Hillary won the Pennsylvania Primary? How did that happen??
I was a little disappointed that Hillary was able to grasp the Pennsylvania delegates even though I am not in the Democratic Party. Although she only won ten percent higher than Obama of the popular votes, I believe Hillary will continue to run for presidency, since her campaign plans on gaining $10 million as a result of her win in Pennsylvania.
Unfortunately, it does not really matter that I dislike Hillary because for the 2008 Presidential Election, I would not endorse any of the candidates. I am a registered Independent and I feel that neither Obama, Clinton, nor McCain fits the qualifications I deem necessary for the President of the United States.
Since January 2008, I have been researching the current issues of our nation and each candidate’s position on the concerns. Each candidate has his and her own strengths in their campaign, but I cannot bring myself to choose between them. I feel that I am choosing between “the lesser of two/three evils”. When speaking to many people about the presidential race, it seems as though they feel the same way I do at this point in time, especially young voters.
I believe the reasons for my choice relates to my limited experience with voting and politics. This election is the first time I have the ability to vote and I never truly followed politics before in my life. Regrettably, I admit that I am apathetic to issues concerning the United States, like many of my college peers.
I believe my Controlling Spin class has made me more aware of the issues and I will be more in-tune with my country now and into the future years. Even though I dislike the presidential candidates this year, I hope to become more educated before the next election in order to fully participate as a voter and “endorse” a candidate.
Amy Fusco '10
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Monday, May 5, 2008
Saturday, May 3, 2008
Controlling Spin Students Endorse the Democratic Candidates for President
As a group of young, educated voters, we want to encourage the American people to vote for a change from the status quo, to vote Democratic in the 2008 election. The Democratic candidates in this year’s Presidential election are perhaps two of the best we have seen in a long time.
Senator Hillary Clinton is a strong woman who believes in the American people. She is reestablishing trust in the federal government for both Americans and international societies as well. Her plans for accessible and affordable healthcare are sure to be a vast improvement from the way things currently are. She seeks to increase the number of those who matriculate as well as decrease the number of high school students who drop out, by administering programs that will increase tuition aid while promoting community service. Her expretise extends not only to domestic affairs, but also to foreign affairs. Clinton has continued to raise questions about the War in Iraq, and is determined to bring our troops home sooner rather later. For all these reasons, one should undoubtedly see the differences between her and Senator John McCain, the GOP candidate. However, there are not many differences to be found between Senator Barack Obama and Senator Clinton.
Senator Obama is just as committed to change as Clinton is. He has continued to fight for our educational system, not only at the college level but beginning with our children. He will also fight for a better healthcare system. Senator Obama is an articulate and charismatic individual who sees what America can be and where the American people can go. He also is determined to bring our troops home and end this war, a war that has put a huge strain on our failing economy.
By now it is evident that our government needs reformation, and only a Democratic President will be able to bring the salvation that America needs. The Democratic candidates represent the change that we need. They are dealing with issues that are most pertinent and important to us. We are not asking you to vote Democratic for the sake of the Democratic Party, but because either Senator Obama or Senator Clinton will bring the change that this country needs in 2008. For these reasons and many more, we endorse the Democratic Party and their candidates.
Contolling Spin Students
Wilkes University
Senator Hillary Clinton is a strong woman who believes in the American people. She is reestablishing trust in the federal government for both Americans and international societies as well. Her plans for accessible and affordable healthcare are sure to be a vast improvement from the way things currently are. She seeks to increase the number of those who matriculate as well as decrease the number of high school students who drop out, by administering programs that will increase tuition aid while promoting community service. Her expretise extends not only to domestic affairs, but also to foreign affairs. Clinton has continued to raise questions about the War in Iraq, and is determined to bring our troops home sooner rather later. For all these reasons, one should undoubtedly see the differences between her and Senator John McCain, the GOP candidate. However, there are not many differences to be found between Senator Barack Obama and Senator Clinton.
Senator Obama is just as committed to change as Clinton is. He has continued to fight for our educational system, not only at the college level but beginning with our children. He will also fight for a better healthcare system. Senator Obama is an articulate and charismatic individual who sees what America can be and where the American people can go. He also is determined to bring our troops home and end this war, a war that has put a huge strain on our failing economy.
By now it is evident that our government needs reformation, and only a Democratic President will be able to bring the salvation that America needs. The Democratic candidates represent the change that we need. They are dealing with issues that are most pertinent and important to us. We are not asking you to vote Democratic for the sake of the Democratic Party, but because either Senator Obama or Senator Clinton will bring the change that this country needs in 2008. For these reasons and many more, we endorse the Democratic Party and their candidates.
Contolling Spin Students
Wilkes University
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Senator Hillary Clinton Continues Smear Tactics at King’s College
On April 1, 2008 Senator Barack Obama held a town-hall meeting at Wilkes-University while Senator Hilary Clinton held a similar event at the rival school, Kings College. I attempted to get into Obama’s town-hall meeting but was sadly locked out with hundreds of others. After an almost four hour wait hoping to see Senator Barack Obama as he exited the building, I decided to give up and head over to King’s College to catch Hillary Clinton’s speech. Once there I fought my way through the crowd and ended up directly in front of the stage where Senator Clinton would be speaking.
Senator Clinton walked in to what she appropriately called, “…a feisty crowd” of supporters. She was just as “feisty” as the crowd jumping into her speech and directing her focus on the people. Hillary began with an appealing statement, “This campaign is not about me, it’s about you” and went on to address Pennsylvania’s primary issue, the economy and “jobs, jobs, jobs.” She was very convincing and energetic as she continued addressing significant issues such as taxes, jobs, trade, security, and oil. I was impressed with Senator Clinton up until she slipped into her trademark mudslinging.
She immediately brought up Senator Obama, “…he thinks that this campaign could be compared to the baton death march…or that it was like a movie that had gone on too long. Well we haven’t even gotten to the part that includes Pennsylvania…some of his supporters are saying that I should quit…” On she went complaining about Senator Barack Obama rather than addressing more important issues. I wonder if she failed to realize that there were supporters of her rival in the crowd or if she was purposely trying to anger them. That opening statement about Senator Obama tainted the rest of the speech but Senator Hillary Clinton didn’t stop there.
About half-way through her rival came up again, “my opponent just started running an ad in Pennsylvania which said he ‘never took money from the oil companies’…well it’s illegal to take money from the oil companies”. By this point I began to believe that Senator Clinton’s speech was about Senator Obama rather than her own policies. To me the speech had an, “anything you can do I can do better” juvenile tone.
Senator Clinton’s negative comments have been going on since the South Carolina primaries and have now become a staple move of hers. Needless to say, these actions do not befit her. Speaking about Senator Obama in a negative tone during a town hall meeting not only takes time away from important issues but also takes the focus off of Senator Clinton and brings it back to Senator Obama.
Mudslinging is nothing new to American politics but it certainly doesn’t have to surface in every speech given to the public. Senator Obama does his own mudslinging in the American tradition, but Senator Clinton steps over the line far too often.
Heather Chulick '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Senator Clinton walked in to what she appropriately called, “…a feisty crowd” of supporters. She was just as “feisty” as the crowd jumping into her speech and directing her focus on the people. Hillary began with an appealing statement, “This campaign is not about me, it’s about you” and went on to address Pennsylvania’s primary issue, the economy and “jobs, jobs, jobs.” She was very convincing and energetic as she continued addressing significant issues such as taxes, jobs, trade, security, and oil. I was impressed with Senator Clinton up until she slipped into her trademark mudslinging.
She immediately brought up Senator Obama, “…he thinks that this campaign could be compared to the baton death march…or that it was like a movie that had gone on too long. Well we haven’t even gotten to the part that includes Pennsylvania…some of his supporters are saying that I should quit…” On she went complaining about Senator Barack Obama rather than addressing more important issues. I wonder if she failed to realize that there were supporters of her rival in the crowd or if she was purposely trying to anger them. That opening statement about Senator Obama tainted the rest of the speech but Senator Hillary Clinton didn’t stop there.
About half-way through her rival came up again, “my opponent just started running an ad in Pennsylvania which said he ‘never took money from the oil companies’…well it’s illegal to take money from the oil companies”. By this point I began to believe that Senator Clinton’s speech was about Senator Obama rather than her own policies. To me the speech had an, “anything you can do I can do better” juvenile tone.
Senator Clinton’s negative comments have been going on since the South Carolina primaries and have now become a staple move of hers. Needless to say, these actions do not befit her. Speaking about Senator Obama in a negative tone during a town hall meeting not only takes time away from important issues but also takes the focus off of Senator Clinton and brings it back to Senator Obama.
Mudslinging is nothing new to American politics but it certainly doesn’t have to surface in every speech given to the public. Senator Obama does his own mudslinging in the American tradition, but Senator Clinton steps over the line far too often.
Heather Chulick '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Undecided in Pennsylvania Primary
In the latest census done by Strategic Vision Political in Pennsylvania, Clinton is expected to lead the polls with 48 % and Obama close behind with 41%. But with 11% still undecided this close to voting day this primary election for the democratic nominee can go either way.
Where does the problem stem from? Why can’t voters make their final decision? After numerous discussions with people from all walks of Pennsylvania the same issue keeps coming up. Policy-wise each Democratic candidate appears to be a great choice, with few differences. So, now it comes down to picking candidates based on the personal characteristics rather than their plans for the country.
Today, in the United Press International an analyst sated, “Undecided voters tend to pick U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., which could help her win in Tuesday's Pennsylvania presidential primary.” However, after an interview this morning, April 21, with CBS’s The Early Show, I reevaluated what I said. I said that the candidates’ characteristics are playing the defining role in many voters selection. I know that I am only one of many voters who have just made up their mind less than a day away from the polls opening.
Although I have taken the time to inform myself on each candidate’s plans I am going with Obama because I simply trust him more. It goes much farther than his ability to give a good speech; but rather that once he makes a mistake he is willing to admit, apologize, and fix it. Also if Clinton is caught in the wrong, Obama doesn’t constantly harp on the situation. In several debates Clinton resurrected issues that have been laid to rest, to the point of slowing down the progression of the discussions. I can’t remember Obama ever bringing up Clinton lying about having to find cover in Bosnia from “sniper fire.” And when Clinton finally chose to apologize she didn’t portray someone that made a human mistake and was genuinely sorry. More accurately, I saw a candidate that got caught in a lie and would have kept the lie going if she didn’t get caught. This situation along with her conduct in various debates made my perception of her turn from respectful into her being unnecessarily hostile.
The biggest difference between them is in their ability to compromise. Ask yourself this question, if either candidate was in office and they realized a policy that they set in place might not go according to plan, which one would admit that they might not have the best policy and adjust it to better suit the circumstances? And who would be stubborn and try to push their policy knowing it might not work?
Clinton won hands down the last Democratic debate in Philadelphia. The wear and tear of the 15 months campaign showed clear as Obama. Clinton appearance was great and answered each question effortlessly; it looked as if it was her first day on the campaign. And for her sake I wish it was. I’m sorry, Senator Clinton it is a little too late. The damage is already done, you crack under pressure and you’ve got a hot head.
Raquel Wheby '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Where does the problem stem from? Why can’t voters make their final decision? After numerous discussions with people from all walks of Pennsylvania the same issue keeps coming up. Policy-wise each Democratic candidate appears to be a great choice, with few differences. So, now it comes down to picking candidates based on the personal characteristics rather than their plans for the country.
Today, in the United Press International an analyst sated, “Undecided voters tend to pick U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., which could help her win in Tuesday's Pennsylvania presidential primary.” However, after an interview this morning, April 21, with CBS’s The Early Show, I reevaluated what I said. I said that the candidates’ characteristics are playing the defining role in many voters selection. I know that I am only one of many voters who have just made up their mind less than a day away from the polls opening.
Although I have taken the time to inform myself on each candidate’s plans I am going with Obama because I simply trust him more. It goes much farther than his ability to give a good speech; but rather that once he makes a mistake he is willing to admit, apologize, and fix it. Also if Clinton is caught in the wrong, Obama doesn’t constantly harp on the situation. In several debates Clinton resurrected issues that have been laid to rest, to the point of slowing down the progression of the discussions. I can’t remember Obama ever bringing up Clinton lying about having to find cover in Bosnia from “sniper fire.” And when Clinton finally chose to apologize she didn’t portray someone that made a human mistake and was genuinely sorry. More accurately, I saw a candidate that got caught in a lie and would have kept the lie going if she didn’t get caught. This situation along with her conduct in various debates made my perception of her turn from respectful into her being unnecessarily hostile.
The biggest difference between them is in their ability to compromise. Ask yourself this question, if either candidate was in office and they realized a policy that they set in place might not go according to plan, which one would admit that they might not have the best policy and adjust it to better suit the circumstances? And who would be stubborn and try to push their policy knowing it might not work?
Clinton won hands down the last Democratic debate in Philadelphia. The wear and tear of the 15 months campaign showed clear as Obama. Clinton appearance was great and answered each question effortlessly; it looked as if it was her first day on the campaign. And for her sake I wish it was. I’m sorry, Senator Clinton it is a little too late. The damage is already done, you crack under pressure and you’ve got a hot head.
Raquel Wheby '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Undecided in Pennsylvania Primary
In the latest census done by Strategic Vision Political in Pennsylvania, Clinton is expected to lead the polls with 48 % and Obama close behind with 41%. But with 11% still undecided this close to voting day this primary election for the democratic nominee can go either way.
Where does the problem stem from? Why can’t voters make their final decision? After numerous discussions with people from all walks of Pennsylvania the same issue keeps coming up. Policy-wise each Democratic candidate appears to be a great choice, with few differences. So, now it comes down to picking candidates based on the personal characteristics rather than their plans for the country.
Today, in the United Press International an analyst sated, “Undecided voters tend to pick U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., which could help her win in Tuesday's Pennsylvania presidential primary.” However, after an interview this morning, April 21, with CBS’s The Early Show, I reevaluated what I said. I said that the candidates’ characteristics are playing the defining role in many voters selection. I know that I am only one of many voters who have just made up their mind less than a day away from the polls opening.
Although I have taken the time to inform myself on each candidate’s plans I am going with Obama because I simply trust him more. It goes much farther than his ability to give a good speech; but rather that once he makes a mistake he is willing to admit, apologize, and fix it. Also if Clinton is caught in the wrong, Obama doesn’t constantly harp on the situation. In several debates Clinton resurrected issues that have been laid to rest, to the point of slowing down the progression of the discussions. I can’t remember Obama ever bringing up Clinton lying about having to find cover in Bosnia from “sniper fire.” And when Clinton finally chose to apologize she didn’t portray someone that made a human mistake and was genuinely sorry. More accurately, I saw a candidate that got caught in a lie and would have kept the lie going if she didn’t get caught. This situation along with her conduct in various debates made my perception of her turn from respectful into her being unnecessarily hostile.
The biggest difference between them is in their ability to compromise. Ask yourself this question, if either candidate was in office and they realized a policy that they set in place might not go according to plan, which one would admit that they might not have the best policy and adjust it to better suit the circumstances? And who would be stubborn and try to push their policy knowing it might not work?
Clinton won hands down the last Democratic debate in Philadelphia. The wear and tear of the 15 months campaign showed clear as Obama. Clinton appearance was great and answered each question effortlessly; it looked as if it was her first day on the campaign. And for her sake I wish it was. I’m sorry, Senator Clinton it is a little too late. The damage is already done, you crack under pressure and you’ve got a hot head.
