Strengthening the Political Image

In response to the editorial ’Obama Just Wants the Votes’.

Both from political and social aspect, I have to disagree with the author of this editorial. I believe that Obama and Clinton joining forces is a positive move. It is not only a smart maneuver in securing the votes of Clinton supporters, but it also strengthens Obama’s personal image. His outreach to help Clinton out of debt gives him a humble persona. It can be argued that Obama is only seeking to gain the support of Clinton voters, but still the act of kindness does deserve to be recognized for what it is.

It has also bothered me the way campaigns become personal attacks on the other candidates. Therefore, this event has been a positive act to reinforce Obama’s campaign, as opposed to making him look better at the expense of others. I can tell from your editorial that you are probably a Republican supporter if you find it hard to accept the fact that either Obama or Clinton could win the national election. This could explain the difficulty you find in seeing that these candidates don’t just want public praise.

I view this as a beneficial act for American politics because it sheds a positive light on the potential leaders of our country. Ideally, aren’t we looking for a caring and generous president? This gives citizens hope, that if two competitive candidates such as these can put their differences aside to uplift a common goal, then hopefully the public’s best interest is also a priority to them.

To a devout Republican this may not look like that at all, and may only seem like another stealthy move in politics. However, to those of us who have not yet given our vote to particular party, a smile and a helping hand could be a deciding factor.

Lending A Helping Hand

After watching the news earlier this evening I was delighted to see the teamwork that had evolved between the two democratic candidates. This sense of cohesion gave me hope that politics can be about more than just gaining power. The steps taken by Barack Obama showed his effort toward bringing together the Democratic Party in enough time before the fall elections.

Senator Obama’s donation of money to alleviate some of former competitor, Hilary Clinton’s debt, was the first affirmative action taken by Obama to show his support for his party. Talk had been heard that actions like this were to take place, but no one knew if they were actually going to be carried through. This reassured me that power and personal image was not the only thing on the candidate’s mind.

Sure the aid does improve Obama’s image as he gains the votes of former Hilary supports, but in my eyes it also gives heart to the campaign. I often have little faith in the true desires of political figures. It gives me hope when we can witness selfless acts of generosity.

As the election year comes to a close I can genuinely say I am happy to rid my television of those ads that only criticize the opposing candidate. The increased focus on the desires of the political party and forgetting petty indifferences, as Obama and Hilary have, reassure me that as citizens we have not lost focus on the issues that are most important to the well-being of our nation. We can often get wrapped up in the scandals of the election and forget to demand that the candidates focus on our current status both physically and economically. With the recent push to unite the Democratic Party, I feel that we are taking strides as citizens to ensure that not only the most influential candidate takes the presidency, but also that he is also the most sympathetic of our country’s best interests.

There Is a Point to All of This

Commentary on 'Seriously, What's the Point?'

It is easy to fall victim to the idea that your vote amongst the millions of other votes in the country does not account for much, but this idea is exactly what our election process is designed to prevent. What if a large portion of the population felt the same way you did and decided that their vote wasn’t worth casting. The opinion of that group would then be left unheard.

The voting process has even changed over the centuries to make it more convenient and accessible to the American public. It is even less of a burden today than it was years ago, giving you less reason to not participate on election day.

In this argument, the author supported the use of manual counting of the popular votes, however, is this idea really plausible? The time and efficiency of hand counting the votes offers more room for error than using voting machines. Though susceptible to error as well, the voting machines are unbiased and contain the ability to count more efficiently and accurately. With such great numbers of votes to count, a machine has the resistance of getting tired as people would. If the situation arises, a machine would also have the ability to recount votes and in a timely manner.

In response to the critique of the Electoral College, a valid point in questioning its existence can be seen. The fear that the Framers had in originally implementing the Electoral College has since almost completely diminished. Those fears, including nomination of unqualified candidates, have been eliminated by the increase in travel and public communication. So why keep the system around? Our election process has worked for centuries, electing the president with the most popular vote count. With only three elections otherwise, I would say the Framers’ system is valid. Though it may seem your vote doesn’t matter, it does. The electoral votes your state contributes are decided upon the people’s vote.

The purpose of the election process is to ensure that the leader of our nation is elected by the people and is an accurate representation of the voices of the whole population. Each election year when people decide it’s not worth their time to vote, they are letting only a fraction of the nation choose the next leader. Those people that believe their vote counts are more correct than they can imagine, because since they are the only ones voting, their opinion is the deciding factor.

Is There An End In Sight?

A major issue currently facing American citizens is the rising prices of gas. It’s not only limiting how much we drive, but also increasing the prices of other necessities such as food. In order to accommodate for the rising price of gas, shipping costs have risen as well. This issue needs to be addressed because while gas prices continue to rise, most American’s aren’t seeing a raise in their pay to compensate for this increasing margin.

The increase in gas prices has been gradual over the past year, only skyrocketing in the past month. It began as a steady increase, with many complaining when it hit $3.00 a gallon. Now prices will increase $.10 in one week! Pretty soon the cost of transporting to and from work will cost more than a paycheck for some. If not addressed soon, the nation could see a significant decrease the revenue generated by traditional tourist attractions. Families will no longer be able to find the money to take road trips and many will find airline prices unaffordable. Travel is also important in the shipment of groceries and other leisure items we take for granted. Prices of everyday household items continue to increase as well because it costs so much more to have it shipped. An unavoidable chain reaction will occur if this problem is not addressed. Soon people will not be able to afford gas to drive to work, thus suspending their source of income and limiting their funds for necessary expenses. The lack of extra spending money as well, will not only be a personal burden to citizens, but will also affect the income of retail shops that rely on these customers’ business.

