Accessed 30. Sept. 2008. <http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080927/BLOG08/80927012&imw=Y>

Speech vs Writing- The Epic Battle for Modern Supremacy

Since the dawn of man, communication has played a vital role in how we interact and live. No matter where one defines the beginning, there has always been some kind of speech. Whether it was a groan, noise, or actual words remain to be seen, but what we do know is that speech is needed for one to live properly. When early man starting using symbols as a way of showing data, it was the beginning of writing. With the evolution of man and the growing technology that comes along with it, the issue has arisen as to which method, speech or writing, is superior in today's society.Without writing it could be said that life as we know it would cease to exist.
First, it should be shown that speech is almost just as important, but without speech in today's society, it would be difficult, but still possible to live. There are, in fact, individuals who are mute due to stroke, psychological problems, paralysis, or other reasons. They find ways of communicating without speech, if speech is defined as verbal communication.
According to the book Communication In History, the earliest precursor to writing were symbols and signs, the first of which was the use of ocher (discovered in Qafzeh, Israel), a red pigment that is believed to have served a symbolic function. More common were notches on rocks or sticks, pebbles in a pile. Later on, the use of coins began, starting with coins being differentiated based on shape, numbers of marks, as well as other distinctions. These symbols were used to trade goods and symbolize things, no one is quite sure what the notches stand for but it is obvious they stood for an amount of something. The shapes and symbols on the coins were believed to determine how much or what type of goods a person could receive. If early man used these methods to develop their simplistic society, it must be even more important in today's society.
Let's look at the modern world without writing. People would have no way of showing data or signs of warning. Traffic would be frightening with no stop signs, no yields and no way of seeing street names(which would make it especially difficult on men because we are too proud and stubborn to ask for directions). Grocery shopping would be tragic; are you buying a bag of mashed potatoes or laundry detergent? Oh well, let's wait for dinner to find out. These things may make things difficult, but they aren't the answer to the question being asked. We need to see why writing is so superior to speech in today's society.
An easy answer to the question would be, of course, the Internet, which is a never-ending source of text, videos, photos, and online auctions. The Internet is an essential and crucial part of today's society. Colleges(such as UMBC) have campus-wide wireless networks, sports games are being web-casted, and even Presidential ads are being put on the Internet. Computers have replaced the card catalogues in libraries, and most students can research anything on a computer and print out what they need instead of signing out a book. E-mail has almost virtually replaced letters and postcards. The snail mail has lost its touch.Why wait two days to answer somebody when you can answer them in two minutes? In a Washington Post article titled "The Dumbing of America," author Susan Jacoby states that "No wonder negative political ads work. With text, it is even easy to keep track of differing levels of authority behind different pieces of information," the cultural critic Caleb Crain noted recently in the New Yorker" With the Internet and text, it is easier to see decisions and remarks made by politicians and others in the past. Barrack Obama could have said something when he was running for Senate a few years back, and thanks to the Internet, John McCain can bring up this long forgotten speech and use it to hurt Obama. Basically, with everything written down and stored somewhere, it is easy for people to validate points and issues that may arise.
At this current time, writing is as important as ever-- if not more. There is now an essay portion on the SATs. Essays are replacing quizzes and tests in classrooms, and colleges require one if not more essays and writing samples to be turned in to not only determine placement, but living arrangements, scholarships, and even campus privileges.
In this day and age, proper spelling and writing is essential. Many children are using Internet grammar; lol (laughing out loud) and c u l8r (see you later),in actual everyday situations. My 12-year-old sister doesn't talk on the phone at all; she texts, constantly. In my experience on my middle school's literary magazine, we had several people submit wonderfully written pieces that were filled with some of the worst spellings I've ever seen. The works were rampant with shortened spellings like " u" replacing "you," and "luv" replacing "love", and it was sad because over half of the submissions were like this. For those who do learn how to write properly, many jobs and opportunities await.
Writing and reading will never die because they are both too important to society. Washington Post writer Howard Gardner brought up this point in his article entitled "The End of Literacy? Don't Stop Reading," when he says "I don't worry for a nanosecond that reading and writing will disappear. Even in the new digital media, it's essential to be able to read and write fluently and,if you want to capture people's attention, to write well."
Now it could be said that the ability for someone to speak well is just as important, but consider this- you can't hear a person who can't speak, but you can read what they have to write. Internet forums and blogs allow these people to talk to others that are going through the same issues as them. Some people aren't good speakers, but they are great writers and it shows that they have the same intelligent capabilities as anyone else. And writing well still reflects one's education and intelligence.
Basically, without the element of writing, today's society would be nothing. Writing lets us check facts by reading information that must be answered immediately (such as going to imdb.com to find out which actor played someone in a movie). It lets us communicate with others to inform,entertain, and persuade.
Imagine what it would be like to lose your voice and not speak.You would be frustrated (although my friends and family would probably throw a wild party if it happened to me), but you'd get by. Now imagine what a world without the World Wide Web, books, newspapers, magazines, scholarly journals and research, street signs and text messages would be like. What would business be like without e-mails and faxes? It's tough to imagine, isn't it. For this reason, on the scale of speech vs. writing, writing tips the scale in today's society.