Where does the problem stem from? Why can’t voters make their final decision? After numerous discussions with people from all walks of Pennsylvania the same issue keeps coming up. Policy-wise each Democratic candidate appears to be a great choice, with few differences. So, now it comes down to picking candidates based on the personal characteristics rather than their plans for the country.
Today, in the United Press International an analyst sated, “Undecided voters tend to pick U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., which could help her win in Tuesday's Pennsylvania presidential primary.” However, after an interview this morning, April 21, with CBS’s The Early Show, I reevaluated what I said. I said that the candidates’ characteristics are playing the defining role in many voters selection. I know that I am only one of many voters who have just made up their mind less than a day away from the polls opening.
Although I have taken the time to inform myself on each candidate’s plans I am going with Obama because I simply trust him more. It goes much farther than his ability to give a good speech; but rather that once he makes a mistake he is willing to admit, apologize, and fix it. Also if Clinton is caught in the wrong, Obama doesn’t constantly harp on the situation. In several debates Clinton resurrected issues that have been laid to rest, to the point of slowing down the progression of the discussions. I can’t remember Obama ever bringing up Clinton lying about having to find cover in Bosnia from “sniper fire.” And when Clinton finally chose to apologize she didn’t portray someone that made a human mistake and was genuinely sorry. More accurately, I saw a candidate that got caught in a lie and would have kept the lie going if she didn’t get caught. This situation along with her conduct in various debates made my perception of her turn from respectful into her being unnecessarily hostile.
The biggest difference between them is in their ability to compromise. Ask yourself this question, if either candidate was in office and they realized a policy that they set in place might not go according to plan, which one would admit that they might not have the best policy and adjust it to better suit the circumstances? And who would be stubborn and try to push their policy knowing it might not work?
Clinton won hands down the last Democratic debate in Philadelphia. The wear and tear of the 15 months campaign showed clear as Obama. Clinton appearance was great and answered each question effortlessly; it looked as if it was her first day on the campaign. And for her sake I wish it was. I’m sorry, Senator Clinton it is a little too late. The damage is already done, you crack under pressure and you’ve got a hot head.
Experiencing an Obama Rally
It all starts with one voice that carries over the crowd like a contagious disease, but is intended for the rising of the spirit. The gym is a packed house and when one single person amongst the 1,500 shouts “O-ba-ma” it catches like wild fire and the gym erupts with all members shouting and repeating the same message. Even the 85-year-old woman next to me, who appears so fragile that a small gust of wind would knock her over, gets out of her chair to clap and yell.
It is Tuesday, April 1, 2008 and Barack Obama is making an appearance at the Marts Center at Wilkes University. The rally leaves a lasting impression on me as I turn my head from side to side to survey to event. One moment, I find myself looking at monumental journalist Dan Rather, while the next I am looking at a child who isn’t old enough to read. An array of colors of every ethnical background paint a rainbow of hope from side to side of the gym. We are all there for one reason, to show and give all of our support for Senator Obama.
High school seniors are dancing up and down in their seats as Obama takes the stage in front of a huge American flag, which makes everyone in the crowd feel a little bit smaller. Then Senator Obama begins to speak.
I am an Obama supporter, and have been since I had the notion and competence to look into his views and stances, which I had deemed important because of my situation as a soon to be college graduate. Today, of course Obama says all the right things that I want to hear. It’s the politician’s way, and it’s always been like that. However, at this rally a new message stands out to me that polishes his already great reputation.
I sit in the back and cannot see up front when Obama starts taking questions from the crowd, but someone tells me he has come down off stage to speak to a woman with some health issues. A tiny, squeaky voice goes into the microphone and speaks with little confidence about gas prices. Obama responds to the question with an answer that satisfies the lady and the crowd alike. What sticks out to me is his compassion to this woman’s status. He actually cares what this person has to say, and to me that is a great quality of our hopefully next president. You can’t lie about compassion, especially in a room filled with journalists on all sides.
Later, Obama's compassion is shown once again when he answers a question from a 2nd grade boy wondering how he can become president. It will be 10 years until he can vote, but he had a voice and Obama wanted the room to know it. He doesn’t just care about voters or what groups he will satisfy, he cares about what every American thinks and feels.
Senator Obama, you have my vote.
Matt Gobbler '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
It is Tuesday, April 1, 2008 and Barack Obama is making an appearance at the Marts Center at Wilkes University. The rally leaves a lasting impression on me as I turn my head from side to side to survey to event. One moment, I find myself looking at monumental journalist Dan Rather, while the next I am looking at a child who isn’t old enough to read. An array of colors of every ethnical background paint a rainbow of hope from side to side of the gym. We are all there for one reason, to show and give all of our support for Senator Obama.
High school seniors are dancing up and down in their seats as Obama takes the stage in front of a huge American flag, which makes everyone in the crowd feel a little bit smaller. Then Senator Obama begins to speak.
I am an Obama supporter, and have been since I had the notion and competence to look into his views and stances, which I had deemed important because of my situation as a soon to be college graduate. Today, of course Obama says all the right things that I want to hear. It’s the politician’s way, and it’s always been like that. However, at this rally a new message stands out to me that polishes his already great reputation.
I sit in the back and cannot see up front when Obama starts taking questions from the crowd, but someone tells me he has come down off stage to speak to a woman with some health issues. A tiny, squeaky voice goes into the microphone and speaks with little confidence about gas prices. Obama responds to the question with an answer that satisfies the lady and the crowd alike. What sticks out to me is his compassion to this woman’s status. He actually cares what this person has to say, and to me that is a great quality of our hopefully next president. You can’t lie about compassion, especially in a room filled with journalists on all sides.
Later, Obama's compassion is shown once again when he answers a question from a 2nd grade boy wondering how he can become president. It will be 10 years until he can vote, but he had a voice and Obama wanted the room to know it. He doesn’t just care about voters or what groups he will satisfy, he cares about what every American thinks and feels.
Senator Obama, you have my vote.
Matt Gobbler '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Monday, April 21, 2008
Is Obama Only For Young American Voters?
The Pennsylvania Primaries are fast approaching as Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama take measures to increase their polls in a neck-and-neck race to win the Keystone State. As the competition ensues, two generations of voters struggle against each other in an attempt to make their voices heard and their votes appear significant.
On April 8, 2008 I participated in a discussion where fellow college students debated with experienced voters from the Jewish Community Center in Wilkes-Barre. The small group was riddled with avid Hillary and Obama supporters. Most of the Senior Citizens were pulling for Senator Hillary Clinton while most students tended to lean towards Barack Obama. Why is there such a divide between the generations in regards to the two Democratic Candidates?
One senior voter, Ruth Sten of Kingston told Newswatch 16, "The young people will go for the new guy on the block. He's young, has charisma and he's handsome.” (http://www.wnep.com). Sadly, this is the way that many senior voters feel towards the young voter’s admiration of Senator Barack Obama. What the senior voters do not realize is that a debate rages just and heavily among the youth voters as it does among them.
On the social networking site facebook.com, students have joined groups in support of Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. On these groups students pledge to vote for a specific candidate in the upcoming election and also post their opinions, support, and thoughts on the message boards. Though the boards are for supporters, many non-supporters (and even non-American citizens) will post a comment and strike up a debate. A McCain supporter Erin Cahan from Franklin High posted,” Everyone is entitled to their opinion but many of those who want Obama to win are too young or too uninformed to make a proper decision. Obama is the media darling but when it is all said and done this country as a whole will never elect him in November”( facebook.com/ Barack Obama for President in 2008). Statements like this rage across the internet showing that the young are bringing up similar issues in the debate between the Democratic Senators.
Seeing the reactions of both young and old voters I have come to the conclusion that there is not really that much of a divide between old and young when it comes to the 2008 political candidates. The issue inherent seems to be that the older generation is not seeing the youth’s debates and viewpoints since they are displayed in a media outlet that they are not exposed to.
Heather Chulick '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
On April 8, 2008 I participated in a discussion where fellow college students debated with experienced voters from the Jewish Community Center in Wilkes-Barre. The small group was riddled with avid Hillary and Obama supporters. Most of the Senior Citizens were pulling for Senator Hillary Clinton while most students tended to lean towards Barack Obama. Why is there such a divide between the generations in regards to the two Democratic Candidates?
One senior voter, Ruth Sten of Kingston told Newswatch 16, "The young people will go for the new guy on the block. He's young, has charisma and he's handsome.” (http://www.wnep.com). Sadly, this is the way that many senior voters feel towards the young voter’s admiration of Senator Barack Obama. What the senior voters do not realize is that a debate rages just and heavily among the youth voters as it does among them.
On the social networking site facebook.com, students have joined groups in support of Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. On these groups students pledge to vote for a specific candidate in the upcoming election and also post their opinions, support, and thoughts on the message boards. Though the boards are for supporters, many non-supporters (and even non-American citizens) will post a comment and strike up a debate. A McCain supporter Erin Cahan from Franklin High posted,” Everyone is entitled to their opinion but many of those who want Obama to win are too young or too uninformed to make a proper decision. Obama is the media darling but when it is all said and done this country as a whole will never elect him in November”( facebook.com/ Barack Obama for President in 2008). Statements like this rage across the internet showing that the young are bringing up similar issues in the debate between the Democratic Senators.
Seeing the reactions of both young and old voters I have come to the conclusion that there is not really that much of a divide between old and young when it comes to the 2008 political candidates. The issue inherent seems to be that the older generation is not seeing the youth’s debates and viewpoints since they are displayed in a media outlet that they are not exposed to.
Heather Chulick '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Sunday, April 20, 2008
He Can Talk and Walk, That Barack
Barack Obama recently made a campaign stop at the Marts Center here at Wilkes University, and I only have one word to sum up the entire experience: incredible. For more than one hour, Barack discussed his policies and implementation of those policies. In my opinion, Barack was more than what people initially think of him, which is a charming speaker with not enough experience to handle the reigns of the White House’s most elite position.
He was charming to the audience, as expected, by listening to their reactions and acting upon them – answering an 8-year-old elementary student’s question of “How can I someday become President” is just one example. Obama was insightful, going into detail from the beginning of his stump speech to answering random questions from an audience. He was also fair, letting the audience take turns by switching between men and women for each question. In addition, he was honest, mentioning several times that we cannot forget the reality of our current situation regarding a plethora of troubling issues, and that we must be willing to invest ourselves in America in order to begin the process of positive change.
No doubt, some people reading this blog entry might still think that Sen. Obama lacks the experience needed to lead our country for the next four years. They would be wrong. Being in a packed gymnasium and listening to Barack give his motivational stump speech will no doubt get your blood pumping. But the man has substance, too.
On the topic of education, which is critical to the college audience that was listening, Barack detailed an intelligent plan that requires students to invest in their country while their country invests in them. To make college expenses cheaper, he has a plan to reward students who give their time for a good deed – a good deed to Barack can be helping at your local soup kitchen, signing up for national service, and giving time to a nursing home just to name a few – with a stipend to offset the college expense. That’s just one part of his detailed plan explained.
Regarding health insurance, I was immensely surprised on his plan to gather his top health care specialists, along with everyday nurses and doctors, and have a round table discussion, with pharmaceutical representatives live on CSPAN. This innovative idea, in which viewers will be able to have input on the health care package, is an attempt to give every person an opportunity to help make the best health care plan for every American. Once again, that’s just one part of his bigger plan for health care.
The issue that especially impressed me was Barack’s idea on alternative fuels. Thank the heavens we have a candidate who truly believes our country needs to start taking a better initiative when it comes to green technology and alternative fuels. I love his idea of expanding every vehicle to require at least 40 mpg in order to reduce our need for oil from foreign countries. In doing so, he proclaimed we would reduce our dependency on the Persian Gulf alone. With that, the price of each gallon will begin to drop. Also, he wants to give each middle and lower class family $1,000 per year to supplement the rising cost of gasoline until we reach his goal of 40 mpg per car.
Barack is a positive spark plug, an already iconic candidate who has all the intangibles needed to become President. Many people use the excuse that he doesn’t have the experience in Congress for the position. But who made an experience standard, anyway? Isn’t 12 years of improvements in the areas Barack has touched proof enough that he should at least get a worthwhile look beyond his stereotype of only being a charming speaker? After his speech at Wilkes, I believe so. And so do the other 1,500 people who attended that morning.
Jamie Gwynn '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
He was charming to the audience, as expected, by listening to their reactions and acting upon them – answering an 8-year-old elementary student’s question of “How can I someday become President” is just one example. Obama was insightful, going into detail from the beginning of his stump speech to answering random questions from an audience. He was also fair, letting the audience take turns by switching between men and women for each question. In addition, he was honest, mentioning several times that we cannot forget the reality of our current situation regarding a plethora of troubling issues, and that we must be willing to invest ourselves in America in order to begin the process of positive change.
No doubt, some people reading this blog entry might still think that Sen. Obama lacks the experience needed to lead our country for the next four years. They would be wrong. Being in a packed gymnasium and listening to Barack give his motivational stump speech will no doubt get your blood pumping. But the man has substance, too.
On the topic of education, which is critical to the college audience that was listening, Barack detailed an intelligent plan that requires students to invest in their country while their country invests in them. To make college expenses cheaper, he has a plan to reward students who give their time for a good deed – a good deed to Barack can be helping at your local soup kitchen, signing up for national service, and giving time to a nursing home just to name a few – with a stipend to offset the college expense. That’s just one part of his detailed plan explained.
Regarding health insurance, I was immensely surprised on his plan to gather his top health care specialists, along with everyday nurses and doctors, and have a round table discussion, with pharmaceutical representatives live on CSPAN. This innovative idea, in which viewers will be able to have input on the health care package, is an attempt to give every person an opportunity to help make the best health care plan for every American. Once again, that’s just one part of his bigger plan for health care.
The issue that especially impressed me was Barack’s idea on alternative fuels. Thank the heavens we have a candidate who truly believes our country needs to start taking a better initiative when it comes to green technology and alternative fuels. I love his idea of expanding every vehicle to require at least 40 mpg in order to reduce our need for oil from foreign countries. In doing so, he proclaimed we would reduce our dependency on the Persian Gulf alone. With that, the price of each gallon will begin to drop. Also, he wants to give each middle and lower class family $1,000 per year to supplement the rising cost of gasoline until we reach his goal of 40 mpg per car.
Barack is a positive spark plug, an already iconic candidate who has all the intangibles needed to become President. Many people use the excuse that he doesn’t have the experience in Congress for the position. But who made an experience standard, anyway? Isn’t 12 years of improvements in the areas Barack has touched proof enough that he should at least get a worthwhile look beyond his stereotype of only being a charming speaker? After his speech at Wilkes, I believe so. And so do the other 1,500 people who attended that morning.
Jamie Gwynn '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
My vote counts? Yeah, right! Let’s Get a National Primary
Let me just start off by saying that I am a 20 year old college student and a Hillary Clinton supporter. I live in Pennsylvania. When I first thought about writing this blog, it was before the March 4th primaries. Since I am in college, and have to work to pay to continue my education that the candidates all have plans to make more affordable, this is the first chance I have had to write this blog. It is March 6th.
Before last week, I thought there may not have even been a meaningful Pennsylvania primary, since it is being held on April 22nd. Now, after the March 4th primaries, Pennsylvania is the state to win in order for either Democratic candidate to keep on moving toward the general election. I couldn’t be happier.
During this election, Michigan and Florida both moved their primaries forward in order to be first. Those states are now being penalized and disqualified. Their delegate’s votes will not count. Please, someone tell me how this is fair to all the people that went out and cast their votes, to all the people that thought their votes would count.
