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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 '08
Wilkes University
Communication Studies