The Power of an Endorsement

It was released in the media that General Colin Powell is now endorsing Barack Obama. General Colin Powell is a republican and the former Secretary of State for the Bush administration. Many people, including myself, hold General Powell in high esteem; we look at him as a man of true integrity. Wow! This can be rather confusing for someone who is supporting McCain, or "on the fence" about their decision.

General Powell had positive things to say about both candidates, yet feels Obama is a better pick. According to General Powell, it was the handling of the economic crisis that made him decide where his support would go. In a press release General Powell comments, stating that Obama has a "calm, intellectual, steady approach that we need in this country." He also made the point that Obama has reached a different generation, and encouraged participation from a very diverse group of people. His arguments are rather compelling.

The question has been about change. Who will bring the best change. For many of my friends, their main concern is foreign relations and how the rest of the world views the US. They feel that Obama is more diplomatic and fear that McCain's "passion" may misrepresent peaceful interaction, and fuel the decline of respect in our international community. For my other friends who support McCain, they fundamentally disagree with the policies of the Obama campaign. They also fear that considering our current situation in the middle east, that Obama may be not have a realistic approach to strategy and negotiations. 

Both sides of the coin are valid. Both candidates bring different strengths. It is our choice to decide what issues are the most important to us, and who will address our current issues in the most positive manner. Though I have to admit, General Powell's endorsement is a big hit to the McCain campaign in the "midnight hour."

Plugged IN and Turned OFF

This election has gotten very negative at times. Once again, turning off American voters to cliche tactics. The good news is that with only a few weeks to go, the "buzz" is that both campaigns will try to refrain from being negative. We shall see. 

With such a crucial election and a sensitive time, the American people need to see who lines up with their personal values and beliefs. We need more that ever to hear what Obama and McCain propose. Where are they similar, and where do they differ.

WAIT A MINUTE...

Okay, McCain and Obama are not being as negative...but what about the Media? It all goes back to Palin again. The media seems to be having a feeding frenzy with her. It's painful to watch. Is there a hidden agenda there? Recent polls reveal that Obama is gaining lead, could this discredit to McCain be influenced by the way Palin's persona is being portrayed? 

I have been "plugged in" to this election, and I am "turned off" by the high drama and attacks of this VP candidate. It must be easier to attack her, rather that going after a war veteran. It is rather tasteless, and I am with the majority of Americans when it comes to frustration with politics. "Air Wars" is not new to politics but with corruption, greed, wall street, global recession, and negative extremes in the news, maybe some old fashion respect in this election would go a lot further, not just with election but also with restoring some confidence back to the American people.

Disaster, Depression, and Denial

For over a week bail out talks have been debated between parties. We see differences in policy, as well as, influence and power in the decision making process. Has the media given us a good understanding of why? I have had to actively search for information to get deeper insight on this issues. What are the pros and cons of these proposals? What is the consequence of the government not bailing out? I bet you the average American could not answer this question. And why? Not because they aren't capable of coming to their own conclusion, but rather lack of information. 

IN THIS DAY AND AGE?

Amazing, that with in the "age of information" the major mass media outlets just barely touch the surface of issues. Is it because the public has a short attention span? Or, rather is the media not giving us enough answers? Rather than being thoroughly informed, I would not be surprised if the average person comes away with more questions than answers, after a story has been aired. I am not speaking about specialized channels of information, I am speaking of the mass media of syndicated television. 

Could the lack of in depth information be denial? How is it that "all of a sudden" we are in economic disaster? These things don't just happen over night, they happen over a period of time. Where was the expansive coverage of that? What about the exposure of corruption being rewarded in the corporate world? How about greedy mortgage companies that largely contributed to the housing fall that we are in?

This is serious business and not just an American problem. If we look at the global market, there are serious problems going on there as well. We all effect each other. We need the media to keep us WELL informed. We don't want short sensationalized stories that make the public panic, we want in depth information that will help us make better choices. And perhaps with more balanced information people wouldn't be so turned off about getting civically involved.

I am not say that there are no good media outlets; I am just saying that the most commercialized media outlets have a lot of power, and if the focus is keep on sensationalism, media collectivism, profits, and soft news, it is doing the American public a great injustice.