This country should hold a national primary. By holding a national primary, each citizen’s vote will count exactly the same. Each citizen will have the same candidates to vote for. The primary should be held the same week every year. The voters can prepare and the candidates can prepare. It is in no way fair that people in Florida and Michigan had the choice to vote for several candidates when I only have the choice of two.
Young people are constantly being told that every vote counts. But it really doesn’t. My vote counts now, but if Barack Obama racked up enough delegates to win the Democratic nomination before the Pennsylvania primary, my vote wouldn’t have meant anything. He would have gotten the Democratic nomination. He wouldn’t need my vote or anyone else’s.
So, to the next President of the United States of America: whenever you are done cleaning up the mess that President Bush left (if you ever get done), ask yourself: If the United States of America held a national primary, would I really be here? Chances are you wouldn’t.
Amanda Cawley '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Before last week, I thought there may not have even been a meaningful Pennsylvania primary, since it is being held on April 22nd. Now, after the March 4th primaries, Pennsylvania is the state to win in order for either Democratic candidate to keep on moving toward the general election. I couldn’t be happier.
During this election, Michigan and Florida both moved their primaries forward in order to be first. Those states are now being penalized and disqualified. Their delegate’s votes will not count. Please, someone tell me how this is fair to all the people that went out and cast their votes, to all the people that thought their votes would count.
This country should hold a national primary. By holding a national primary, each citizen’s vote will count exactly the same. Each citizen will have the same candidates to vote for. The primary should be held the same week every year. The voters can prepare and the candidates can prepare. It is in no way fair that people in Florida and Michigan had the choice to vote for several candidates when I only have the choice of two.
Young people are constantly being told that every vote counts. But it really doesn’t. My vote counts now, but if Barack Obama racked up enough delegates to win the Democratic nomination before the Pennsylvania primary, my vote wouldn’t have meant anything. He would have gotten the Democratic nomination. He wouldn’t need my vote or anyone else’s.
So, to the next President of the United States of America: whenever you are done cleaning up the mess that President Bush left (if you ever get done), ask yourself: If the United States of America held a national primary, would I really be here? Chances are you wouldn’t.
Amanda Cawley '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
A Marine Versus His Sister
I can sum up my opinions of the Iraq war simply by saying I am anti-war, anti-Bush, and I want our troops out of Iraq. I was against the war from the start and was completely against the troop surge. But, my story is much more complicated than the average, impersonal outlook on the war. My brother, Joseph Marzzacco is a United States Marine who served a year long tour of duty in Iraq. Most Americans are now against the war and against Bush, we know this. But, what do the troops who are actually fighting this war think of all these issues, and how will they vote in the upcoming election? By talking to my brother, I learned that for two people who grew up side by side, we have completely opposite opinions of these current events.
I will openly say I hated Bush from the beginning. When he sent my brother to Iraq I hated him even more. But, the person who had to deal with actually being there supports Bush. Why is this? As Joe explained, “I do support President Bush and have from the beginning. Everyone has forgotten about how he united this country after 9/11.”
The war in Iraq, in my opinion, was a mistake from the beginning, along with the troop surge. I always find it hard to believe when I hear people saying that they support it. According to my brother, “I supported the war from the beginning. That’s why I became a Marine. I will say that we could’ve waited to go into Iraq, but again, from what I know; another 9/11 could’ve been launched from Iraq if we didn’t act and I do believe the troop surge has been working. Casualties will go down and the Iraqi Army will have more time to train.”
In my opinion, our troops need to be pulled out of Iraq immediately. When I said this to my brother, he was really offended. He said, “I honestly don’t believe we will ever be completely out of Iraq. We will definitely have bases their similar to the ones in Japan, Germany, and South Korea. If we were to pull out completely, Iraq would be at risk of falling into the hands of another dictator and we’d have to go back in a few years anyway.
From what I’ve heard from the Democrats, troops deployed to Iraq were not getting the benefits they needed or benefits for their families. But, what my brother told me completely discredits the information I have. He explained, “I do feel that injured troops get good benefits. I have a combat related disability and the treatment and compensation I receive are much better than I would’ve gotten from a work related injury in the private sector. Also, the benefits have increased every year. When I was deployed, my wife gave birth to our son while caring for our daughter. She was eligible to leave work and receive benefits including my combat pay, military health insurance, and separation pay. How do you think she survived?”
The main thing I was eager to hear from my brother, were his opinions about the candidates in the upcoming Presidential election. From what I know about him, I probably could’ve guessed who he’d support. “I can’t answer for all troops, but I support Senator McCain. He has the military background to make good decisions regarding our security and safety. On the Democratic side, I like Obama. But, I could never support a candidate who wants to lead this country but has not served in the military himself.
Like I said, my brother and I have really conflicting opinions about war, the President, and the upcoming election. However, I will admit that what he told me really makes sense when looking at it from his perspective. He said it best when he told me, “Everyone is entitled to their opinions of the war and politics. But, it is one thing to debate it in a classroom full of people who don’t understand war and then to actually get your boots on the ground in Iraq and have the honor to fight for your country.” So many American families are being torn apart by their conflicting opinions about these issues. You should always say exactly what you feel, but when someone disagrees with us, we have to respect them. In my situation, taking my own advice is harder than it sounds and is a work in progress.
Katie Marzzacco ‘09
Communication Studies
Wilkes University
I will openly say I hated Bush from the beginning. When he sent my brother to Iraq I hated him even more. But, the person who had to deal with actually being there supports Bush. Why is this? As Joe explained, “I do support President Bush and have from the beginning. Everyone has forgotten about how he united this country after 9/11.”
The war in Iraq, in my opinion, was a mistake from the beginning, along with the troop surge. I always find it hard to believe when I hear people saying that they support it. According to my brother, “I supported the war from the beginning. That’s why I became a Marine. I will say that we could’ve waited to go into Iraq, but again, from what I know; another 9/11 could’ve been launched from Iraq if we didn’t act and I do believe the troop surge has been working. Casualties will go down and the Iraqi Army will have more time to train.”
In my opinion, our troops need to be pulled out of Iraq immediately. When I said this to my brother, he was really offended. He said, “I honestly don’t believe we will ever be completely out of Iraq. We will definitely have bases their similar to the ones in Japan, Germany, and South Korea. If we were to pull out completely, Iraq would be at risk of falling into the hands of another dictator and we’d have to go back in a few years anyway.
From what I’ve heard from the Democrats, troops deployed to Iraq were not getting the benefits they needed or benefits for their families. But, what my brother told me completely discredits the information I have. He explained, “I do feel that injured troops get good benefits. I have a combat related disability and the treatment and compensation I receive are much better than I would’ve gotten from a work related injury in the private sector. Also, the benefits have increased every year. When I was deployed, my wife gave birth to our son while caring for our daughter. She was eligible to leave work and receive benefits including my combat pay, military health insurance, and separation pay. How do you think she survived?”
The main thing I was eager to hear from my brother, were his opinions about the candidates in the upcoming Presidential election. From what I know about him, I probably could’ve guessed who he’d support. “I can’t answer for all troops, but I support Senator McCain. He has the military background to make good decisions regarding our security and safety. On the Democratic side, I like Obama. But, I could never support a candidate who wants to lead this country but has not served in the military himself.
Like I said, my brother and I have really conflicting opinions about war, the President, and the upcoming election. However, I will admit that what he told me really makes sense when looking at it from his perspective. He said it best when he told me, “Everyone is entitled to their opinions of the war and politics. But, it is one thing to debate it in a classroom full of people who don’t understand war and then to actually get your boots on the ground in Iraq and have the honor to fight for your country.” So many American families are being torn apart by their conflicting opinions about these issues. You should always say exactly what you feel, but when someone disagrees with us, we have to respect them. In my situation, taking my own advice is harder than it sounds and is a work in progress.
Katie Marzzacco ‘09
Communication Studies
Wilkes University
Such a Sucker for a Sweet Talker
Senator Barrack Obama recently made a campaign stop right here at Wilkes University in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. As anyone who knows me will say, I am not shy about being a Hillary Clinton supporter through and through. But, my attendance at the recent speech given here at Wilkes by Obama had me nearly second guessing my choice to support Hillary.
On the same day Obama visited Wilkes University, Clinton made a stop at our very closely neighboring school, King's College. Of course, being the headstrong Hillary supporter I am, I was looking forward to attending her speech. However, the fact that Obama tickets were much easier to require, plus the fact that I had no ride to King's led me to my decision to go see Obama and see what he had to say.
As I sat among the boisterous Obama supporters, I couldn't help but find the little Obama chants they shouted to be a little bit catchy. As Obama came out, cheers filled the gym here at Wilkes. As Obama started talking, I was still not expecting to be thrilled.
Half way through the speech, I found myself nodding in agreement and clapping with each assertion Obama made. His voice was sure and powerful, and his demeanor was very relaxed and approachable. He seemed to quickly develop a rapport with all of us in the audience, making us feel as if he was speaking to us individually as well as a whole community. He smiled as people asked him questions and even took time to approach a young boy that was seated in the audience. I'll admit it. I was completely put under the Obama spell that so many friends of mine have fallen under. Was I actually starting to like Obama more than Hillary?
As I walked out of the gymnasium, I started thinking that this guy deserves some credit. Even though the answers he gave to all of the questions in the meeting were void of any detail and actual plan, I still liked the way they sounded. How is it that a candidate who repeatedly avoids going into detail about any of his policies manages to do so well? The combination of his powerful voice, his charismatic attitude, and his ability to, pardon my French, bullshit may actually win him the Democratic nomination. Amazing.
Katie Marzzacco '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
On the same day Obama visited Wilkes University, Clinton made a stop at our very closely neighboring school, King's College. Of course, being the headstrong Hillary supporter I am, I was looking forward to attending her speech. However, the fact that Obama tickets were much easier to require, plus the fact that I had no ride to King's led me to my decision to go see Obama and see what he had to say.
As I sat among the boisterous Obama supporters, I couldn't help but find the little Obama chants they shouted to be a little bit catchy. As Obama came out, cheers filled the gym here at Wilkes. As Obama started talking, I was still not expecting to be thrilled.
Half way through the speech, I found myself nodding in agreement and clapping with each assertion Obama made. His voice was sure and powerful, and his demeanor was very relaxed and approachable. He seemed to quickly develop a rapport with all of us in the audience, making us feel as if he was speaking to us individually as well as a whole community. He smiled as people asked him questions and even took time to approach a young boy that was seated in the audience. I'll admit it. I was completely put under the Obama spell that so many friends of mine have fallen under. Was I actually starting to like Obama more than Hillary?
As I walked out of the gymnasium, I started thinking that this guy deserves some credit. Even though the answers he gave to all of the questions in the meeting were void of any detail and actual plan, I still liked the way they sounded. How is it that a candidate who repeatedly avoids going into detail about any of his policies manages to do so well? The combination of his powerful voice, his charismatic attitude, and his ability to, pardon my French, bullshit may actually win him the Democratic nomination. Amazing.
Katie Marzzacco '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Live in Person with Obama and Clinton
April 1, 2008 will always be a day I remember because it was the day I had the privilege of seeing two of our nations presidential firsts in person. I saw Presidential Candidates Senator Barack Obama and Senator Hillary Clinton when they visited Wilkes-Barre, PA.
After word spread that both Democratic candidates would be in Wilkes-Barre, I decided this was an opportunity that needed to be taken advantage of. Therefore, at 9:30 a.m., I was in line waiting to be admitted into Wilkes University’s Martz Gymnasium to hear Senator Obama and by 1pm I was running cross-town to hear Senator Clinton at nearby King’s College. I planned my day around these two events because by the end of the day, I was determined to know who would be receiving my vote on Tuesday, April 22, the Pennsylvania primary.
Upon Senator Obama’s entrance into the gymnasium, the entire room was on their feet applauding their Presidential hopeful. With all the chanting and cheering, one would have thought we were awaiting a famous music band or celebrity. It is now my understanding that indeed, we were. At that moment I realized I was not just about to see two presidential candidates, but two of the most renowned political celebrities in our nation.
Obama and Clinton both are excellent candidates. After doing much research on their campaigns and their political agenda, I concluded they are more similar than different when it comes to politics. However, as individuals the two could not be more different.
Senator Obama was incredibly articulate. His charisma and oratorical skills enabled him to fully engage the audience—men, women and children alike. The eyes of his constituents smiled upon him as he spoke of issues that he finds important. I found it quite surreal as I looked at the crowds and saw them mesmerized by his person. It was as though they fell in love with the man and not the candidate.
Clinton was also adored by her constituents, but for entirely different reasons. Senator Clinton took the stage with a feminine dignity and grace which was greeted by a very large crowd who all chanted her name but fell silent the minute she took the mic. Unlike Obama who needed to silence his audience, Clinton was listened to the moment she began to speak. Her magnetism was not of charisma or oratorical skills, but of her political agenda. Her passion for what she was talking about was reflected through her word choice. The vocal variety and kinesics of her speech were impressive and allowed the audience to truly see her as a leader.
After seeing both candidates in person, on the same day, I felt that I would have a clear mindset about which one I was going to vote for the Pennsylvania State Primary. But I was mistaken. Although I feel both candidates are more than capable of leading this country, I still have skepticism concerning their plans. Senator Obama, as eloquent as he was, did not explain how he will bring his changes about. And Senator Clinton, as precise as she was in explaining how she will go about her plans, she did not engage her audience with her personality or speech which I believe is a trait our Chief Diplomat needs. Consequently my mind has yet to be decided but at least, I now feel like I am closer to knowing who Senator Barack Obama and who Senator Hillary Clinton are.
Valerie J. Martinez '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
After word spread that both Democratic candidates would be in Wilkes-Barre, I decided this was an opportunity that needed to be taken advantage of. Therefore, at 9:30 a.m., I was in line waiting to be admitted into Wilkes University’s Martz Gymnasium to hear Senator Obama and by 1pm I was running cross-town to hear Senator Clinton at nearby King’s College. I planned my day around these two events because by the end of the day, I was determined to know who would be receiving my vote on Tuesday, April 22, the Pennsylvania primary.
Upon Senator Obama’s entrance into the gymnasium, the entire room was on their feet applauding their Presidential hopeful. With all the chanting and cheering, one would have thought we were awaiting a famous music band or celebrity. It is now my understanding that indeed, we were. At that moment I realized I was not just about to see two presidential candidates, but two of the most renowned political celebrities in our nation.
Obama and Clinton both are excellent candidates. After doing much research on their campaigns and their political agenda, I concluded they are more similar than different when it comes to politics. However, as individuals the two could not be more different.
Senator Obama was incredibly articulate. His charisma and oratorical skills enabled him to fully engage the audience—men, women and children alike. The eyes of his constituents smiled upon him as he spoke of issues that he finds important. I found it quite surreal as I looked at the crowds and saw them mesmerized by his person. It was as though they fell in love with the man and not the candidate.
Clinton was also adored by her constituents, but for entirely different reasons. Senator Clinton took the stage with a feminine dignity and grace which was greeted by a very large crowd who all chanted her name but fell silent the minute she took the mic. Unlike Obama who needed to silence his audience, Clinton was listened to the moment she began to speak. Her magnetism was not of charisma or oratorical skills, but of her political agenda. Her passion for what she was talking about was reflected through her word choice. The vocal variety and kinesics of her speech were impressive and allowed the audience to truly see her as a leader.
After seeing both candidates in person, on the same day, I felt that I would have a clear mindset about which one I was going to vote for the Pennsylvania State Primary. But I was mistaken. Although I feel both candidates are more than capable of leading this country, I still have skepticism concerning their plans. Senator Obama, as eloquent as he was, did not explain how he will bring his changes about. And Senator Clinton, as precise as she was in explaining how she will go about her plans, she did not engage her audience with her personality or speech which I believe is a trait our Chief Diplomat needs. Consequently my mind has yet to be decided but at least, I now feel like I am closer to knowing who Senator Barack Obama and who Senator Hillary Clinton are.
