Poor Herman

While it might be a little late to be writing, I am glad I am. If I would have done this earlier I would not have had the chance to talk about an article that was just posted on the Huffington Post website a little over an hour ago.

The title of the article: “Hermain Cain Sexual Harassment Accusations: GOP Presidential Candidate Denies Politico Report”.  I do not know if Herman Cain ever realized that being a frontrunner in this race would bring on so many scrutinizing eyes. Or maybe he did not expect to be a frontrunner at all. First the holes in his 999 plan, then his electrified fence on the border, his overall inexperienced past, his smoking campaign manager, and now this.

Cain was head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s. Apparently during his time of leadership, two women employees, that we know of, complained about Cain’s inappropriate/sexual behavior.

“The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association. The agreements also included language that bars the women from talking about their departures.”

Cain and his campaign have repeatedly declined to make any comment on these allegations. Cain is said to be “vaguely familiar” with these stories, and believed this matter to be resolved.

On the Politico.com they have the most recent statement that Cain has made concerning the allegations of this issue.

“Cain said he has “had thousands of people working for me” at different businesses over the years and could not comment “until I see some facts or some concrete evidence.” His campaign staff was given the name of one woman who complained last week, and it was repeated to Cain on Sunday. He responded, “I am not going to comment on that.”
 He was then asked, “Have you ever been accused, sir, in your life of harassment by a woman?”
 He breathed audibly, glared at the reporter and stayed silent for several seconds. After the question was repeated three times, he responded by asking the reporter, “Have you ever been accused of sexual harassment?””

Politico learned of these allegations weeks ago, but has slowly been putting fact together, and talking to numerous people.

Now, Cain has made some crazy comments and come up with silly metaphors, but this is the first time that I have ever been convinced that more than a handful of people will be put off by this issue. America has elected men with all sorts of quirks and faults. But everyone will agree that a man who cheats, or disrespects a woman in anyway is considered uncouth. Which is an interesting note to elaborate on, but for the purposes of this post, we do not want another Monica Lewinsky situation. And not that that is a situation that would ever fall at Herman Cain’s feet, but the mere possibility is something that will shy the American people away from a vote for Herman Cain. We’ll see how he battles this one with apples and oranges.

Guantanamo Bay

Because of the Platforms project assigned this past week, I have realized that Guantanamo Bay is not something I am too familiar with. So here goes nothing.

Guantanamo Bay is located at the southeastern end of Cuba. The United States gained power over the southern part of the bay in the beginning of 1900 after forming the Cuban-American Treaty. However, at the present time, the government of Cuba sees the US presence on the land as illegal.

So now what is the Guantanamo Bay that Obama was supposedly to shut down?

Well, that Guantanamo Bay is a detention camp under the United States within the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base. There is not much history to be discovered about the camp itself because it was only established in 2002. The Bush Administration created the Guantanamo Bay detention camps as a place to hold detainees from the war. These detainees were suspected enemies that could be involved in the war on terrors. The entirety of this location is split up into, now, two separate camps: Camp Iguana, and Camp Delta.

The main conflict during the Bush Administration was jurisdiction; figuring out who had the power to try these detainees, and what protections these detainees specifically fell under. That was then.

When Barack Obama was to be elected to office, he made a campaign promise to shut down Guantanamo Bay. In January of 2009, Obama signed an order to hold the proceedings of the Guantanamo commissions for 120 days and that the facility will be shut down by the end of the year. A week later a judge in Cuba denied this order. In May of 2009 the US passed an amendment that stopped all funds that would transfer or release the detainees of Guantanamo Bay. Then again in March of 2011, Obama tried to make efforts that would lead towards the demise of the camp, but these efforts failed as well.

According to an article printed in The New York Times, written in April of this past year, out “of the 779 people that have been detained at the United States military prison at Guantanamo, 600 have been transferred and 171 remain.”

My knowledge of Guantanamo Bay has increased significantly from this research. However, what I still do not comprehend is Barack Obama’s continuous failed efforts concerning this issue. Clearly Guantanamo Bay is an issue that has to be maneuvered around very delicately. Both sides, Cuba and the US, have strong opinions about the US’s presence their, and those sides do not match up. If closing the Guantanamo Bay detention camp was significant enough to be considered a campaign promise, then it should’ve been something that we read about in the papers more than a couple of times a year. Please correct me if I am wrong in any way, but I would give that a 2 on my I.B.I scale.  Yes, campaign promises are not necessarily things that we can trust. However, from what I have recently learned Guantanamo Bay is a much more serious issue than we would like to believe.

Media Shmedia

Robert Woodward, a CSPAN junkie, briefly touches on the benefit of CSPAN in politics.



