Obama's Numerous TV Appearances Offer Another Kind Of "Change"

As this years mid-term elections near, party candidates are out in full force campaigning for votes. We see this everywhere from speeches at  local colleges to political ads every other commercial on television. The President is no exception, also vigorously campaigning to keep the Democrats in Congress this year. One of these appearances this past week was on Jon Stewart's "Daily Show" on Comedy Central, where the President was interviewed by the satire comedian in front of a live audience.

While there was a lot of hype about his appearance, it was far from his first television show appearance. Arguments made by critics claim that going on popular shows for self promoting and interviews is a use of "irresponsible media.," and that it lowers the dignity and prestige of the Presidency. Karl Rove responded to Obama's five Sunday morning talk show appearances last year by saying that, "Mr. Obama doesn't need more TV time. He needs a new health-care plan...He needs his facts to align with reality." I however think the contrary; that President Obama is reaching different audiences that wouldn't tune into him or current politics otherwise. We see this when looking at the number of viewers tuning in to his TV guest spots.
.
The President's August 2010 appearance on The View gave the show its best ratings ever, drawing in 6.6 million viewers. Let's remember that The View is mainly aimed towards the female audience. The male viewers (18-34) tend to watch shows such as The Daily Show. His most recent interview on The Daily Show drew in just under 3 million viewers, which was less than his 2008 appearance where he drew in 3.58 million viewers.

When looking at a complete list of Obama's TV appearances, you see that he has been on almost every time slot in television. He has reached everyone from the early morning news crowd (Today Show), to the mid-day talk show crowd (think Oprah & Ellen), to the late night folks (Jay Leno/Letterman). So while everyone is talking about Obama's failed promises of "change," they themselves are failing to see a whole new kind of change, which is the way in which our President is accessible to us. It is important that we keep our society's political interest and involvement up, especially in rough and changing times such as these. When looking back a hundred years from now, I believe that we will see Obama helped "change" the role of the President as much outside of the White House as he intends to inside the White House.

Removing Minimum Wage...Just The Beginning

On the left-winged blog Daily Kos, I found an interesting blog written by Jed Lewison, aimed at the working class in America, particularly those on the lower end of the payroll. Lewison's blog was written this week about many Republican senate nominees expressing their interests in removing or lowering minimum wages in our country. He bases this off of recent remarks by GOP Senate nominee Joe Raese, from West Virginia, who promised to repeal the Fair Labor Standards Act,  which would remove the set minimum wage. When looking furthur into Mr. Raese's statements, he criticizes FDR's Labor Act, stating that it "didn't solve any problems then and it hasn't solved any problems in 50 years." Lewison claims that in their effort to abolish the minimum wage, they will literally remove any and all protection workers have, including key protections such as overtime. Lewison's evidential support is the quotes of these Republican nominees (including Linda McMahon and Chris Dudley) speaking out against minimum rate laws that are currently set.


I completely agree with Lewison's argument that the Republicans would be setting us back a century by changing these laws. While we are in a recession right now, we were also in one when FDR created the Fair Labor Act, and he is historically known for helping to pull our country out of that Depression. Therefore, Raese's claims that it didn't work or make an impact don't really have a leg to stand on. While Lewison has a valid argument that removing the Act all together would be a GIANT step back for our country, he also failed to expand further on some of the GOP nominee's plans of not completely eliminating it, but to simply modify it. So I think that his logic is sound, if based simply off of Mr. Raese's ideas and statements, but not sound for grouping all the GOP senate nominees together.

Pulling The Curtain on Political Advertising

 

I came across an editorial in The New York Times written earlier this week entitled, The Secret Election. Ironically, the editorial had no named author which is mainly the idea of the entire piece, leaving me with no credibility to base the author off of. While the editorial had no author named, it was clear that the anonymous author strongly favored the passing of the Disclosure Act. The Disclosure Act, is an act being held up in the Senate right now by a strong Republican blockade. It would make anonymous campaign donors, who contribute millions of dollars for advertisements in support of a political party, attach their names to those donations. With this being said, the author is obviously voicing his frustrations and rallying fellow Democrats in favor of the act, while stating his case to Republican readers as well. The author is making an argument that these anonymous contributors are creating "secret elections," which are not good for Democracy, because the money being donated is usually going to one party. This creates a lopsided election in which the voters are seeing an overwhelming number of smear campaigns in favor of the Republican party. It is no secret that people such as Karl Rove are embracing this loophole in the law, even going as far as creating tax exempt organizations which help funnel the money funding these campaigns. With people hiding behind the first amendment, they are basically "buying" an election. This is the complete opposite idea of democracy, where the vote is in the hands of the  people and not a few wealthy individuals. The author states at the end of his editorial, that it's crucial for this type of election to end and that it's necessary for the Disclosure Act to pass so that we can have fair elections from this point on.

I agree with this editorial and the argument that the author makes. If people were to see that a high percentage of the ads they were seeing on the television and in print were all funded by the same person, I think it would be less influential on them. I also believe that it's important for people to know the source of their information, especially when it comes down to an election where we are placing power into somebodies hands. An election is supposed to be a census of the people's honest ideas and beliefs, not ideas swayed by smear campaigns and bitter political rivalries.

Back To Basics With Obama

A recent CNN article entitled Obama pushes kids to work hard in back-to-school speech, talks about the Presidents speech encouraging American students to work for the life that they want. He spoke honestly about the need for education being more important than ever right now, and told students that only they can create the life they want. He said that it wouldn't be easy, and that at times they will feel like giving up, but hard work and dedication pays off in the end. I liked the part of his speech where he spoke about the time he was slacking in school and had to be reprimanded by his mother to get back into motion and try harder. It helped students see him as an actual human and not some perfect person just because he is the President. But don't think that a simple do-good message would always go without controversy. Before last years speech, conservatives complained the President would try to force his political agenda on students, and also criticized a lesson plan that included writing letters about how students could help the president. While this years speech went almost unnoticed, there was still some speculation about whether teachers should show it in class, which many did around the nation.
I think that this is a good article to read because it seems like we are all wrapped up in political controversy and drama right now. This article is the opposite of all that, simply taking it back to basics. The President is admitting to students that in hard times, such as these, we need to work a little harder and stay focused on the life that we want for ourselves. Also, I like that he told students, that most of the jobs they want require an education, and they can't just "drop out and drop into a good job." I think a lot of people today have forgotten about this simple message, finding it too easy to roll over and blame others for their problems (mainly the President).  

"The story of America," Obama said, "isn't about people who quit when things got tough. It's about people who kept going, who tried harder, who loved their country too much to do anything less than their best."