Valerie J. Martinez '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
A Rock Star Among Mortals
With the line to enter the Marts Center at Wilkes University stretching around the block, it seemed as if Led Zeppelin was having a reunion concert and everyone had a ticket. Unfortunately, even if you had a ticket to see the in-demand personae known as Barack Obama, chances are that you would have been turned away from the entrance if you were not in line by 9:45 AM. I was honored to be one of the many denied entrance to hear Obama’s speech despite my waiting for an hour and a half just to get a door slammed in my face accompanied by rude State Police lingo. Through my struggles in line this past Tuesday (April 1) along with reviewing Obama’s speech on the internet (thanks to poconorecord.com), I have realized that his reputation as a charismatic presidential candidate who constantly reinforces positive “change” for this country has consequently left him with Rock Star status.
Being a rock star has its ups and downs, but when it comes to public appearances you should always have stage presence that gets a crowd pumped. Obama said to 1,500 plus in attendance, “over 10 billion dollars are spent on the war per month, that money could be spent here in Pennsylvania…right here in Wilkes-Barre!” It was nice to hear him try to appeal to this small town, but I question his sincerity in saying money should be spent in Wilkes-Barre. Every lead singer that has come to the Wachovia arena in Wilkes-Barre has started the show by giving a shout out to our town through his or her own particular genre of music. Barack Obama gave his shout out regarding two sensitive issues to people in this town, the war and money. That was a rock star move, one I do not believe he needed to make.
I can only hope he did not try to use the same tactic in other arenas across this country, because there is no way he could please every town he has visited in the past few months if he becomes president. It’s okay to be enthusiastic about revitalizing our falling nation, but a potential leader who has as many people invested in his campaign as he does needs to cut back on the rock star entrances and stick to the politics for the nation. Appealing to a small town does not mean he has to bend reality to seem as if Wilkes-Barre is the only place that matters in this nation. Take it from a life-long resident; I think we know where we stand when it comes to this country’s political agenda.
David Lewis '10
Wilkes University
Communitcation Studies/English
Being a rock star has its ups and downs, but when it comes to public appearances you should always have stage presence that gets a crowd pumped. Obama said to 1,500 plus in attendance, “over 10 billion dollars are spent on the war per month, that money could be spent here in Pennsylvania…right here in Wilkes-Barre!” It was nice to hear him try to appeal to this small town, but I question his sincerity in saying money should be spent in Wilkes-Barre. Every lead singer that has come to the Wachovia arena in Wilkes-Barre has started the show by giving a shout out to our town through his or her own particular genre of music. Barack Obama gave his shout out regarding two sensitive issues to people in this town, the war and money. That was a rock star move, one I do not believe he needed to make.
I can only hope he did not try to use the same tactic in other arenas across this country, because there is no way he could please every town he has visited in the past few months if he becomes president. It’s okay to be enthusiastic about revitalizing our falling nation, but a potential leader who has as many people invested in his campaign as he does needs to cut back on the rock star entrances and stick to the politics for the nation. Appealing to a small town does not mean he has to bend reality to seem as if Wilkes-Barre is the only place that matters in this nation. Take it from a life-long resident; I think we know where we stand when it comes to this country’s political agenda.
David Lewis '10
Wilkes University
Communitcation Studies/English
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Charisma is Important
On April 1st, I had the opportunity to attend a Town Hall Meeting with Senator Barack Obama at Wilkes University. I approached the event with a bit more skepticism than the many people in attendance who broke out into chants of “Yes We Can” or covered their entire bodies with Obama posters (literally). I have not yet decided which democratic candidate I will vote for on April 22nd, but I was looking forward to listening to Obama, who’s speaking abilities I have heard a lot about, in person.When Obama took the stage, I found that his charisma and oration did not disappoint. At one point, I stopped to look around the room and was amused to see many people who were literally sitting on the edge of their seats, smiling hopefully as they listened to him talk. It took me a moment to realize that to my surprise, I was doing the same thing.
I am not saying that Obama’s ability to inspire with his speeches and his talent for connecting with an audience have convinced me that he is the best candidate for the job. There are many actors, rock stars, and other celebrities that have the same talent, but most of them would not be good choices for President. However, my experience at this rally made me think more about the role that this talent should play in choosing a candidate.
Many political purists would say that candidates should win elections because of their policies, experience, and professional record only. I agree that these should be the primary concerns of voters. However, since in my opinion the policies of Obama and Clinton are for the most part similar to each other, I have begun to wonder whether things like charisma and speaking ability are legitimate things to take into consideration. After hearing Obama speak in person, I am inclined to answer yes.
My reasoning for this is that one of the biggest problems that I currently see with politics is the partisan divisiveness in Washington, which prevents many things from getting done. It will take an extraordinary person to be able to bring together the Republicans and the Democrats in the near future. In this case, I believe Obama’s charisma and inspirational abilities will be a huge advantage and something worth taking into consideration when voting.
Christine Zavaskas '09
Wilkes University
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Saturday, March 29, 2008
What Does Obama Mean By “Change We Can Believe In”?
"To stand up for these Americans, I don’t want to settle for anything less than real change, fundamental change – change we need – change that we can believe in." This quote from Barack Obama shapes his entire campaign. The suggestion, of course, is that the other Democratic primary candidate talking change may not be up to the task, as Obama hinted himself, saying they are "targeting different messages to different audiences." There has been a lot of talk in Obama’s campaign about the politics of hope. This doesn’t mean hoping things come easy. This campaign of change and hope is illustrating that this candidate believes in what could be in this country, he believes in the unseen.
I believe that what this country needs is change for the greater good. I think that Obama has a strong and solid campaign for change but doesn’t always specify what exactly will be changed. So, what specific changes do college students want to see? Some issues I would like to see changed are the war and health care for people ages 22-25 and I’m not the only one who feels this way. A few college students my age have said that they are concerned with how they are going to get coverage for health insurance once they graduate. Laura, a 21 year old senior at Wilkes said; “I think that in order for Obama to make significant changes, he needs to look at what the younger voters want.” I agree, and I do think Obama is making the effort to listen to the young voters. Kyle, another 22 year old student at Wilkes said; “I haven’t really thought about voting until this election. The candidates seem more concerned with what young voters want to see changed and I like that.” I asked this student what he wanted to see changed and he responded with; “getting this war over with and dealing with the bigger problems like health care and national debt, especially since I will be graduating and paying student loans.” These are just a few changes young voters today are concerned with. I think that Obama has a strong belief in helping the younger generation achieve these changes.
Barack Obama believes America needs a president who has the courage to be candid and honest about the challenges we face, even when it’s politically unpopular. Barack Obama speaks of hope and change, saying both require vision and recognize the need for hard work. Obama has positioned himself as an inspiring messenger for a “Change We Can Believe In.” What I believe is that Obama wants to educate the American people about what it will take to make long-term change. Obama has said that change will be tough but doesn't go into why or discuss exactly what this “change” will be and how it will effect the young voters of today. We need for details and will not vote for change on blind faith alone.
Katie Cappelloni '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
I believe that what this country needs is change for the greater good. I think that Obama has a strong and solid campaign for change but doesn’t always specify what exactly will be changed. So, what specific changes do college students want to see? Some issues I would like to see changed are the war and health care for people ages 22-25 and I’m not the only one who feels this way. A few college students my age have said that they are concerned with how they are going to get coverage for health insurance once they graduate. Laura, a 21 year old senior at Wilkes said; “I think that in order for Obama to make significant changes, he needs to look at what the younger voters want.” I agree, and I do think Obama is making the effort to listen to the young voters. Kyle, another 22 year old student at Wilkes said; “I haven’t really thought about voting until this election. The candidates seem more concerned with what young voters want to see changed and I like that.” I asked this student what he wanted to see changed and he responded with; “getting this war over with and dealing with the bigger problems like health care and national debt, especially since I will be graduating and paying student loans.” These are just a few changes young voters today are concerned with. I think that Obama has a strong belief in helping the younger generation achieve these changes.
Barack Obama believes America needs a president who has the courage to be candid and honest about the challenges we face, even when it’s politically unpopular. Barack Obama speaks of hope and change, saying both require vision and recognize the need for hard work. Obama has positioned himself as an inspiring messenger for a “Change We Can Believe In.” What I believe is that Obama wants to educate the American people about what it will take to make long-term change. Obama has said that change will be tough but doesn't go into why or discuss exactly what this “change” will be and how it will effect the young voters of today. We need for details and will not vote for change on blind faith alone.
Katie Cappelloni '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Watching the Presidential Debate on Univision with my “Mama”
On February 21, 2008 CNN and Univision collaborated to bring together the Democratic frontrunners, Senator Obama and Senator Clinton, in a debate from Austin, Texas. This debate was unique because Univision is a Spanish television network, so the debate was translated for Latinos. This seemed like a good opportunity for me to watch a debate with and discover the political views of my grandmother, Horacia Ortiz, who is an immigrant from Baceloneta, Puerto Rico currently residing in New York State.
Politics is a controversial entity. It is a topic that can spark conversation, but also can strike up confrontation. This inherent fact made me uncertain of what would happen while watching the debate with someone from a completely different generation. I am twenty-years-old and currently enrolled in Wilkes University in Pennsylvania. Although it is obvious that our demographics differ drastically, my grandmother and I sat together to watch and discuss the upcoming Presidential election.
It did not take long for my grandmother, who I refer to as Mama, to voice her opinion. In Senator Obama’s opening remarks, he stated that he and Clinton are friends and will continue to be after the debate. Mama saw his comments as merely an act for the Democrats to see he is trying to be the bigger person, when all they have done is bicker with one another. In her words, “Of course, they will always be friends; they’re on the same side.”
For the most part, Mama and I agreed on just about everything in spite of our generational differences. Mama noted that in her opinion, Clinton is more prepared to be President. When Clinton was asked about reuniting Cuba and she responded by saying yes, after they have proven themselves to not be terrorists, Mama was thrilled. “If you don’t reunite them you will never see a positive change, you see she’s smart,” claimed Mama. Later when the issue of immigration came up, Mama was all too happy to hear Clinton’s views on reuniting the people. Not only was Mama ecstatic, but so were the audience members of the debate. Clinton received a standing ovation when she stated, “…that is not the America that I know. That is against American values. And it is -- it is a stark admission of failure by the federal government,” in response to a question Ramos asked pertaining to raids to eliminate illegal immigration. “I agree we all came at one point together, why can’t we live together?” asked Mama. She then added, “Watch Obama disagree.”
After several minutes, I asked Mama why she prefers Clinton over Obama. She said, “I’m familiar with her. She has always represented the underreported classes. I am voting for her all the way, but fear Obama will win. Either way I prefer these candidates over McCain. If he wins there will be no positive change. I am not voting for her because she is a woman, although America always wants a man to lead. Valerie, a man is only as strong as the woman by his side. No matter what Hillary Clinton represents me because she’s my Senator.”
What can I say? I’m my grandmother’s granddaughter because I couldn’t have said it better. This debate was not something I was particularly looking forward to, having seen so many thus far, but watching it with Mama made it different. It made it real and brought it closer to home than ever before. Age really is just a number because the heart is the reflection of your life. Consequently, we are closer in “political age” than one might have thought and together our hearts are aligned for Clinton.
Valerie Martinez '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Politics is a controversial entity. It is a topic that can spark conversation, but also can strike up confrontation. This inherent fact made me uncertain of what would happen while watching the debate with someone from a completely different generation. I am twenty-years-old and currently enrolled in Wilkes University in Pennsylvania. Although it is obvious that our demographics differ drastically, my grandmother and I sat together to watch and discuss the upcoming Presidential election.
It did not take long for my grandmother, who I refer to as Mama, to voice her opinion. In Senator Obama’s opening remarks, he stated that he and Clinton are friends and will continue to be after the debate. Mama saw his comments as merely an act for the Democrats to see he is trying to be the bigger person, when all they have done is bicker with one another. In her words, “Of course, they will always be friends; they’re on the same side.”
For the most part, Mama and I agreed on just about everything in spite of our generational differences. Mama noted that in her opinion, Clinton is more prepared to be President. When Clinton was asked about reuniting Cuba and she responded by saying yes, after they have proven themselves to not be terrorists, Mama was thrilled. “If you don’t reunite them you will never see a positive change, you see she’s smart,” claimed Mama. Later when the issue of immigration came up, Mama was all too happy to hear Clinton’s views on reuniting the people. Not only was Mama ecstatic, but so were the audience members of the debate. Clinton received a standing ovation when she stated, “…that is not the America that I know. That is against American values. And it is -- it is a stark admission of failure by the federal government,” in response to a question Ramos asked pertaining to raids to eliminate illegal immigration. “I agree we all came at one point together, why can’t we live together?” asked Mama. She then added, “Watch Obama disagree.”
After several minutes, I asked Mama why she prefers Clinton over Obama. She said, “I’m familiar with her. She has always represented the underreported classes. I am voting for her all the way, but fear Obama will win. Either way I prefer these candidates over McCain. If he wins there will be no positive change. I am not voting for her because she is a woman, although America always wants a man to lead. Valerie, a man is only as strong as the woman by his side. No matter what Hillary Clinton represents me because she’s my Senator.”
What can I say? I’m my grandmother’s granddaughter because I couldn’t have said it better. This debate was not something I was particularly looking forward to, having seen so many thus far, but watching it with Mama made it different. It made it real and brought it closer to home than ever before. Age really is just a number because the heart is the reflection of your life. Consequently, we are closer in “political age” than one might have thought and together our hearts are aligned for Clinton.
Valerie Martinez '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Former President Bill Clinton Did Not Disappoint in Wilkes-Barre
I want to make my personal position clear. As a product of the early 80’s, a child of the early 90’s, and an avid Hillary supporter it only seemed logical that I visit my old alma matter, Coughlin High School, to hear the campaign speech of the greatest president of my lifespan, Bill Clinton. Sure it was rainy and cold and the line seemed to take hours to move inches but in my opinion it was well worth the wait.
While I was in line for two hours, it only seemed natural to speak to my elders and get their opinions on the election and why they were braving the cold and rainy conditions. I got more than I bargained for when I struck up a conversation with an older woman named Margo. She did not think that in her lifetime she would ever see a presidential race like this one. “A black or a woman, nah it would never happen; it‘s a great time to be alive,” she said. It was just a simple surface conversation until I asked her why she was there. In that instant our surface banter became an all-out political discussion. My intention was never to use her in this blog, but to simply pass the time. However, without her this experience wouldn’t have been quite as amusing or as informative. Margo said, “I voted for a Clinton in 92 and again in 96 and I am honored to vote for another Clinton in 2008. Race or sex has nothing to do with my decision. She‘s a good woman with great ideas.”
We are two women from two very different generations but I stand by her words. It’s nice to find common ground between generations when at times the gap seems too large to close. We may not have the same reasoning behind our decisions, but I am also honored to vote for a Clinton on April 22nd and with any luck again in November.
As the line started moving and the conversation dissipated I couldn’t help getting butterflies in my stomach. By the time I finally reached the gymnasium, that very same one I used to run laps around just a few years ago, I became filled with a child-like excitement. My father was an intense Clinton supporter in the 90’s and I guess he handed the torch down to me. I’ve been hearing for years what an amazing speaker he was, and the chance to hear him in person was something I just couldn’t wait to experience.