Michael Robinson (George Washington University) discusses why networks take out full page ads and how the people of the networks look at it these ads as opportunities to prove their credibility. Tack, hmm?



Katrina Vanden Huevel, while discussing Occupy Wall Street, comments on how, up until recently, the mainstream media has solely focused on the "tea party" movement and not on the American people's voice.

Republican Rubio

There has been some talk in recent news about Marco Rubio and when exactly his parents left Cuba to come to the US. What’s so intriguing about this? Mitt Romney has stepped up to defend the 40 year-old Senator. This is about a 9 on my I.B. I scale. Rubio has been spoken of as a possible Vice Presidential candidate. All this talk about him made me realize that I don’t really know much about him. So I shall be using this blog as an opportunity to expand my knowledge on the Senator today.

Marco Rubio was born in ’71. He went to Tarkio College on a football scholarship, and then later transferred to Santa Fe Community College and graduated in ’93 from University of Florida with a bachelor of science. He served in the Florida House of Representatives for 8 years. (2000-2008) During those years he promoted lower taxes, free market empowerment and an efficient government. Then after two years he was elected to the United States Senate to represent Florida. Rubio and his wife, Jeanette, have been married for 13 years and have four kids.

So far, he sounds like a really great family man. Now, where does he stand on the issues?

Healthcare:
Rubio wants to lower health care costs by repealing/replacing Obamacare, letting the states be in control of health policy, and allowing individuals to choose their own health care.

Education: (This is quoted from his website)
“Senator Rubio believes we should create a universal education tax deduction, perform a regular review of Department of Education programs, make block grants conditional on performance and accountability measures, improve parental access to school performance, improve school choice through a Federal corporate income tax credit, protect teachers from frivolous lawsuits, overcome the science, technology, engineering and mathematics crisis, create students with disabilities scholarships, promote voluntary Pre-K scholarship, provide opportunity scholarships for students in chronically failing schools, reinstate the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program and promote a national virtual learning platform.”

Economy:
To help create businesses and jobs, Rubio’s plans are to permanently end the Death Tax, cut corporate taxes, reform the Alternative Minimum Tax, and end double taxation. And again repeal/replace Obamacare.

Rubio also has ideas about protecting our seniors. (Also, from his website.)
He has “put forth simple ideas that the Senate should pursue, including increasing prosecutions on those who prey on seniors through fraud and financial crimes, protect seniors from identity theft, protect current benefits for seniors, repeal ObamaCare, crack down on unapproved prescription drugs and permanently end the Death Tax.”

If you notice, there are a few of his ideas that fall under more than just once category. Which could be a very good strategy. Rubio seems to be about the simple things that can be most effective.
It also helps that his image is exactly what the media and the people would love. A young good-looking family man. VP? We’ll see!

Plat what? Platforms

Barbara Garson expands on what the Socailist Party wants to see. In '92.



Paul Manafort expresses positive thoughts on the Republican Party Platform in '96.



Sunne McPeak discusses some of the issues of the Democratic Platform in '84.

Romney-Rama

To start, my pre-debate thoughts were focused mainly on Herman Cain. Would he be under the scope as much as I’m lead to believe? Is he really the new frontrunner? Has he become the topic of conversation because he’s the non-politician? Also, what color will Michele Bachmann be wearing? Will Rick Santorum have more than two chances to speak? Will Rick Perry speak about a plan of action? What will be the most used word of this debate?

Well, let’s answer some of these questions, shall we?
Bachmann paired a shade of ivory with black. Santorum had somewhere around seven opportunities to make a valid point. (That doesn’t mean he was affective, though.) Perry didn’t have an more details on his plans for us. Shocking. And the most used word? Taxes. Followed by jobs, economy, and border.

Now about this whole Herman Cain deal.
I keep hearing that Cain is the up and comer, that he’s being paid more attention to, and we need to keep an eye on him. Clearly, his “9-9-9” plan is under more scrutiny than it was. And why? Because he has a plan! Sure, it may have its issues to be argued about (and they are, as was shown in the first 30 minutes of the debate), but it’s more than Rick Perry has to say at the moment.
But to be honest, I was expecting Cain to turn head a little more. Not that he didn’t have a good debate. He had a nice apple to oranges comparison. However, he wasn’t in the spotlight or caught up in a fiery back and forth nearly as much as the former Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney.

For the first time during his campaign, Romney got fired up, and in a quarrel with Rick Perry. We knew it was coming. It was just a matter of time. The quarrel came about from the topic of immigration. Perry brought up the issue of Romney hiring illegals for yard work. Romney explained the issue after he got to make a couple of jabs about his previously failed debates and his un-presidential qualities.

