Main | October 2008 »

September 30, 2008

1st Presidential Debate

Did anyone notice that Sen. Obama addressed Sen. McCain as Jim, Bob, and another name which was not John, his actual name. That was just something I noticed that I thought was kind of rude and unprofessional on Obama’s part to mistake his opponents name on several different occasions.

It was unsure whether or not McCain would show up to the debate, but he did, and rightfully so since he owed it to the American people to talk about his view on our country’s issues and how he plans to address them as future President. That to me was much more important and advantageous event for McCain to attend, as opposed to staying in Washington.

Anyways, moving on to what was discussed and debated at the presidential debate.
The Wall Street Journal pointed out how the debate veered off from topic.
(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122247204209780953.html?mod=article-outset-box)
Even though the debate was supposed to be devoted entirely to foreign policy and national security, the debate brought up issues such as the new economic crisis, taxing, and spending. However, they did talk a lot about national security and the war. McCain kept pointing out that he has much experience in combat as a Vietnam Vet and knows how to better handle the current war. He doesn’t want to pull out because he feels that we are winning. He also kept saying that Obama doesn’t know the difference between a strategy and a tactic. He says Obama is not well trained in how to handle military moves and is ill-equipped to handle the current state of the war. McCain took a stab at Obama stating, "There are some advantages to experience and knowledge and judgment, and I honestly don't believe that Sen. Obama has the knowledge and experience. I don't think I need any on-the-job training. I'm ready to go at it right now."
Obama struck back against his harsh comments saying, "John, you're absolutely right that presidents have to be prudent in what they say. But coming from you who in the past have threatened extinction for North Korea and sung songs about bombing Iran, I don't know how credible that is."

The New York Times emphasized how Obama continually compared McCain like Bush, and saying that we cannot afford to have a repeat of the last 8 years. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/27/us/politics/27debatecnd.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=presidential%20debate&st=cse&oref=slogin)
NY Times stated that for the first 40 minutes, Mr. Obama repeatedly sought to link Mr. McCain to President Bush, and suggested that it was policies of excessive deregulation that led to the financial crisis and mounting economic problems the nation faces now.
As quoted from the debate, “We also have to recognize that this is a final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies promoted by George Bush, supported by Senator McCain — the theory that basically says that we can shred regulations and consumer protections and give more and more to the most and somehow prosperity will trickle down,? Mr. Obama said. “It hasn’t worked, and I think that the fundamentals of the economy have to be measured by whether or not the middle class is getting a fair shake.?

The main argument from the two candidates that I got from the debate was that McCain kept emphasizing that Obama wasn’t ready to handle big military problems, the war in Iraq, and the financial crisis because he is too inexperienced. McCain repeatedly brought up that the American people should go on his website and check out things he’s done in the past to prove that he knows what he’s talking about. This goes along with his famous saying, “I walk the walk, not just talk the talk.?

As for Obama, he stressed that we cannot afford as a country to have a repeat of the last 8 years, and McCain is supported of many Bush decisions, and says we cannot expect good change for this country if we follow in the footsteps of Bush’s reign as President, which he is confident will happen if McCain becomes president.

September 23, 2008

Troubles on Wall Street

The Pioneer Press took on a different angle compared to the Star Tribune and the MN Daily on the country's financial problems. Instead of writing about the woes of Wall Street, the Pioneer Press (http://www.twincities.com/ci_10531164?nclick_check=1 interviewed a Minnesota based company that is actually doing quite well in our suffering economy. They interview General Mills and talk about how in midst of everything that is happening, they have sales rising, stocks going up, and a debt that is very much manageable. The story's purpose was to bring hope and confidence in the economy by their example. I thought it was a great white light in the middle of financial turmoil, however, I really think they should have focused more on what Washington is doing to fix the problem, and not lead people on that the economy is okay because one MN company is doing fine.

The Star Tribune focused on the new bailout bill that was proposed. (http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/congress/29234359.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUX)
They described the bill, and said how Democrats want to cut executive's pay to help with the company. They said the government is very generous to offer such a bill that would help so many companies since the Great Depression. Frank, D-Mass, who was leading negotiations said "By the declaration that they made, by sending this proposal, I think we have to recognize the reality that we don't have a choice now of debating whether this is a good or a bad thing," This obviously is a much different view and angle than the Pioneer Press did. In this quote, it states how things are really bad, and it’s supported by the fact that the $700 billion bailout bill is being proposed. Even President Bush is worried, saying to Congress to pass the rescue plan quickly, declaring, "The whole world is watching."

The MN Daily also did a story on Bush’s plan to solve the economy’s bad debt.
(http://mndaily.com/content/bush-meets-treasury-secretary-fed-chief-says-hes-working-hard-financial-turmoil)
However, unlike the Star Tribune, the MN Daily just stated that Bush met at the White House to calm the financial turmoil. They just stated, “news reports said Paulson was considering having the government create an entity to take over banks' bad debt.?
They didn’t have any quotes from White House treasury secretary, Bush, big business executives, or citizens. They also ended the story with: Bush canceled his trip so he could focus on the worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression. That was a pretty bold statement, I thought, to make seeing as how throughout the whole article it never once gave information about how bad the economy was, or quotes from people who are worried. All it did was state that Bush was meeting at the White House to discuss the issue, and it said nothing else. However, the Star Tribune actually went into detail about what happened at the White House and what bill was presented to Congress. It also stated the challenges our economy is facing, and I think the MN Daily did a poor job on reflecting the struggles and the actions put forth to solve the issue. Maybe they feel students won’t care about the bill, or maybe they didn’t have enough information, I’m not sure. All I know is that the two stories (MN Daily and Star Tribune) were posted on the same day. So how one story could have lots of information, while the other one is very vague about what happened at the White House is beyond me.