Once we were seated it became a spectacle. There was music blaring and people everywhere. If I didn’t know any better I would have thought I was walking into a concert. Plain and simple, it was crazy.
He arrived a half-hour late, but his speech did not disappoint. He touched on every issue for every age range. He talked about creating more energy efficient cars and making them more affordable for the masses. He spoke about health care and higher education. He really didn’t skimp on anything. He was as charismatic as promised and as charming as he looks on television. In my opinion, he helped sway a few of those undecideds to Hillary supporters with just a few words. My favorite line of the entire speech is when he was responding to remarks made by Barrack Obama about the Clinton era 90’s. Clinton said, “What didn’t you like about the 90’s, was it the peace or was it the prosperity?” The crowd went into an uproar, whether you like the man or not, he can make a speech. I am so glad I had the honor of attending this event. The YouTube feed will never replace the feeling of actually being there.
Was it worth standing outside for two hours for? Absolutely. If you weren’t a Hillary supporter before this speech my guess is you were afterwards. My advice to anyone on the fence in this election is to go watch the candidates or their surrogates speak. I promise the feeling of being there won’t disappoint.
Lyndsay Padavan '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
While I was in line for two hours, it only seemed natural to speak to my elders and get their opinions on the election and why they were braving the cold and rainy conditions. I got more than I bargained for when I struck up a conversation with an older woman named Margo. She did not think that in her lifetime she would ever see a presidential race like this one. “A black or a woman, nah it would never happen; it‘s a great time to be alive,” she said. It was just a simple surface conversation until I asked her why she was there. In that instant our surface banter became an all-out political discussion. My intention was never to use her in this blog, but to simply pass the time. However, without her this experience wouldn’t have been quite as amusing or as informative. Margo said, “I voted for a Clinton in 92 and again in 96 and I am honored to vote for another Clinton in 2008. Race or sex has nothing to do with my decision. She‘s a good woman with great ideas.”
We are two women from two very different generations but I stand by her words. It’s nice to find common ground between generations when at times the gap seems too large to close. We may not have the same reasoning behind our decisions, but I am also honored to vote for a Clinton on April 22nd and with any luck again in November.
As the line started moving and the conversation dissipated I couldn’t help getting butterflies in my stomach. By the time I finally reached the gymnasium, that very same one I used to run laps around just a few years ago, I became filled with a child-like excitement. My father was an intense Clinton supporter in the 90’s and I guess he handed the torch down to me. I’ve been hearing for years what an amazing speaker he was, and the chance to hear him in person was something I just couldn’t wait to experience.
Once we were seated it became a spectacle. There was music blaring and people everywhere. If I didn’t know any better I would have thought I was walking into a concert. Plain and simple, it was crazy.
He arrived a half-hour late, but his speech did not disappoint. He touched on every issue for every age range. He talked about creating more energy efficient cars and making them more affordable for the masses. He spoke about health care and higher education. He really didn’t skimp on anything. He was as charismatic as promised and as charming as he looks on television. In my opinion, he helped sway a few of those undecideds to Hillary supporters with just a few words. My favorite line of the entire speech is when he was responding to remarks made by Barrack Obama about the Clinton era 90’s. Clinton said, “What didn’t you like about the 90’s, was it the peace or was it the prosperity?” The crowd went into an uproar, whether you like the man or not, he can make a speech. I am so glad I had the honor of attending this event. The YouTube feed will never replace the feeling of actually being there.
Was it worth standing outside for two hours for? Absolutely. If you weren’t a Hillary supporter before this speech my guess is you were afterwards. My advice to anyone on the fence in this election is to go watch the candidates or their surrogates speak. I promise the feeling of being there won’t disappoint.
Lyndsay Padavan '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Does our current education system make the grade?
Even as the days of President George W. Bush’s administration are at last numbered and America poises to choose its next potential disaster, I can stand proud and say that I have not yet submitted to political hype that has since seized the nation. While I don’t intend to sound conceited, I also don’t pretend to stand alone in the belief that even as the daily news is swamped with pictures of press conferences, allegations of racism, and Sedona barbeques, sometimes the issues are lost beneath the waves of what really is important.
Take our nation’s education. I seem to recall that, at least at some point since last November, it was a hot issue of sort and a point of frustration for me. However, even as our Democratic candidates rally around the out-and-out (merciful) execution of the No Child Left Behind Act, I think it similarly depressing that we take for granted the possibility that there may be people who do not concur with our point of view.
In light of this desire to hear what others think, I recently sought the opinion of 78-year-old Mildred Kahn. As I met with this woman, who has such a Rockwell-grandmother appeal to her, I had no presumption that my views would be well-met in the slightest. However, Mildred surprised me when I asked for her opinion on the state of public education.
“Horse feathers. . . It’s unreal what’s going on,” responded Ms. Kahn, an answer that shocked me, if only in its rapidity. “It’s the children that suffer, as the quality of education goes down.”
Mildred speaks as if there is a great fire building up inside her that’s desperately craving oxygen to lash out at any moment. That moment arose when I questioned her about the hiring of teachers. “It’s terrible. It’s not what you know, but who you know when it comes down to it. First things first: we need to start getting rid of politics everywhere in school,” said Ms. Kahn.
As a great-grandmother, Mildred also mentioned the infamous No Child Left Behind Act, and how she feels it’s not working, to say the least. “Children need to read and write and it’s the schools fault this isn’t occurring. Parents can only do so much because of their hectic work schedule. Parents work hard to give them everything that [their children] need. They can’t be asked to tutor them in the things they aren’t [learning].”
Though Ms. Kahn fondly remembers a time when, as she puts it, “you didn’t need college,” she also recognizes the need for higher education in a world of increasing specialization. “How do you expect kids to go to college when schools aren’t preparing them for it?”
Apparently, we young folk aren’t the only ones fearful for lack of certainty in our children’s future.
Matthew Gobbler '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Take our nation’s education. I seem to recall that, at least at some point since last November, it was a hot issue of sort and a point of frustration for me. However, even as our Democratic candidates rally around the out-and-out (merciful) execution of the No Child Left Behind Act, I think it similarly depressing that we take for granted the possibility that there may be people who do not concur with our point of view.
In light of this desire to hear what others think, I recently sought the opinion of 78-year-old Mildred Kahn. As I met with this woman, who has such a Rockwell-grandmother appeal to her, I had no presumption that my views would be well-met in the slightest. However, Mildred surprised me when I asked for her opinion on the state of public education.
“Horse feathers. . . It’s unreal what’s going on,” responded Ms. Kahn, an answer that shocked me, if only in its rapidity. “It’s the children that suffer, as the quality of education goes down.”
Mildred speaks as if there is a great fire building up inside her that’s desperately craving oxygen to lash out at any moment. That moment arose when I questioned her about the hiring of teachers. “It’s terrible. It’s not what you know, but who you know when it comes down to it. First things first: we need to start getting rid of politics everywhere in school,” said Ms. Kahn.
As a great-grandmother, Mildred also mentioned the infamous No Child Left Behind Act, and how she feels it’s not working, to say the least. “Children need to read and write and it’s the schools fault this isn’t occurring. Parents can only do so much because of their hectic work schedule. Parents work hard to give them everything that [their children] need. They can’t be asked to tutor them in the things they aren’t [learning].”
Though Ms. Kahn fondly remembers a time when, as she puts it, “you didn’t need college,” she also recognizes the need for higher education in a world of increasing specialization. “How do you expect kids to go to college when schools aren’t preparing them for it?”
Apparently, we young folk aren’t the only ones fearful for lack of certainty in our children’s future.
Matthew Gobbler '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Sincere Voting
“Barak Obama works with Muslim terrorist organizations, Hillary Clinton fakes her tears for sympathy, and John McCain led a prison camp to freedom with a Rambo-style escape during his Vietnam War tour.” As false as the previous sentence is, there are many people across this nation who have made their voting decisions based on such bogus legends. If a voter has not taken the time to find out what a candidate for president supports and does not support, then the smart action would be to find out some facts about the candidate or do not vote at all.
Unfortunately, there are people within every break-room, classroom or place of social gathering who will not support certain candidates because of a tall-tale their racist, sexist, or ageist friend/parent/relative who told them. Anyone who takes the word of a biased informer without seeking answers from a credible source does not deserve a voice in this election; he or she does not deserve to vote! This election has been entrenched with hype over factors that have nothing to do with being a good president and everything to do with pop culture obsessions including Obama’s race, Hillary’s gender, and McCain’s war experience.
All candidates do their fair share of building up these trivial matters in public appearances, but behind the malarkey lay large amounts of information people need to know in order to decide if Clinton, Obama, or McCain is indeed the candidate for them. It is one thing to ask the stranger at the bus stop who happens to hate Hillary Clinton because her health care plan failed the first time she tried to pass it. But it’s a completely different scenario to hear her talk about her plans for health care while she debates against other candidates over the same subject.
Watching debates on television, researching campaign sites on the internet, or reading about the candidates in commendable publications are a few ways a voter can learn about a presidential candidate. However, the number of available forms of media to learn about the candidates is not the problem. The true issue lies with the voters taking the initiative to at least view the contestants’ policies once before and after primary elections. This process takes about an hour to complete and could only benefit a voter with more knowledge.
Voting is a privilege that can benefit every citizen in the U.S as long as there is an element of sincerity that surrounds the process. The next time someone in your break-room says “I’m not voting for Obama because he will be sworn in on the Koran,” please do us all a favor and rhetorically slap him or her with the proverbial “think and educate yourself before you vote!”
David Lewis '10
Wilkes University
Communitcations Studies/English
Unfortunately, there are people within every break-room, classroom or place of social gathering who will not support certain candidates because of a tall-tale their racist, sexist, or ageist friend/parent/relative who told them. Anyone who takes the word of a biased informer without seeking answers from a credible source does not deserve a voice in this election; he or she does not deserve to vote! This election has been entrenched with hype over factors that have nothing to do with being a good president and everything to do with pop culture obsessions including Obama’s race, Hillary’s gender, and McCain’s war experience.
All candidates do their fair share of building up these trivial matters in public appearances, but behind the malarkey lay large amounts of information people need to know in order to decide if Clinton, Obama, or McCain is indeed the candidate for them. It is one thing to ask the stranger at the bus stop who happens to hate Hillary Clinton because her health care plan failed the first time she tried to pass it. But it’s a completely different scenario to hear her talk about her plans for health care while she debates against other candidates over the same subject.
Watching debates on television, researching campaign sites on the internet, or reading about the candidates in commendable publications are a few ways a voter can learn about a presidential candidate. However, the number of available forms of media to learn about the candidates is not the problem. The true issue lies with the voters taking the initiative to at least view the contestants’ policies once before and after primary elections. This process takes about an hour to complete and could only benefit a voter with more knowledge.
Voting is a privilege that can benefit every citizen in the U.S as long as there is an element of sincerity that surrounds the process. The next time someone in your break-room says “I’m not voting for Obama because he will be sworn in on the Koran,” please do us all a favor and rhetorically slap him or her with the proverbial “think and educate yourself before you vote!”
David Lewis '10
Wilkes University
Communitcations Studies/English
Don’t Let Gender Define this Campaign
With the upcoming Pennsylvania primary just a few weeks away, and considering the importance our state can have on which Democratic presidential candidate gets the nomination, I wanted to remind local residents of the importance of voting for a candidate based on their plan of action, rather than their race or gender.
I’m going through an invaluable experience this semester by studying each candidate and how they plan to make our country better, and I’m also learning how campaigns “spin” a message to their candidate’s advantage. And you know, for the first time I feel educated about the political process. But, it really upsets me when I have taken the time out to study each candidate’s plan of action to find that there are people here in Wilkes-Barre, and across the country for that matter, who vote in the primary based on gender or race alone. Or, they vote on looks as the sole reason for acceptance. Now, I don’t mind if someone is voting for John McCain, Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, but let’s have some sense when we go to the voting booth!
In this upcoming primary in particular, I’ve heard countless women, including my mother, say they’ll vote for Hillary because “we need a woman as President because a man couldn’t get the job done.” Vote for Hillary, but do it because you find her universal health care plan irresistible, or because you have a child going to college in the near future and you like her ideas to make his or her education more affordable. To strip each candidate to simply their race or gender is being simple and narrow-minded.
I’m not being naive on this issue. I know there will always be people who will vote for a candidate because they like their inspirational speeches or they like their significant other, who previously served in office. But, in a critical primary that can potentially shape the next couple of generations, how about we look at the content of the speeches, rather than listen to the supporters strategically clap between every other sentence?
Jamie Gwynn '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
I’m going through an invaluable experience this semester by studying each candidate and how they plan to make our country better, and I’m also learning how campaigns “spin” a message to their candidate’s advantage. And you know, for the first time I feel educated about the political process. But, it really upsets me when I have taken the time out to study each candidate’s plan of action to find that there are people here in Wilkes-Barre, and across the country for that matter, who vote in the primary based on gender or race alone. Or, they vote on looks as the sole reason for acceptance. Now, I don’t mind if someone is voting for John McCain, Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, but let’s have some sense when we go to the voting booth!
In this upcoming primary in particular, I’ve heard countless women, including my mother, say they’ll vote for Hillary because “we need a woman as President because a man couldn’t get the job done.” Vote for Hillary, but do it because you find her universal health care plan irresistible, or because you have a child going to college in the near future and you like her ideas to make his or her education more affordable. To strip each candidate to simply their race or gender is being simple and narrow-minded.
I’m not being naive on this issue. I know there will always be people who will vote for a candidate because they like their inspirational speeches or they like their significant other, who previously served in office. But, in a critical primary that can potentially shape the next couple of generations, how about we look at the content of the speeches, rather than listen to the supporters strategically clap between every other sentence?
Jamie Gwynn '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Friday, March 21, 2008
Hillary Gets My Vote on the Economy
Think back to 1929, the United States was in the largest slump it had ever been in and people were in a panic. Think now to 2008, thanks to President George W. Bush we may be headed in the same direction. John Schmitt and Dean Baker from the US Center for Economic and Policy Research say that, “A recession in 2008 would raise the national unemployment rate by between 2.1 and 3.8 percentage points, increasing the number of unemployed Americans by between 3.2 million and 5.8 million.”
As a graduating college senior this frightens me more than just a little. The stock market is dropping and the financial stability of our country is dropping, wake up people. Calvin Coolidge was a reason for the recession of 1929; do we want George W. Bush to be the cause of this one? We need to educate ourselves and be aware of this situation.
According to the Morgan Stanley global economic forum, we need to be educated on four main factors: “First, weak US demand may spill into overseas economies through a traditional trade channel, as slower growth in US imports will directly or indirectly affect exports in other regions. Under the trade umbrella, we include the cross-border flows of profits resulting from direct investment in the US. Second, financial channels are probably more important today; financial shocks that began with rising US mortgage defaults are now spilling over into a global credit squeeze, deleveraging of balance sheets, and tighter financial conditions in many markets. Third, the ebbing tide of US and global growth is exposing domestic weakness in economies that had been masked by the global boom of the past few years, so understanding domestic economic health is critical. Finally, while we aren’t bearish on commodities, it’s important to assess the effects on commodity producers of slower growth in demand.”
I’ve done my homework ladies and gentleman and all the facts are leading to one outcome, at least in my mind. A recession is approaching us at a rapid pace and we need to elect the right officials to do something about it. In my eyes, Hillary Clinton is just the right woman to take on this job.