Take a look: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2011/10/18/seg-romney-perry-illegal-immigration.cnn

This was not the only instance where Romney struggled to speak. Santorum put up a fight as well. These candidates may be trying to bring Romney down, but they might be helping his campaign. Why? Well, Romney has been presented as this very put together, non-emotional type of candidate. While that has its benefits, he’s been leaving us with very little personality. (Something Herman Cain has going for him.) So seeing Romney have a little more spark and sass in his comments is really quite refreshing.

After the conclusion of the debate, some people gave their insight on who they felt stood out. Some said Romney, some said Cain. Some even talked about Perry’s strong defenses. Different answers and perspectives of all kinds. So where are all these different perspectives coming from? Our own knowledge of the candidates and the race? How is the media affecting our views? Something to think about.

Quote of the day: “You have a problem with allowing someone to finish speaking. And I suggest that if you want to become president of the United States, you have got to let both people speak. So first, let me speak.”

Conventions

Lenny Curry briefly discusses the impact of a national convention.



Michele Bachmann speaks at the California Republican Party Convention.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K8NWt2fdXo

I know this is not a C-SPAN video. However, I really wanted to share what a convention from past years is like. This is from 1988.

To Speak, or Not to Speak

Something that seems to be occurring this election year, and maybe unlike any other, is the audience participation in the recent GOP debates. Now, this is not something I am necessarily knowledgeable of, but that is the point of this particular post. Figuring out why this may happen, if there has ever been another time in history where audiences have been so outspoken. That being said, if you actually read this, please express your thoughts and opinions as well.

So let’s start with the history of presidential debates.

These debates were created for television. The Republican and Democratic  nominees did not even debate until 1960 with Nixon and Kennedy. The next debate did not occur until ’76 with Carter and Ford. When spectators started attending the debates, it was a “go sit, and keep your mouth closed” kind of deal, on the respectable side. 

Even in 1984, it was expected that the audience would be reserved. But, in ’84, when a little applause occurred the moderator, Sander Vanocur, quickly silenced them. He said, “I beseech you’ try to hold your applause, please.” Vanocur also commented that that kind of emotion is more appropriate for athletic events, and not in political debates.

By 2003, voter questions were submitted over the internet for the pre-primary debates. By 2008, they introduced Youtube questions, and this year, Twitter. These new tactics are clearly encouraging viewers involvement, which in turn encourages audience participation, naturally. It seems that the more spectator participation is encouraged the more “brawl-like” feel these debates have to them. It takes away from the issues at hand, and turns it into something that media eats up. Obviously that is not the point of a debate.

In case you’ve missed them, this year there have been three particular instances, where the audience participation is truly nothing less than inappropriate.

The first of these occurred, during the first GOP debate in California. Rick Perry was asked about the amount of executions in the state of Texas. Whenever it was pointed out that Perry has overseen 234 executions the audience cheered. They cheered over the deaths of others.

During the debate held in Tampa, FL, Ron Paul was asked by the moderator about healthcare and insurance policies. After his response the moderator asked “Are you saying that society should let him die?” And a few members of the audience cheered and yelled, “Yeah!”

But the most talked about outburst occurred during the debate on September 22^nd in Florida. A youtube question came from a gay soldier in Iraq asking if the candidates planned to circumvent the end of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. Then a handful of spectators booed the soldier. 

Even in the debate that took place last week on the 11th, there was an outburst from a spectator. Unfortunately, it was unintelligible, but clearly something to take note of. 

Now, of course, these are controversial issues in themselves. But as a whole, the participation is also one to argue about. Some people like the audience participation, others do not. I am personally not a fan. I’ve read, and agree, that these outbursts are quite reminiscent to the guillotine days during the French Revolution. A little barbaric for my taste.

I found a website that specifically talks about the psychology behind these newfangled outbursts, that I find quite interesting. Please take a look. 

Another Day, Another Debate

The most recent debate was held in Hanover, New Hampshire at Dartmouth. Fancy. I don’t know what it was about this particular debate, but I was not a huge fan of the first 50 minutes. Maybe it was because they were sitting at a round table with coffee mugs. Maybe it was because the younger female monitor had a sassy attitude. Or maybe it was because everyone kept talking over each other.
Not that I’m a huge Santorum fan, but from what I saw, he was asked only asked one question in the first of hour, of the entire debate. When Charlie Rose went to cut him off Santorum responded with, “I am not done yet. I’ve only been able to answer one question, unlike everybody else here, so let me just finish what I’m saying.” You tell ‘em Rick. Poor guy seems to be fighting a losing battle. He deserves a 9.9(.9) on my I.B.I. scale for that.