WORK CITED

Crowley, David and Paul Heyer. "Communication In History" Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. 2007

Gardner, Howard. "The End of Literacy? Don't Stop Reading". The Washington Post.Sunday Feb 17, 2008. Page B01

Jacoby, Susan. "Call Me a Snob, but Really,We're a Nation of Dunces". The Washington Post.
Sunday Feb 17, 2008. Page B01

Palin Pick Gives McCain New Life

One of the political issues of importance throughout the summer was who the Vice Presidential picks were going to be. Right before the Democratic National Convention, Barrack Obama picked Delaware Senator Joe Biden, a member of the Senate since 1972, in what many believed as a pick Obama used to get experience on his ticket. This gave Obama all the attention throughout the following week, but then John McCain picked Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

In Drudge Report, the blog I chose to follow, there was an article written by Camille Paglia, about the fact that McCain (whom she calls a vampire) breathed in new life when selecting Palin. Paglia even goes so far as to say that Palin could be one of the best things to happen to feminism. When one thinks about it, Palin is exactly what McCain as well as the republicans need. She is, well, different. Her kids are non-typically named; Track, Bristol, Willow, Piper, and Trig. Also, she enjoys fishing and hunting (typical conservative ideals). She knows the military as her son Track enlisted last year, and she can almost match Obama when it comes to public speaking abilities. She embodies a form of feminism that Paglia calls "can-do, no-excuses, moose-hunting feminism." It truly is different from what we are used to seeing out of politically powerful women, such as Hillary Clinton who is most famous for being the First Lady.

The choice of Palin has sent the media into a frenzy. Not even a hurricane hitting New Orleans could stop the new Palin powerhouse. The pick came a day after Obama ended the Democratic National Convention by making a speech at the 50 yard line at Invesco

Field at Mile High Stadium (home of the Denver Broncos) in front of an estimated 84,000-plus people.

The media was buzzing over the speech, but when McCain announced Palin as his VP pick late the next morning, it was if Obama's speech never happened. All the news was on this nearly unheard of female governor of Alaska who, in addition to the above, played basketball in high school. It was if all the momentum Obama had picked up in the previous few weeks had all but disappeared. In fact, according to Amazon.com bestseller list, a book on how Sarah Palin positively changed Alaska as governor is now outselling books about Obama.

Palin represents a new femist type, as previously mentioned. She is a tomboy, plain and simple. When one usually thinks of a women politician, at least for me, the first thing that comes to mind is usually a well educated older woman who would not only not use guns, but also not want to kill an innocent animal(although she might not have a problem wearing one at a black-tie political fundraiser). Palin is middle-age, educated, hockey-mom hunter who also happens to be the governor of the largest state (geographically) in this country. She is, as Paglia describes, reminiscent of the frontier women who got women of the west the right to vote long before the 19th amendment was passed. She is different from what this country has seen before, and even if she and McCain were to lose, her name is now out there and she could do things for women that could change this country.

It appears, though, that McCain's choice of Palin is paying off. According to an article on Bloomberg.com, McCain has jumped ahead of Obama in several national polls and even in others. He is now drawing bigger crowds than ever before, and energizing the Republican party. The article states that "McCain's choice of Palin ' allowed the McCain campaign to change the narrative away from McCain as an extension of Bush,' said Democratic strategist Jenny Backus" 

Obama's appeal appears to be wearing off, especially with his choice of Biden over Hillary Clinton, and his record fundraising is declining. Meanwhile over on the right, the future never looked so bright as Sarah Palin has changed the face of this entire election and could keep the Republicans in charge for at least four more years.

Works Cited

• "Governor Palin's Biography." Accessed 10 Sept. 2008. <http://gov.state.ak.us/>.
• "Joe Biden." accessed  10 Sept. 2008. <http://biden.senate.gov/senator/>.
• Nagourney, Adam. Zeleny, Jeff. "Obama's Pick Adds Foreign Expertise to Ticket." The New York Times 23 Aug. 2008. Accessed 10 Sept.2008. <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/us/politics/24veep.html?ref=politics>.
  
• Paglia, Camille. "Fresh Blood for the Vampire." Salon.com 10 Sept. 2008. <http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/09/10/palin/index.html>.
• Przybyla, Heidi. "McCain Poll Surge, Fundraising Give Democrats Election Jitters." 10 Sept. 2008 <http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aaWaPymjJ3rk>.
• Stapleton, Arnie. "Obama Speech: More Than 84,000 Attend." The Huffington Post 28 Aug. 2008. Accessed 10 Sept.2008.  .
• "The Office of Governor Sarah Palin." Accessed 10 Sept. 2008.<http://www.eeo.state.ak.us/bio.html>.

Opening Statement

Hi, my name is Zach Seidel I'm a 17, freshman at UMBC who graduated from Pikesville high school this past spring, and almost every day i use the media to a vast extent. I check my Facebook at least once a day, check my emails at least 3 times, and am on the internet 75% of the time I'm in my room. When I'm on the internet I read news sites because I like to see what is happening in the world. I play ice hockey so use the internet to check my schedule. My father is a reporter so I know people in the media and how they feel about certain issues. Personally, I feel that despite arguments tot he contrary, every media outlet in the world is biased. The media is meant to inform people, and despite their bias, the media does keep me informed. I am choosing to follow drudgereport.com becuase it seems to be the most respected blog on the web as well as having the most information.