Her economic plan includes establishing a $30 Billion Emergency Housing Crisis Fund to help states and cities mitigate the effects of mounting foreclosures, take action against the stem tide of foreclosure (which includes a 90-day moratorium on sub-prime foreclosures and an automatic rate freeze on sub-prime mortgages of at least five years), provide $25 billion in emergency energy assistance for families facing skyrocketing heating bills, accelerate $5 billion in energy efficiency and alternative energy investments to jumpstart green collar job growth, and to invest $10 billion in extending and broadening unemployment insurance for those who are struggling to find work.
What does this mean to me? I am graduating from college in May, the real world is just on the horizon and the fact is I am going to need a job. Hillary’s plan will help to create jobs and open up new opportunities for those of us that need them. The truth is it just isn’t encouraging when your graduating college and the economy is experiencing its “down time.” With the help of young voters such as myself, we can make sure we choose the right person to help us through our journey. I don’t want to be standing in the unemployment line, do you?
Lindsay Padavan '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
As a graduating college senior this frightens me more than just a little. The stock market is dropping and the financial stability of our country is dropping, wake up people. Calvin Coolidge was a reason for the recession of 1929; do we want George W. Bush to be the cause of this one? We need to educate ourselves and be aware of this situation.
According to the Morgan Stanley global economic forum, we need to be educated on four main factors: “First, weak US demand may spill into overseas economies through a traditional trade channel, as slower growth in US imports will directly or indirectly affect exports in other regions. Under the trade umbrella, we include the cross-border flows of profits resulting from direct investment in the US. Second, financial channels are probably more important today; financial shocks that began with rising US mortgage defaults are now spilling over into a global credit squeeze, deleveraging of balance sheets, and tighter financial conditions in many markets. Third, the ebbing tide of US and global growth is exposing domestic weakness in economies that had been masked by the global boom of the past few years, so understanding domestic economic health is critical. Finally, while we aren’t bearish on commodities, it’s important to assess the effects on commodity producers of slower growth in demand.”
I’ve done my homework ladies and gentleman and all the facts are leading to one outcome, at least in my mind. A recession is approaching us at a rapid pace and we need to elect the right officials to do something about it. In my eyes, Hillary Clinton is just the right woman to take on this job.
Her economic plan includes establishing a $30 Billion Emergency Housing Crisis Fund to help states and cities mitigate the effects of mounting foreclosures, take action against the stem tide of foreclosure (which includes a 90-day moratorium on sub-prime foreclosures and an automatic rate freeze on sub-prime mortgages of at least five years), provide $25 billion in emergency energy assistance for families facing skyrocketing heating bills, accelerate $5 billion in energy efficiency and alternative energy investments to jumpstart green collar job growth, and to invest $10 billion in extending and broadening unemployment insurance for those who are struggling to find work.
What does this mean to me? I am graduating from college in May, the real world is just on the horizon and the fact is I am going to need a job. Hillary’s plan will help to create jobs and open up new opportunities for those of us that need them. The truth is it just isn’t encouraging when your graduating college and the economy is experiencing its “down time.” With the help of young voters such as myself, we can make sure we choose the right person to help us through our journey. I don’t want to be standing in the unemployment line, do you?
Lindsay Padavan '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Sex, is this all that matters?
We constantly hear that 2008 is the year of presidential firsts. Well, what about concentrating on the content of someone’s character instead of their demographics? Let us be clear, Senator Clinton understood that the road ahead would not only break new ground, but also reopen the debate as to whether a woman could be elected President. Why does it matter that she chooses to take the road less traveled? Is it necessary that Americans continue to elect the same wealthy, Caucasian, middle-aged males? I think not.
Clinton, often referred to as “Hillary” by her competitors and the press, is seen simply as a woman. Her sex is discussed more than her political agenda. For example, in New Hampshire she was accused of crying. Who saw her cry? Where is the proof? I saw photos of a person showing emotion, but I did not see anyone crying. What I have seen is a woman prove that she is more than capable of playing with the big boys. Yet the American people cannot get past her sex. In fact, Senator Clinton has encountered several gender-based attacks and the use of the "B" word. While in Las Vegas for the Democratic debate she acknowledged that what she is aiming for is "toward the highest, hardest glass ceiling." My question is why, in today’s age, is that ceiling so high? And why is she the only one aiming towards an improbable goal?
As a twenty-year-old Latina voting this year, I personally do not look at the candidate’s demographics, but his or her knowledge on what our country needs. Having stated my personal opinion, I realize this is not the consensus amongst a majority of Americans. Instead, the media and many constituents have chosen to teach our youth that sex does matter. By making such a big deal about a woman candidate, people are demonstrating that sex is an issue and cannot be overlooked in a debate, an election, or simply put, a job. After all, that is what the presidency is. It’s a job, a very important job, but a job none the less. The male candidates have been asked about their views on politics, issues concerning America, and their personal beliefs. Senator Clinton has been asked similar questions, but also questions regarding her fashion and romantic life. For example on the Tyra Banks Show, Senator Clinton was asked about her headbands, a hair accessory she wore while Bill Clinton ran for President. She was also asked about her first date, but I do not recall Senator Obama talking about his first date or why he seems to wear blue ties so often. The only “firsts” discussed with Obama were his first job and first priorities if elected President of the United States.
It is shameful that when looking at our presidential candidates a majority of Americans merely see gender. Whatever happened to choosing the best person for the job and not the best sex for the position? I hope that in some ways people realize that if we truly are to claim advancement in the struggle of the sexes, America as a whole will need to treat all the Presidential candidates equally and not simply give “Hillary” a shot but give Senator Clinton an opportunity.
Valerie Martinez '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Clinton, often referred to as “Hillary” by her competitors and the press, is seen simply as a woman. Her sex is discussed more than her political agenda. For example, in New Hampshire she was accused of crying. Who saw her cry? Where is the proof? I saw photos of a person showing emotion, but I did not see anyone crying. What I have seen is a woman prove that she is more than capable of playing with the big boys. Yet the American people cannot get past her sex. In fact, Senator Clinton has encountered several gender-based attacks and the use of the "B" word. While in Las Vegas for the Democratic debate she acknowledged that what she is aiming for is "toward the highest, hardest glass ceiling." My question is why, in today’s age, is that ceiling so high? And why is she the only one aiming towards an improbable goal?
As a twenty-year-old Latina voting this year, I personally do not look at the candidate’s demographics, but his or her knowledge on what our country needs. Having stated my personal opinion, I realize this is not the consensus amongst a majority of Americans. Instead, the media and many constituents have chosen to teach our youth that sex does matter. By making such a big deal about a woman candidate, people are demonstrating that sex is an issue and cannot be overlooked in a debate, an election, or simply put, a job. After all, that is what the presidency is. It’s a job, a very important job, but a job none the less. The male candidates have been asked about their views on politics, issues concerning America, and their personal beliefs. Senator Clinton has been asked similar questions, but also questions regarding her fashion and romantic life. For example on the Tyra Banks Show, Senator Clinton was asked about her headbands, a hair accessory she wore while Bill Clinton ran for President. She was also asked about her first date, but I do not recall Senator Obama talking about his first date or why he seems to wear blue ties so often. The only “firsts” discussed with Obama were his first job and first priorities if elected President of the United States.
It is shameful that when looking at our presidential candidates a majority of Americans merely see gender. Whatever happened to choosing the best person for the job and not the best sex for the position? I hope that in some ways people realize that if we truly are to claim advancement in the struggle of the sexes, America as a whole will need to treat all the Presidential candidates equally and not simply give “Hillary” a shot but give Senator Clinton an opportunity.
Valerie Martinez '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
I Don’t Want Candidates to Preach to Me—Separation of Church and State Matters to Me
With the upcoming 2008 presidential election, each candidate has a number of tough issues to address including the War in Iraq, abortion, gay marriage, the environment, the economy, etc. While all of these issues are important and need to be examined carefully by each candidate before they make a decision about which stance they will take on them, I think the question of HOW they make their choice is also of equal importance.
As a young voter, I think everyone is entitled to their own opinions. If a candidate thinks abortion is wrong, I’d like to know what motivates them to think this way. If they say “I think abortion is wrong because I feel its murder.” I’m ok with that, and I can respect their opinion whether I agree with them or not. However, I tend to be offended when I hear a candidate say “I think abortion is wrong because God says it's wrong.” What God? Your God? My God? What about the people who don’t believe in any God? We’re supposed to have a separation between church and state in this country, so why bring God into your reasoning behind what stance you take on an issue? If your religious beliefs are the driving force behind how you vote and what laws you choose to pass, how is that keeping church and state separate?
The First Amendment guarantees the right to freedom of religion. If the lawmakers and presidential candidates are allowing their personal religious views to determine how they vote, how are they guaranteeing freedom of religion? If they outlaw gay marriage or abortion because their God says they should, what about the people who don’t believe in their God? Why should they be subjected to following a law based on something they don’t believe in?
When I look at a candidate I’m not looking for their religious affiliation, I look at their stance on the issues and the steps they’ve taken to resolve an issue. I don’t want to be preached to. I have my own views and can form my own opinions based on the facts. If I want religious commentary, I’ll attend a religious service. I’m not saying its wrong to be religious or its wrong not to be religious, people should live their lives in whatever way makes them happy. I also don’t believe that potential political leaders should be trying to sway people’s votes by trying to appeal to them on a religious moral level. If I like a candidate because of their stance on the issues and I hear them start preaching about how “God says this is wrong”, it’s going to turn me off and make me try to find someone who doesn’t have the “holier than thou” attitude.
People who are planning to vote in the 2008 election need to be able to think for themselves. Don’t allow someone’s religious views to cloud your judgment and ability to pick the candidate with the best ideas and solutions for an issue. Challenge yourself to look beyond where and who someone worships. Take a look at the issues that they see as important and what they plan to do about them, find out the facts, and make an educated decision. They’re not running for president of a religious organization, they’re running to represent and protect everyone in this country, not just the people who practice the same religion as them.
Jamie Gibson '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
As a young voter, I think everyone is entitled to their own opinions. If a candidate thinks abortion is wrong, I’d like to know what motivates them to think this way. If they say “I think abortion is wrong because I feel its murder.” I’m ok with that, and I can respect their opinion whether I agree with them or not. However, I tend to be offended when I hear a candidate say “I think abortion is wrong because God says it's wrong.” What God? Your God? My God? What about the people who don’t believe in any God? We’re supposed to have a separation between church and state in this country, so why bring God into your reasoning behind what stance you take on an issue? If your religious beliefs are the driving force behind how you vote and what laws you choose to pass, how is that keeping church and state separate?
The First Amendment guarantees the right to freedom of religion. If the lawmakers and presidential candidates are allowing their personal religious views to determine how they vote, how are they guaranteeing freedom of religion? If they outlaw gay marriage or abortion because their God says they should, what about the people who don’t believe in their God? Why should they be subjected to following a law based on something they don’t believe in?
When I look at a candidate I’m not looking for their religious affiliation, I look at their stance on the issues and the steps they’ve taken to resolve an issue. I don’t want to be preached to. I have my own views and can form my own opinions based on the facts. If I want religious commentary, I’ll attend a religious service. I’m not saying its wrong to be religious or its wrong not to be religious, people should live their lives in whatever way makes them happy. I also don’t believe that potential political leaders should be trying to sway people’s votes by trying to appeal to them on a religious moral level. If I like a candidate because of their stance on the issues and I hear them start preaching about how “God says this is wrong”, it’s going to turn me off and make me try to find someone who doesn’t have the “holier than thou” attitude.
People who are planning to vote in the 2008 election need to be able to think for themselves. Don’t allow someone’s religious views to cloud your judgment and ability to pick the candidate with the best ideas and solutions for an issue. Challenge yourself to look beyond where and who someone worships. Take a look at the issues that they see as important and what they plan to do about them, find out the facts, and make an educated decision. They’re not running for president of a religious organization, they’re running to represent and protect everyone in this country, not just the people who practice the same religion as them.
Jamie Gibson '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
What Can Obama and Clinton Do to Help Me Pay for My College Education and Reduce My Debt?
I am a first semester senior at Wilkes University and that means that I will be graduating next fall. If I do find a job in the communications field, it will most likely be low paying until I can work my way up the corporate ladder. Six months into my profession the bills for the loans that I had to take out will kick in.
My loans have been accumulating interest and now I will almost have to pay double the amount that I took out. In other words, the interest rate is variable and will go up. According to rockthevote.com, in 2005 Congress passed the Deficit Reduction Act, “which cut $12 billion in federal student aid money…the plan includes a hike in interest rates on Stafford federal student loans (rose from 5.3% to 7.14% on existing loans and to 6.8 % on new loans) and loans taken out by parents (from 6.1 to 7.4 percent on existing loans and to 8.5% on new loans).
Why did Congress do this? According to collegejournal.com, “the reduced funding is part of a $40 billion deficit reduction passed by the Senate…to help limit spending…” As a college student, I have many worries on my mind once graduation comes, worries that I will address to the presidential candidates specifically. What can the 2008 Democratic Presidential candidates do to help me pay for my education and reduce my debt?
In recent years the price of college level education has skyrocketed. According to rockthevote.com, college costs are up 35% in five years. As a student at Wilkes University I am paying about $34,180 for tuition and fees along with room and board. That phenomenal fee doesn’t include books, supplies, transportation, or living expenses like extra food and toiletries. According to current reports by the College Board, “most students and their families can expect to pay, on average, from $95 to $1,404 more than last year for this year's tuition and fees, depending on the type of college (http://www.collegeboard.com/).”
The top two Democratic candidates, Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, are aiming their education policies at lower level rather than college level education. According to HillaryClinton.com, Senator Clinton is planning to increase the maximum Pell Grant, strengthen community colleges through a $500 million investment, create a graduation fund to increase college graduation rates, and increase to $10,000 the college scholarship for those who participate in AmeriCorps full-time for one year. All of these plans are good, but the policies are vague. What about students who will just be graduating? What can Senator Clinton do about the hike in interest rates on the loans, including private lender loans, that students will have to pay off in the next one to two years?
Senator Obama has a plan that supersedes that of Senator Clinton because he provides more information and more opportunities, but he still does not address the issue of loans, other than to support eliminating costly bank subsidies. “Obama will save taxpayer money billions by eliminating the more expensive private loan program and directing that money into aid for students” (http://www.barackobama.com). The issue of loans is addressed, but there is still nothing directed at the 60 percent of college students that will leave college with debt.
Here is a plea to the current Democratic candidates Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, start addressing the issue of the cost of college education and reducing the amount of debt that college graduates will have. There will be 60 percent of students in America graduating who will be in debt and that large percentage needs the help of the government now.
Heather Chulick ‘08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
My loans have been accumulating interest and now I will almost have to pay double the amount that I took out. In other words, the interest rate is variable and will go up. According to rockthevote.com, in 2005 Congress passed the Deficit Reduction Act, “which cut $12 billion in federal student aid money…the plan includes a hike in interest rates on Stafford federal student loans (rose from 5.3% to 7.14% on existing loans and to 6.8 % on new loans) and loans taken out by parents (from 6.1 to 7.4 percent on existing loans and to 8.5% on new loans).
Why did Congress do this? According to collegejournal.com, “the reduced funding is part of a $40 billion deficit reduction passed by the Senate…to help limit spending…” As a college student, I have many worries on my mind once graduation comes, worries that I will address to the presidential candidates specifically. What can the 2008 Democratic Presidential candidates do to help me pay for my education and reduce my debt?
In recent years the price of college level education has skyrocketed. According to rockthevote.com, college costs are up 35% in five years. As a student at Wilkes University I am paying about $34,180 for tuition and fees along with room and board. That phenomenal fee doesn’t include books, supplies, transportation, or living expenses like extra food and toiletries. According to current reports by the College Board, “most students and their families can expect to pay, on average, from $95 to $1,404 more than last year for this year's tuition and fees, depending on the type of college (http://www.collegeboard.com/).”
