Well, it's been quite awhile since I've updated, and quite a lot has changed...and stayed the same...in politics.

Although I admittedly lean right, which I think may be fairly apparent from my blog, I find myself taking a step back as super Tuesday quickly approaches.

I listened to President Bush's final State of the Union Address Monday night, and I was pleasantly surprised. Admittedly, he has little to no hope of achieving any of his departing wishes with a Democratic Congress and minimal support from the public, yet he said what he felt he needed to say, and even threw a few punches toward the left. With the beating he has endured over the past seven years, I say they were long overdue.

He did not mince words when it came to the war in Iraq, his pride in our military, and his trust in General Petraeus.

We have had a president in office for eight years who had to lead this country through one of the greatest tragedies in American history. He had to make a decision on how to deal with 9/11, and he did just that with compassion and fervor. He also never second guessed his choice and willingly forged ahead.

What was the best possible solution to 9/11 and the perilous situation in Iraq and Afghanistan? I would like to meet the one man or woman who thinks they have that answer.

As for our troops overseas, I thought Bush's statement directed toward them was one that they, as well as Congress, needed to hear.

"This evening, I want to speak directly to our men and women on the frontlines. Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen: In the past year, you have done everything we have asked of you, and more. Our Nation is grateful for your courage. We are proud of your accomplishments. And tonight in this hallowed chamber, with the American people as our witness, we make you a solemn pledge: In the fight ahead, you will have all you need to protect our Nation. And I ask the Congress to meet its responsibilities to these brave men and women by fully funding our troops."

There's no better way to show our support for our troops than by providing them with what they need from artillery to a wash cloth.

I pray for our troops every single day, and now I pray for a leader for our nation that will find a way to lessen the demand for our services in Iraq and Afghanistan without erasing the accomplishments our troops have achieved. I also pray for a leader who understands the severity of the threats against our country and is willing to continue to fight those who want to hurt the people of this free country.

November 2008 is going to be the most important election in my lifetime, and I am proud to say that I will be able to cast my vote toward the candidate who I believe will fulfill my dreams as an American citizen, and support our military who allowed and granted me that privilege.

Transcript of the 2008 State of the Union Address

Today I would like to blog about the disparity of news coverage between every single presidential candidate, both Republican and Democrat, and Hillary Clinton.

The advantages Clinton has enjoyed, just by announcing her candidacy are astounding.
1- She is a woman.
2- She is married to a former president who is perhaps one of the most charismatic ,yet corrupt and immoral, but still appealing politicians of our time.
3- She has been in the political spotlight for years, and more so than any other candidate, as she enjoyed her position as First Lady for eight years in the White House and then not surprisingly snagged a seat in the Senate representing a state she did not even live in.

What I would like to know, is where would she be without these internal advantages she received on a silver platter?

Generating publicity, distinguishing yourself from the other candidates, establishing a firm stance on one issue or another, and painting a portrait of yourself are all inarguably the most important first steps in running for president.

Hillary received all of these things gift wrapped with a bow.

Because of these advantages, Hillary has been in the spotlight since day one, and she shows no signs of slowing down.

She has hit little to no bumps in her campaign, and her poll numbers have never dipped more than slightly.

And why is this? Because we have an image of Hillary in our head. Most Americans either love her or hate her. And enough people love her that she need make no effort to swing the vote of those who express the opposite emotion.

The only time she has stumbled on our path to victory is when she swung nervously back and forth between Spitzer's immigration policy of providing all illegal immigrants with driver's licenses. Her numbers dipped because surprisingly she was confronted with a real issue and provided no real response.

Surprising? Not really. The debates I have watched thus far are superficial and annoying. Questions are planted repeatedly, campaigns are caught after the fact, and the candidate's deny their involvement.

The race for the presidency is a race of who we hear most about. Hillary Clinton is winning that race by miles.

Refreshing

I found a blog entry linked from the Daily Kos which was a refreshing read. The writer is a democratic female under the name "ProgressForAmerica." The blog entitled, "Why, as a Reasonable Women, I Cannot Vote for Hillary Clinton" voiced the writer's respect for Clinton along with her doubts concerning Clinton's run for the presidency.

Instead of ranting and raving about the failures of the Bush administration and the Republican party in general, the writer points out the faults of the Democratic party throughout the past 15 years which have curbed their attempts at the White House.

I was surprised that I found the entry on the Daily Kos, but I'm glad that I stumbled across it on a site that I usually not prone to exploring. It just goes to show the extensiveness of the internet as a medium of information.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/11/22/165642/08

Harvard Youth Follows Campaign Trail in New Hampshire

I was reading a political blog on The New York Times website entitled "The Caucus" when I came across an entry that described the actions of a group of Harvard students who are participating in an academic project called Campus Voices. The students are attending campaign events, interviewing young and older voters and campaign staff, writing about these experiences and filming some stories in New Hampshire.

After I clicked through the site, I came across many unique features I have not found on other political web sites. First of all, I liked that Campus Voices acts like a detached third party. It is not the candidate and the staff talking up the candidate and the staff, and it isn't't the news media talking about the candidate. It is young people talking about their first hand observations and genuine impressions of the candidates and their campaigns.