The second half of the debate I found to be more compelling. The GOP candidates were able to ask each other questions. That’s always a recipe for something of interest.
So what were some of the questions? Well, Ms. Bachmann, decked out in all white, asked Perry what he will do differently than Obama. The answer? Nothing you haven’t heard before. Next, the always entertaining, Herman Cain questions Romney’s ability to name all 59 points in his 160 page plan. And that is just the start of many questions addressed to Romney. But that doesn’t seem to intimidate him one bit. Every answer seems to be handled with much ease and eloquence, really.

Something I really found interesting was a quote from Cain that he was addressed about. The quote is, “… don’t blame Wall Street, don’t blame the big banks, if you have a job and you are not rich, blame yourself.” According to Cain that quote does not refer to the 14 million people “who are out of work for no reason…” but it is directed towards the protestors. Either way, I’m not sure those are words that are easy to just accept. Food for thought, I suppose.

Truthfully, this was the most lack luster debate for me. So what did I do? Fact checking. I actually found a webpage that came up with 13 facts for this particular debate. So I wanted to share a couple.

Jon Huntsman was quoted saying, “The IRS is already planning on 19,500 new employees to administer that mandate. That will stay, and that’s the ruinous part of ‘Obamacare.’”
Who knows where he got this figure from, but according to the IRS budge request for 2012 the new number of employees is 1,300.

During the debate Cain was approached by Ron Paul about calling the Federal Reserve ignorant. Of course, Cain denied such a thing. But read the quote that Paul was referring to:
“I don’t know why people think we’re gonna learn this great amount of information by auditing the Federal Reserve. I think a lot of people are calling for this audit of the Federal Reserve because they don’t know enough about it.” Hmmm. So he didn’t actually say “ignorant”, but he might as well have.


Quote of the Day: “I'm a mother of 28 kids, 22 foster kids, 5 biological kids.” –Michele Bachmann (Wait, how many kids have you mothered?)

Our Vote

Michael Worley and Zach Howell of the College Republican/Democrat National committee talk about the globalization in higher education. This is a topic I myself have never heard much about, and found it especially interesting to hear both sides perspectives.



Again, Worley and Howell discuss whether there's fire on the republican or democratic side with the a potential up-rise of independents.



Sara Haile-Mariam from Campus Progress handles an unnecessarily rude phone call with grace, and stands up for young people.

Moderate Shmoderate

Today, I had a conversation with my mom about the Presidential Candidates, who she likes/doesn’t like, and the things she wishes she knew more about. So what does my mom feel like she’s missing?

A moderate G.O.P. Candidate. “I’m tired of hearing people say how they’re anti-Obama, and why people believe that that statement alone makes them a good candidate.” This is something that has crossed my mind before as well. Yet, never has been something I’ve really looked into. Is there a candidate who has never slammed Obama in a debate?

So let’s review a couple of our beloved candidates.

-Michele Bachmann- Obviously out. This woman can’t even answer two questions in a row without making an anti-Obama comment.

-Newt Gingrich- Based off of how this issues is portrayed in the media, I’d be surprised if Gingrich didn’t make digs at Obama in his sleep.

-Mitt Romney- Has his anti-Obama moments. His metaphors are always the best. “What's happened over the last 20, 30 years is we've gone from a pay phone world to a smartphone world and President Obama keeps jamming quarters into the pay phone thinking things are going to get better. It's not connected, Mr. President.”

I recently went through the last two debates (September 12^th & 22^nd) transcripts on washingtonpost.com, and searched “Obama” to see how many times his name was mentioned. Here are the combined results:

Bachmann- 25

Romney- 16

Perry- 8

Gingrich- 5

Cain- 4

Huntsman- 4

Santorum- 3

And who is the one candidate to NOT slam Obama in the recent debates? RON PAUL, ladies and gentleman! (And Gary Johnson, but he doesn’t really count.)

Paul is keeping it classy with no digs to be heard. Bachmann on the other hand shows no mercy, and no other points of interest, with her whopping 25 mentions.

So let’s talk about Ms. Bachmann. What can she offer besides a repeal of Obamacare?

According to her website her top priorities are to:

-Restore our economy and create millions of new jobs.

-Repeal Obamacre and is unconstitutional mandates. (She just had to add the unconstitutional part.)

-Achieve deep cuts in spending to reduce America’s debt.

-Strengthen the family and defend marriage.

-Rebuild respect for America as the shining city upon a hill. (Shining city? Upon a hill? Come now.)

All of this certainly sounds like a nice little sentiment. But take a look at the issues section on her website. Almost half of every issue section talks about the failure of Obama. I’ll give the Bachmann team about a 1.2 on my I.B.I scale for wasting space. We get it Michele. You don’t like Obama.

I guess Bachmann doesn’t have my mom’s vote, huh?

Does she have yours?