The top two Democratic candidates, Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, are aiming their education policies at lower level rather than college level education. According to HillaryClinton.com, Senator Clinton is planning to increase the maximum Pell Grant, strengthen community colleges through a $500 million investment, create a graduation fund to increase college graduation rates, and increase to $10,000 the college scholarship for those who participate in AmeriCorps full-time for one year. All of these plans are good, but the policies are vague. What about students who will just be graduating? What can Senator Clinton do about the hike in interest rates on the loans, including private lender loans, that students will have to pay off in the next one to two years?
Senator Obama has a plan that supersedes that of Senator Clinton because he provides more information and more opportunities, but he still does not address the issue of loans, other than to support eliminating costly bank subsidies. “Obama will save taxpayer money billions by eliminating the more expensive private loan program and directing that money into aid for students” (http://www.barackobama.com). The issue of loans is addressed, but there is still nothing directed at the 60 percent of college students that will leave college with debt.
Here is a plea to the current Democratic candidates Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, start addressing the issue of the cost of college education and reducing the amount of debt that college graduates will have. There will be 60 percent of students in America graduating who will be in debt and that large percentage needs the help of the government now.
Heather Chulick ‘08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Monday, March 10, 2008
McCain’s Education Plan Gets an F: A Cross-Generational Opinion
The next President of the United States will likely have a great impact on our nation’s educational policy in the next four years and for generations to come. As a student, it is something that is very important to me, but it is also important to others as I found out on a recent visit to the local Jewish Community Center. Recently, our class met with our partners in a cross-generational voting project to determine the most important issues facing voters in the Pennsylvania presidential primary.
Through a conversation there with a senior citizen woman named Roz Smulowitz, it became obvious to me that education was an issue she felt very passionately about. Surprisingly, although our age difference was significant we found some common ground along with a few differences on this topic, especially when we discussed John McCain’s position.
John McCain supports a plan to improve and equalize education throughout the country by offering parents the “voucher” option of using taxpayer money to send their children to private schools. He believes this will provide parents with the power and financial ability to remove their children from those public schools which are failing. Neither Roz nor I see this an effective plan, but we have different primary reasons for why we disagree with it.
In my opinion John McCain’s plan does not address the actual problem at hand, which is the fact that there are many public schools of poor quality. What the United States government needs to do is work to improve these schools by increasing their funding and working to attract good teachers to these schools. Instead McCain would simply help some students to leave these schools and then let the institutions continue to grow worse.
Roz had a different reason for disagreeing with McCain’s plan. She believed that this idea could not work because a large number of students would overcrowd the private schools. Consequently, the quality of these schools would then decrease. While I agree with this point, I see it as secondary to the fact that this plan is not designed to meet the real need in the first place.
Obviously there are some possible flaws in McCain’s plan for education on several different levels. However, I think that John McCain, Roz, and myself can all agree that the current inequality in the quality of education that children receive across our nation is unacceptable.
Christine Zavaskas '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Through a conversation there with a senior citizen woman named Roz Smulowitz, it became obvious to me that education was an issue she felt very passionately about. Surprisingly, although our age difference was significant we found some common ground along with a few differences on this topic, especially when we discussed John McCain’s position.
John McCain supports a plan to improve and equalize education throughout the country by offering parents the “voucher” option of using taxpayer money to send their children to private schools. He believes this will provide parents with the power and financial ability to remove their children from those public schools which are failing. Neither Roz nor I see this an effective plan, but we have different primary reasons for why we disagree with it.
In my opinion John McCain’s plan does not address the actual problem at hand, which is the fact that there are many public schools of poor quality. What the United States government needs to do is work to improve these schools by increasing their funding and working to attract good teachers to these schools. Instead McCain would simply help some students to leave these schools and then let the institutions continue to grow worse.
Roz had a different reason for disagreeing with McCain’s plan. She believed that this idea could not work because a large number of students would overcrowd the private schools. Consequently, the quality of these schools would then decrease. While I agree with this point, I see it as secondary to the fact that this plan is not designed to meet the real need in the first place.
Obviously there are some possible flaws in McCain’s plan for education on several different levels. However, I think that John McCain, Roz, and myself can all agree that the current inequality in the quality of education that children receive across our nation is unacceptable.
Christine Zavaskas '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
War in Iraq: My Number One Priority
Hey, remember that war? You know, the one with death tolls over 600,000? (washingtonpost.com) The War, which is very much still raging, has seemingly slipped from America’s list of pressing issues. Why is this? What it all comes down to is the fact that the war is being fought in another part of the world. Here in America, we are separated from the real ugliness of it. Also, the truth is that after 9/11 there was an outburst of patriotism. By now, it has sadly seemed to fade. People have replaced their thoughts of the war with the issues that are affecting them on a daily basis.
According to City-Data.com, the most important issue on Americans’ minds is the economy. The bad economy is a problem that is caused by many different factors. The outsourcing of jobs to foreign countries and the lack of jobs available to our college graduates are two examples of problems contributing to the current state of the economy. However, what many people fail to notice is that there is a very strong link between the issues with the economy and the War in Iraq. According to nationalpriorities.org the war is costing us $275 million per day!
For thousands of wives, children, parents, and siblings, the War is still very real and a horror that is impossible to rid from the mind. My brother, a United States Marine, spent a year in Iraq and it is impossible to describe the fear that was present in the minds of my family each and every day until he returned. I know it is impossible to really understand the relevance of this war unless you have some personal stake in it, but for the benefit of the troops still in Iraq and their families, we really need to. As Americans we need to band together and keep supporting our brothers and sisters who are literally risking their lives every day. They at least deserved to be kept in our thoughts, even if the media doesn’t remind us anymore.
Katie Marzzacco '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
According to City-Data.com, the most important issue on Americans’ minds is the economy. The bad economy is a problem that is caused by many different factors. The outsourcing of jobs to foreign countries and the lack of jobs available to our college graduates are two examples of problems contributing to the current state of the economy. However, what many people fail to notice is that there is a very strong link between the issues with the economy and the War in Iraq. According to nationalpriorities.org the war is costing us $275 million per day!
For thousands of wives, children, parents, and siblings, the War is still very real and a horror that is impossible to rid from the mind. My brother, a United States Marine, spent a year in Iraq and it is impossible to describe the fear that was present in the minds of my family each and every day until he returned. I know it is impossible to really understand the relevance of this war unless you have some personal stake in it, but for the benefit of the troops still in Iraq and their families, we really need to. As Americans we need to band together and keep supporting our brothers and sisters who are literally risking their lives every day. They at least deserved to be kept in our thoughts, even if the media doesn’t remind us anymore.
Katie Marzzacco '09
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
I'm Young and I Vote
My decision to vote is not a result of MTV’s Rock the Vote, P Diddy’s Vote or Die Campaign, or the fact that the opportunity is present to vote for the first African American or female president…I am voting because I am of age and have peace of mind to do so. For too long I heard from older generations that “young people are not well informed enough to vote.” Youth in itself brings a sense of purity of mind along with an overall good natured outlook towards the world. For this reason, elders may argue that our “happy-go-lucky” mindsets will cause us to overlook serious issues addressed by the candidates which would result in the election of a bad president.
On the other hand, our mindsets give us a great advantage over any other demographic of voters because we have yet to fully develop our opinions on a broad spectrum of political subjects. This open way of thinking allows us to view candidates’ plans and policies with a high level of objectivity. Because our untainted political views, we therefore, are even better evaluators of potential presidents and their policies.
The young voters have a fresh set of issues to contemplate for the future of this country. Voters who have endured elections for the past thirty years or so already have their minds made up on what kind of policies they want to see run this country. It is the perfect time for the young people of this nation to step up and combat the issues which are plaguing us, by voting for the right candidate who will recognize our needs.
David Lewis '10
Wilkes University
Communication Studies/English
On the other hand, our mindsets give us a great advantage over any other demographic of voters because we have yet to fully develop our opinions on a broad spectrum of political subjects. This open way of thinking allows us to view candidates’ plans and policies with a high level of objectivity. Because our untainted political views, we therefore, are even better evaluators of potential presidents and their policies.
The young voters have a fresh set of issues to contemplate for the future of this country. Voters who have endured elections for the past thirty years or so already have their minds made up on what kind of policies they want to see run this country. It is the perfect time for the young people of this nation to step up and combat the issues which are plaguing us, by voting for the right candidate who will recognize our needs.
David Lewis '10
Wilkes University
Communication Studies/English
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Gendered Discourse and Clinton’s Unfortunate Use of Sarcasm in Recent Debates
I write this entry with some sadness. I am a 57 year-old woman who is trained in the practice and analysis of public debate. I also fully appreciate the historic nature of the 2008 presidential campaign, with Hillary Clinton winning a number of Democratic presidential primaries‑something no other woman has done. What makes me sad is witnessing the strategic demise of Senator Clinton’s presidential bid.
Anyone who uses sarcasm and ridicule in the political arena runs the risk of being seen as defensive, harsh and rude. Not surprisingly, when Senator Hillary Clinton used sarcasm in the two February debates against Senator Obama, her rhetorical tone became the meat of media stories and not the substance of her arguments.
In everyday conversation when a person uses ridicule about another’s character, onlookers jump to the defense of the person they see as being unfairly attacked. When Senator Hillary Clinton used sarcasm in the February debates against Senator Barack Obama, she cut away at her own lead, not his. These snide comments may have been intended to show strength; instead they made her appear petty. Senator Hillary Clinton must learn (or be reminded) that both sarcasm and ridicule, as rhetorical tactics in debates, have very sharp edges.
During the February 26th debate from Ohio, she also pushed back at the moderator when asked a tough lead question. She said she always got the tough questions first, and repeated her displeasure about the order of questioning. Most debaters would welcome the opportunity to get lead questions. That’s when she can define the key terms and frame a response to the question that casts the other candidate in the diminished role of a “Me, too” follow-up speaker. Senator Clinton has proven that she can handle tough questions and accusations. So, what was with the little fit about order of questioning? Again, pettiness made her appear defensive and sharp edged, rather than confident about her arguments.
Much has been written and said about her rhetorical “style” and gender in the 2008 campaign. Much will be written in the years ahead. As the sole woman running for a major party nomination, gender is an ever-present constraint for the Clinton campaign. But, constraints are wonderful rhetorical opportunities. For every instance of awkwardness, there is a chance to transform past practices into new traditions. Her closing statement in the Texas debate was wonderful. It was political rhetoric so well crafted that most people listening were moved by her words. In that closing, Senator Clinton seemed comfortable telling a life story that drew people to her as a candidate, as a leader, and as a woman.
Senator Clinton often refers to her 35 years of experience in positions that required advocating on behalf of others in some of the most demanding chambers imaginable. Throughout her career in public service, her rhetorical skills have been refined. She is smart, eloquent, analytical and capable of putting together an argument better than the other candidates. She is a varsity political debater. But underlying every campaign performance is the gender factor. How will SHE perform? How will SHE respond to tough questions and pressure? How will SHE manage her campaign? And, how will SHE convince the American public that she should be President of the U.S.?
She has said she is very mindful of being the sole woman in this presidential race. Yes, the Hillary Clinton campaign is historic because it is plausible. She is close enough to the Democratic nomination and possibly the Presidency that voters like me are sad to see her slipping into the “she ran a strong, but losing campaign” category. If there is another Clinton-Obama debate, I hope Senator Clinton shows up without the sharp edges.
Dr. Jane Elmes-Crahall
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Anyone who uses sarcasm and ridicule in the political arena runs the risk of being seen as defensive, harsh and rude. Not surprisingly, when Senator Hillary Clinton used sarcasm in the two February debates against Senator Obama, her rhetorical tone became the meat of media stories and not the substance of her arguments.
In everyday conversation when a person uses ridicule about another’s character, onlookers jump to the defense of the person they see as being unfairly attacked. When Senator Hillary Clinton used sarcasm in the February debates against Senator Barack Obama, she cut away at her own lead, not his. These snide comments may have been intended to show strength; instead they made her appear petty. Senator Hillary Clinton must learn (or be reminded) that both sarcasm and ridicule, as rhetorical tactics in debates, have very sharp edges.
During the February 26th debate from Ohio, she also pushed back at the moderator when asked a tough lead question. She said she always got the tough questions first, and repeated her displeasure about the order of questioning. Most debaters would welcome the opportunity to get lead questions. That’s when she can define the key terms and frame a response to the question that casts the other candidate in the diminished role of a “Me, too” follow-up speaker. Senator Clinton has proven that she can handle tough questions and accusations. So, what was with the little fit about order of questioning? Again, pettiness made her appear defensive and sharp edged, rather than confident about her arguments.
Much has been written and said about her rhetorical “style” and gender in the 2008 campaign. Much will be written in the years ahead. As the sole woman running for a major party nomination, gender is an ever-present constraint for the Clinton campaign. But, constraints are wonderful rhetorical opportunities. For every instance of awkwardness, there is a chance to transform past practices into new traditions. Her closing statement in the Texas debate was wonderful. It was political rhetoric so well crafted that most people listening were moved by her words. In that closing, Senator Clinton seemed comfortable telling a life story that drew people to her as a candidate, as a leader, and as a woman.
Senator Clinton often refers to her 35 years of experience in positions that required advocating on behalf of others in some of the most demanding chambers imaginable. Throughout her career in public service, her rhetorical skills have been refined. She is smart, eloquent, analytical and capable of putting together an argument better than the other candidates. She is a varsity political debater. But underlying every campaign performance is the gender factor. How will SHE perform? How will SHE respond to tough questions and pressure? How will SHE manage her campaign? And, how will SHE convince the American public that she should be President of the U.S.?
She has said she is very mindful of being the sole woman in this presidential race. Yes, the Hillary Clinton campaign is historic because it is plausible. She is close enough to the Democratic nomination and possibly the Presidency that voters like me are sad to see her slipping into the “she ran a strong, but losing campaign” category. If there is another Clinton-Obama debate, I hope Senator Clinton shows up without the sharp edges.
Dr. Jane Elmes-Crahall
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Senators Clinton and Obama Get High Marks for Policies on HIV/AIDS; Republicans Offer Very Little
The War in Iraq, the environment, the economy, and health care are all controversial issues the candidates in the 2008 presidential election are addressing. Thousands have died in Iraq, the economy is steadily declining, and the number of people without health care in this country is staggering. While these are major problems the country faces, these numbers pale in comparison to those affected and infected by the AIDS virus.
After looking at the top two Democratic and top two Republican candidates I was shocked to find out that only the two Democratic candidates have made a substantial effort in the fight against AIDS. Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama are the only two to mention AIDS as one of their issues on their campaign websites. Both Clinton and Obama should be praised for their efforts in the fight against AIDS.
In 2006, Clinton moved to provide better funding for the Ryan White Care Act, which helps lower class families pay for medical care. She also recognized that young people (who are one of the most at risk groups to becoming infected) need to get access to scientific information about HIV and the prevention of AIDS. This would also include educating those people already infected so they can learn how to prevent infecting others. Clinton also stresses the need for testing and lessening the stigma young people have associated with getting tested.
In a statement made at the U.N. Meeting on AIDS, Clinton mentioned her concerns about the global spread of AIDS and the lack of AIDS education. According to the U.N. children in low to middle income countries have little to no knowledge about how to prevent the spread of HIV. She also expressed her concerns on the lack of medical care in these countries, especially dealing with pregnant women who would benefit from treatments that could limit mother-to child transmission.