It has first hand interviews with people who support both Democrat and Republican candidates. It is informative, but also personal because the students blog about their day to day experiences and impressions.

The site is definitely one that I will bookmark and access as a genuine source of Election 2008 news.

Campus Voices

Quotes of the Week

I've been thinking about a way to spice up my blogging every week, and I believe I have a new feature that may inspire me to keep writing, and hopefully you to keep reading.

Every week, the media broadcasts quotes from celebrities, politicians, and other prominent figures in society saying something controversial, opinionated, and sometimes, just downright stupid. The majority of the time, these comments are critical of the Bush administration, the Iraq war, or our country in general.

For this blog post, and hopefully from here on out, I will try to compile these quotes (along with other controversial occurrences like movie or song releases) from both the left and the right (to the best of my ability...although I admittedly lean right) which stir up controversy and make the American public reevaluate whether they would like to continue to invest financially or support this particular public figure whether it be a movie star or a politician.

Here a few that I have heard this week:

Rosie O'Donnell: "You'd have to literally, I think, to get impeached, take the Constitution out of the museum, put it on the floor and have George Bush literally take a dump on it. That is the only way that we are going to get people to understand the magnitude of what he has done." (Speech over the weekend at Hunter College)

Mark Cuban: "You see, Mr. [Bill] O'Reilly thinks that movies are a tool used by terrorists, and any Anti American faction as motivation to hate us and everything we stand for even more than they already do. I'm not sure that terrorists and those who are Anti American need any more motivation , or if they are even capable of hating us even more than they do. We are at war. There are people willing to be convinced to blow themselves up to kill as many of us as possible. Anytime, anywhere." (Blog entry concerning the new film "Redacted" financed by Cuban and to be released in theaters soon)

When I toured The Daily News Leader in Staunton, Virginia last fall, we were introduced to a contributing cartoonist who they could not afford to keep on staff, but regularly contributed to the paper. He had drawn and published the cartoon of the crying Hokie mascot of Virginia Tech surrounded by the mascots of neighboring Virginia universities after the 2007 Virginia Tech tragedy. The cartoon was picked up by many newspapers nationwide.

I know that cartoon touched me and many other students nationwide who displayed it on their Facebook and Myspace pages. I had never before thought of cartoonists as journalists until I saw that cartoon. However, they tell stories just as well, if not better, than an article you could read about the same subject.

Therefore, I just wanted to quickly post a link to a cartoon web site I found with a political twist.

Daryl Cagle's Professional Cartoonist's Index

Since we've been talking about the importance of the "art" of newspaper layout design, I decided this week to investigate the websites of several cable news outlets and newspapers.

I don't have that much experience with web layout design, but from what I've learned in my multimedia production, web communication, and the introductory SMAD classes, I think I get the gist of it. As a constant visitor of such sites, I know what turns me on and turns me off.

First up...FOXnews.com
This site had one main photo of an Islamic woman on the right side of the page which immediately grabbed my attention. From there, my eye was directed in a clockwise fashion to the right and I was hit by an advertisement exactly the same size as the first photo. An immediate turn-off. I could barely tell which one was the story and which one was the ad. Then I began my neverending scroll down the page. Thumbnail photos were everywhere under the different categories found in a traditional newspaper. More ads could be found on the right hand side of the page as well. Fox is known for the "Fox Effect" on television which is in your face moving, loud, and large images and sounds. I could see this clearly reflected in their web page.

Second up...NYTimes.com
I don't have a subscription to the NYTimes, so I'm not sure if their web page is a direct replica of their newspaper layout design. However, it is undoubtedly of the same importance considering so many who do not live in or near New York access one of the nation's greatest newspapers online. Immediately, my eye was drawn to a photo of Afghans standing over and looking down at several coffins adorned with flowers and photos of those lost. From there, my eye didn't really have a clear path to follow. On the right hand side, below the main photo there was an automobile ad proportional to the Afghan photo similar to the layout reflected on FOXnews. Unfortunately, when I rolled my mouse over it, it became even larger, almost taking up the width of the page. The page also included several thumbnail photos, but they were contained to the middle of the page, and the links to the other areas of interest where listed neatly at the bottom of the page. I did not have to do nearly as much scrolling.

Lastly...CNN.com
Definitely my least favorite. Honestly, it looks like that our class could design a page like this ourselves. Nothing on the entire page drew me in or made me want to explore any of the stories. The main photo they had on the page was on the left top hand side. It was bland and boring and almost looked pixelated. My eye had nowhere to go, thumbnail photos were scattered everywhere, and it was extremely text, or should I say link, heavy.

So what I got from critiquing some of the largest news sources out there was this...they are trying to cram as much information as they possibly can on their home page so you can choose what you want to read at it and go directly there .I believe the term we learned for these sites in Web Communication was "non-linear structure." Basically, it's a free-for-all. Perhaps a little chaotic, but I don't really see a way to get away from that. However, what I was most surprised was the lack of the use of compelling photographs. Most were just thumbnail shots of recognizable faces.