The government has promised to seek a solution, at least temporary, to lower prices though no changes have actually been seen. How high do the prices have to get before officials realize that average American’s can barely afford to drive to work? The Bush Administration has agreed to increase oil drilling over seas to hopefully alleviate the stress slightly, but how long will it be for and what does lowering actually mean? With the increased emphasis on the upcoming election, it seems like more money is going into campaigns than into finding solutions to these devastating problems. Sometimes as citizens, we tend to lose focus on the issues that need primary attention. Though the plans our legislators have for the future tend to draw our attention, we also need to ensure that we are demanding improvement of our current situation.

Is There a Need to Panic?

Food contamination is viable issue for citizen’s to be concerned about since it could easily affect the food they bring home from the grocery store. The recent food scare has been with tomatoes and the rare form of salmonella that has been caused by these infected fruits. Unforgettably, there have been several food scares in the past few years including peanut butter and spinach, but does this mean that the government is not doing enough to protect us?

The editorial entitled, Now It's Tomatoes, criticizes the Bush Administration and blatantly states “they haven’t done nearly enough”. In addressing concerned citizens this article does mention the high degree of precaution being taken by food suppliers when problems like this do arise but this author’s main concern is that this is a reoccurring problem. It’s hard to place the blame on those in Washington because there is such a vast array of other issues that need to be addressed as well, the war in Iraq being one of main focus. Food poisoning is definitely an important issue and one that the public should be aware of though not one that government needs to immediately focus on because there are bigger issues that need priority. With only about 160 people falling ill out of a country of millions this clearly is not an epidemic that is affecting a majority of our food supply. It is a valid argument to desire more funding for the Food and Drug Administration, which could potentially prevent future food contamination. However, with so many other problems currently facing our nation, it is neither likely nor necessary that this problem be given the government’s full attention.

There are many ways to address this issue, including the creation of a “trace-back system” like the editorial noted. Solutions like this, however, cannot be expected to be implemented immediately or ensure the prevention of all types of food contamination. We have to expect that even with increased inspection, contaminated food will go unnoticed every once in a while because the mass of food being shipped all over the country is just too large to be scrutinized. Though the process is slow moving, the increased funding to the Food and Drug Administration is a first step as well as the continual awareness and warning about the potentially harmful foods already in circulation. Despite the reoccurrences of food contamination recently, the government is concerned with the publics safety and would take more drastic measures if the problem became out of control.

Feeding the World

In today’s issue of the The New York Times, an editorial appeared titled “Politics and Hunger” concerning wealthy nations’ unwillingness to address the issue of starvation in the world’s poorest countries. This article, speaking to citizens of one of the wealthiest countries, discusses how food is hoarded at the expense of other less fortunate countries. It highlights how the prices of grain and corn have increased significantly due to droughts and taxes, yet we continue to increase our imports. It reports that many plans have been made to aid these countries, yet no action has been taken.

As the author reports, he also criticizes the lack of action taken by countries such as ours stating that “one of the most useful things industrialized countries could do would be to deliver on their promise and end the fat subsidies they provide their farmers no matter how high prices go.” He expresses his frustration with the lack of US aid as well as other industrialized countries in their continued focus on themselves. He is also bothered by the ample supply of food these countries have that could be going to feed those that are starving, but instead is continued to be taxed at prices the poorer countries cannot afford. The article fails, however, to address the ways in which the Bush Administration has made strides to alleviate the suffering in these poor countries and only talks about the plans that have not yet been put into action. The author lays out the issue as one that has a simple answer and a quick cure, even though many factors affect the countries ability to contribute. It is obvious that this is a serious issue that wealthy countries should address, however the course of action to be taken must be carefully assessed.


The article referred to above can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/09/opinion/09mon1.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Where Is Our Focus?

On Tuesday, even before the final votes had been tallied, it looked as if Sen. Barack Obama had won the race to be the 2008 Democratic Presidential candidate. The race with his opponent Sen. Hilary Clinton proved to be close, as each candidate fought to make history as either the first woman or first black man to take a major political party into the race for presidency. While Obama pushed for change in Washington, Hilary continually offered her experience with political America. Though both were competitive in their campaigns, it seems that Obama was able to pull through in the end according to The Associated Press as seen in editorial, "Obama's first change: The course of history". This competitive campaign, however, did create division within the Democratic Party with the degrading ads and deliberate misinformation. This gap must be healed before Obama can effectively fight against McCain, the Republican candidate. Despite being rivals, Obama could use Clinton’s help to strengthen the democratic campaign. As we get closer to the presidential election in the fall, every move of the candidates will be recorded, reviewed, scrutinized, and replayed for the entire country. Any mistake could cause a downfall. But instead of pushing for personal victory and focusing on how to scrutinize their opponents, Americans should want these candidates to focus their attention on issues such as reforming education and healthcare. It seems American’s can get so wrapped up in media coverage and scandalous slip-ups that we forget to listen for and demand these candidates to address issues that make a difference in the lives of the average person. Middle class Americans are finding it hard to pay for their college education and a simple tank of gas as it climbs to almost $4 a gallon. These are issues that we should be inquiring about, as we get closer to electing the next leader of our nation.

This article is worth reading because it brings to our attention the importance of the candidate’s focus on political issues that affect the average American, rather than on solely winning the presidency. It brings to light how easily we get distracted from the issues that most directly affect a majority of the people.