At the June 2007 debate at Howard University, Clinton expressed her outrage with the White House’s response to the increase in HIV cases in Black Americans, saying. “If HIV/AIDS were the leading cause of death of White women between the ages of 25-34, there would be an outraged outcry in this country.”
Senator Obama has also taken many steps in the fight against AIDS. He has traveled to Kenya to take a public HIV test to encourage testing and to help clear up any negative stereotypes that might linger about testing. He has also pushed for better prevention methods in the global fight against AIDS, which include condom distribution and the introduction of the Microbiade Development Act, which will be used to produce and develop products to help women battle HIV and AIDS.
At the Howard University debate in June, Obama pushed for greater AIDS education for young people saying, “We don’t talk about it in the schools. Sometimes we don’t talk about it in the churches.”
John McCain really surprised me by his lack of knowledge about anything dealing with AIDS. In March 2007, when asked by a reporter what he thought about using taxpayer money to distribute condoms in Africa to help fight HIV, McCain responded by saying he didn’t know the subject well. He also added that he relied on the advice of Senator Tom Coburn, a physician and Republican from Oklahoma. He then went on to say, “I haven’t thought about it. Before I give you an answer, let me think about it. Let me think about it a little bit, because I never got a question about it before. I don’t know if I would use the taxpayer’s money for it.”
In late 2007, Mike Huckabee refused to retract statements he made in 1992 about quarantining AIDS patients to prevent the spread of the disease. He also said “It is the first time in the history of civilization in which the carriers of a genuine plague have not been isolated from the general population, and in which this deadly disease for which there is no cure is being treated as a civil rights issue instead of the true health crises it represents.” Apparently Governor Huckabee failed to get the message that health officials have been saying for years— casual contact is not a way AIDS could be spread.
After carefully examining the top four candidates in this election I would continue to praise Senators Clinton and Obama for not only their efforts in raising awareness and their ideas for combating this deadly disease both in the United States and globally. As for the two Republican candidates, they seem to act as if AIDS isn’t one of the major crises we face in this world. Their lack of knowledge and in the case of Huckabee, compassion, is alarming. How can you make a decision on an issue if you’re not informed on it? How can you be a successful leader if you rely on someone else’s opinions when making decisions on an issue?
Jamie Gibson '08Wilkes University
Communication Studies
Thursday, February 21, 2008
To My Students Who Asked, Why Should I Vote?
It’s a fair question. And, it is a very timely one. My answer will be a direct one, no begging this question.
It is a matter of empowerment, as well as collective power. Empowerment means giving individuals the tools needed to have a positive affect in society. Empowerment can also be cumulative. When one individual feels certain about their knowledge, abilities or actions their behavior spills over and influences others. Voting will empower you, and have a cumulative affect on all of the people around you. But just deciding to register to vote involves some education and analysis. I teach, so I’m all in favor of you educating yourself before taking action.
First, begin following the 2008 campaigns at the national, state and local levels. While the presidential campaigns may capture your interest, you may have more direct political power at the local level. More than any previous generation, you can educate yourself about political campaigns using online social media or traditional media. And, most importantly, you can be part of what is being called the first presidential election that features citizen-generated content. Voter registrations are becoming the best attended events—complete with music— on many college campuses. Why? Because in this election, young voters care and are actively participating. Let your passion about events and problems in society guide you. If you care very deeply about the War in Iraq, saving the environment, making college more affordable, or reforming immigration you can easily find out where the candidates stand on these issues and comment on their web sites or You Tube. And, you can discuss it with your friends. Millions of 18-24 year olds have already voted in the 2008 election and they have made a difference in the outcome and momentum of various campaigns. They can be proud of their role in shaping this election. And, when they vote in November they will be helping shape the future of the nation. When votes become a collective, they can be very powerful.
While the Pennsylvania primary isn’t until April 22, our voters could still play a significant role in determining who the presidential nominees will be. Consider the fact that there are over 1 million state residents in the 18-24 age bracket. Do you realize how much power over 1 million voters could have in the primary?
Sometimes I am asked if one vote matters. The greatest impact of voting may be at the local levels. In the mid-1990’s I had the privilege of serving on the Luzerne County’s Election Board. If you don’t think that one vote matters, consider that we had to toss a coin to settle several local elections—one for the City’s school board. That is a fairly common scenario across the country—a single vote determining the outcome of an election. Direct decision-making at the local level or representative decision-making in a presidential election—democracy only works when you vote.
I know that you have strong, very perceptive opinions on a lot of issues. And, I know you speak up. If you do not vote you will have no voice in the national conversation about who should govern, no voice to advocate for change, no voice to question and probe policy, and no voice to complain when things do not go the way you think they should. Here is your chance to bring your distinctive voice to the 2008 election. Join with millions of other young voters and send a really clear message about how this nation should be governed.
One final thought. Does it concern you that in only 15 years your generation will be leading this nation? Empower yourself. Get ready to lead and vote.
Dr. Jane Elmes-Crahall
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
It is a matter of empowerment, as well as collective power. Empowerment means giving individuals the tools needed to have a positive affect in society. Empowerment can also be cumulative. When one individual feels certain about their knowledge, abilities or actions their behavior spills over and influences others. Voting will empower you, and have a cumulative affect on all of the people around you. But just deciding to register to vote involves some education and analysis. I teach, so I’m all in favor of you educating yourself before taking action.
First, begin following the 2008 campaigns at the national, state and local levels. While the presidential campaigns may capture your interest, you may have more direct political power at the local level. More than any previous generation, you can educate yourself about political campaigns using online social media or traditional media. And, most importantly, you can be part of what is being called the first presidential election that features citizen-generated content. Voter registrations are becoming the best attended events—complete with music— on many college campuses. Why? Because in this election, young voters care and are actively participating. Let your passion about events and problems in society guide you. If you care very deeply about the War in Iraq, saving the environment, making college more affordable, or reforming immigration you can easily find out where the candidates stand on these issues and comment on their web sites or You Tube. And, you can discuss it with your friends. Millions of 18-24 year olds have already voted in the 2008 election and they have made a difference in the outcome and momentum of various campaigns. They can be proud of their role in shaping this election. And, when they vote in November they will be helping shape the future of the nation. When votes become a collective, they can be very powerful.
While the Pennsylvania primary isn’t until April 22, our voters could still play a significant role in determining who the presidential nominees will be. Consider the fact that there are over 1 million state residents in the 18-24 age bracket. Do you realize how much power over 1 million voters could have in the primary?
Sometimes I am asked if one vote matters. The greatest impact of voting may be at the local levels. In the mid-1990’s I had the privilege of serving on the Luzerne County’s Election Board. If you don’t think that one vote matters, consider that we had to toss a coin to settle several local elections—one for the City’s school board. That is a fairly common scenario across the country—a single vote determining the outcome of an election. Direct decision-making at the local level or representative decision-making in a presidential election—democracy only works when you vote.
I know that you have strong, very perceptive opinions on a lot of issues. And, I know you speak up. If you do not vote you will have no voice in the national conversation about who should govern, no voice to advocate for change, no voice to question and probe policy, and no voice to complain when things do not go the way you think they should. Here is your chance to bring your distinctive voice to the 2008 election. Join with millions of other young voters and send a really clear message about how this nation should be governed.
One final thought. Does it concern you that in only 15 years your generation will be leading this nation? Empower yourself. Get ready to lead and vote.
Dr. Jane Elmes-Crahall
Wilkes University
Communication Studies
My Experience as a First Time Voter
The American electorate is now one person stronger. Consider me part of the “youth-quake”, rocking the 2008 Campaign. I am a first time voter. There, I said it. But getting to this point required introspection. I had to ask questions and research in order to choose which party I wanted to register as.
Where can I pick up a registration form? How do I know which Party to be in? Which candidate am I most likely to vote for? These are just a few of the many questions I asked myself when deciding to register to vote for the first time. I felt overwhelmed with all the questions I had in my head about the registering process.
I decided to vote this year because it is the first time in my life I am following the presidential campaign. I am attending a Controlling Spin class which focuses on politics and the media. This sparked my interest in our nation’s government and the president’s role in all of it. I became more aware of my country in less than two months than I have in the past nineteen years.
As a first time voter, I am expecting to face a few challenges of my own. I have to catch up on the key issues of our country’s concern and create my own opinions about them. After creating my own opinions, which I’m still in the process of doing, I will then explore the candidates’ opinions and their plans of action to enhance our nation.
Another challenge I had to face when registering to vote for the first time was deciding on which Party to choose. I consider myself an Independent, but I really want to vote in the Pennsylvania Primary, so I had to select a Party. I called my Dad because I was having trouble deciding. He is a registered Republican and my Mom is a registered Independent. I never considered myself a hardcore liberal or a hardcore conservative, so I chose the one I felt I best fit under.
As a first time voter, I am excited to be a part of something much larger than I am used to. I feel that I can make a difference in the world by being able to follow politics and voice my opinions about issues. Furthermore, I can influence who will be the next president, which can change America. Although it is a small difference, it will mean something for future generations.
Amy Fusco '10
Wilkes University
Communications Studies
Where can I pick up a registration form? How do I know which Party to be in? Which candidate am I most likely to vote for? These are just a few of the many questions I asked myself when deciding to register to vote for the first time. I felt overwhelmed with all the questions I had in my head about the registering process.
I decided to vote this year because it is the first time in my life I am following the presidential campaign. I am attending a Controlling Spin class which focuses on politics and the media. This sparked my interest in our nation’s government and the president’s role in all of it. I became more aware of my country in less than two months than I have in the past nineteen years.
As a first time voter, I am expecting to face a few challenges of my own. I have to catch up on the key issues of our country’s concern and create my own opinions about them. After creating my own opinions, which I’m still in the process of doing, I will then explore the candidates’ opinions and their plans of action to enhance our nation.
Another challenge I had to face when registering to vote for the first time was deciding on which Party to choose. I consider myself an Independent, but I really want to vote in the Pennsylvania Primary, so I had to select a Party. I called my Dad because I was having trouble deciding. He is a registered Republican and my Mom is a registered Independent. I never considered myself a hardcore liberal or a hardcore conservative, so I chose the one I felt I best fit under.
As a first time voter, I am excited to be a part of something much larger than I am used to. I feel that I can make a difference in the world by being able to follow politics and voice my opinions about issues. Furthermore, I can influence who will be the next president, which can change America. Although it is a small difference, it will mean something for future generations.
Amy Fusco '10
Wilkes University
Communications Studies
Help for Veterans of Iraqi War
I’m pretty sure if you’re the typical movie going American citizen, you have seen the award winning film, Forrest Gump. Lieutenant Dan, an unforgettable character, gets wounded from a battle deep within the jungles of Vietnam. Eventually it resulted in the loss of his legs. Over the course of the movie’s 142 minutes you saw the dramatic rise and fall of this character as he accepted and then refused a fate he didn’t deserve. What’s particularly sad is that Lt. Dan was a foreshadowing of a harsh reality facing returning troops from Iraq.
More and more, I hear stories of young adults around my age, 22, returning home from Iraq without limbs, with dependencies, suffering from PTS and the worst fate—death. We live in a country that claims to be #1, but we haven’t accepted responsibility for providing help to our modern day veterans.
In 2005, The Washington Post ran an article about a wounded veteran, Robert Loria, who returned from Iraq to find out that the government turned its back on him.
Loria had his hand blown off and could not walk as well. As pain increased significantly throughout his body the last thing that entered his mind was him owing money to the U.S. Army. He was hit with a $6,200 debt after putting his life on the line that would eventually alter his bodily functions forever. When The Washington Post looked into this situation, they found 331 soldiers also dealt with this problem. When military authority higher-ups were questioned, the only response they gave was a computer malfunction was messing up the debts (George, A01).
Along with financial problems and physical complications that arise from this war, some of the worse are long term psychological effects that remain untreated. Since the Vietnam conflict, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) has been a main concern and those who suffer from PTSD experience anxiety, depression, sleeplessness, flashbacks, wariness, and in extreme cases, suicide. One of these extreme cases is Marine Lance Cpl. James Jenkins.
Jenkins was a Marine who survived a fifty-five hour battle with the Mahdi militia in Najaf which would eventually mess him up. After returning home he couldn’t sleep for some time because of the hyper sensitive activity of the war and took up gambling which turned into a major problem and even bigger debts. Soon after Jenkins couldn’t function and would eventually take his life. The reason behind this terrible incident was the lack of medical assistance with PTSD (Dobie).
Everyday the news is awash with political jargon and pseudo promises of a better future for America. We’ve heard “change” and “hope” repeated like an old style vinyl record that’s been overplayed too many times. Yet one topic that hasn’t been touched upon enough in presidential debates is treatment of returning veterans. Why is it that these soldiers who are putting there lives on the line for a better world are being pushed aside?
Shouldn’t the current administration be concerned about offering assistance to men and women, to mothers and fathers, and most of all, to these kids? Maybe they should make sure that all returning veterans get the assistance they need whether it is mental, physical or financial.
Citations:
St. George, Donna. “For Injured U.S. Troops, ‘Financial Friendly Fire’.
Washington Post 14 Oct. 20005:A01.
Dobie, Kathy. “Denial in the Corps.” The Nation. 2008. Truthout Issues. 18 Feb. 2008
Matthew Gobbler '08
Wilkes University
Communications Studies
More and more, I hear stories of young adults around my age, 22, returning home from Iraq without limbs, with dependencies, suffering from PTS and the worst fate—death. We live in a country that claims to be #1, but we haven’t accepted responsibility for providing help to our modern day veterans.
In 2005, The Washington Post ran an article about a wounded veteran, Robert Loria, who returned from Iraq to find out that the government turned its back on him.
Loria had his hand blown off and could not walk as well. As pain increased significantly throughout his body the last thing that entered his mind was him owing money to the U.S. Army. He was hit with a $6,200 debt after putting his life on the line that would eventually alter his bodily functions forever. When The Washington Post looked into this situation, they found 331 soldiers also dealt with this problem. When military authority higher-ups were questioned, the only response they gave was a computer malfunction was messing up the debts (George, A01).
Along with financial problems and physical complications that arise from this war, some of the worse are long term psychological effects that remain untreated. Since the Vietnam conflict, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) has been a main concern and those who suffer from PTSD experience anxiety, depression, sleeplessness, flashbacks, wariness, and in extreme cases, suicide. One of these extreme cases is Marine Lance Cpl. James Jenkins.
Jenkins was a Marine who survived a fifty-five hour battle with the Mahdi militia in Najaf which would eventually mess him up. After returning home he couldn’t sleep for some time because of the hyper sensitive activity of the war and took up gambling which turned into a major problem and even bigger debts. Soon after Jenkins couldn’t function and would eventually take his life. The reason behind this terrible incident was the lack of medical assistance with PTSD (Dobie).
Everyday the news is awash with political jargon and pseudo promises of a better future for America. We’ve heard “change” and “hope” repeated like an old style vinyl record that’s been overplayed too many times. Yet one topic that hasn’t been touched upon enough in presidential debates is treatment of returning veterans. Why is it that these soldiers who are putting there lives on the line for a better world are being pushed aside?
Shouldn’t the current administration be concerned about offering assistance to men and women, to mothers and fathers, and most of all, to these kids? Maybe they should make sure that all returning veterans get the assistance they need whether it is mental, physical or financial.
Citations:
St. George, Donna. “For Injured U.S. Troops, ‘Financial Friendly Fire’.
Washington Post 14 Oct. 20005:A01.
Dobie, Kathy. “Denial in the Corps.” The Nation. 2008. Truthout Issues. 18 Feb. 2008
Matthew Gobbler '08
Wilkes University
Communications Studies
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)