GOP identity crisis: Hoffman vs Scozzavava

Earlier today, Dede Scozzafava, the GOP candidate running in New York's District 23 special election next week, abruptly withdrew her candidacy for the hotly contested House Seat. Her decision to drop out was entirely unsurprising in light of the mass revolt of Party support over the past few weeks.

The moderate Republican was initially thought of as the only viable conservative candidate with a chance of winning. The NRCC's candidate of choice set off a storm of displeasure among certain party members setting the stage for a greater intra-party battle.

The GOP has been struggling with identity issues ever since the November elections. Almost a year later and the Party still remains a fractured mess. Ultimately, the crux of the conflict comes down to a question of purity. On one side of the issue are the uber-conservative members who blame all previous problems on the Party's straying from their core principles. On the other side of the debate are those who believe that the path to future prosperity lies in enlarging the party's appeal.

It's disheartening to see moderates, such as Scozzafava being pushed out as "not right enough" for a vocal radical base who represent views far removed from the majority of Americans.



The NY election has become the latest battleground in the war over the GOP's future direction.

Obama vs Fox News and week of nonstop FNN

The Obama administrations ongoing spat with popular conservative news outlet, Fox News, shows no sign of abating any time soon. At least, that was the general impression of events according to the outcome of a recent meeting between Obama advisor David Axelrod and Fox News President Roger Ailes.

The long-brewing conflict has been steadily rising in intensity over the last few months as party relations continue to sour. At the heart of the disagreement is the Obama camp's claim that Fox News has been actively spreading misinformation as the network solidified its position as the voice of the opposition. This represents a marked difference from merely reporting the news through a conservative ideological lens. The accusation strikes to the core of Fox News' identity as a source of genuine journalism.

The administration's response to these assertions has been to extend the "proverbial" cold shoulder to the network. Administration officials have shown little hesitation expressing their criticisms in an open forum. In addition, the President recently opted out of an appearance on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace. It's almost impossible to ascertain the direct consequences of these actions considering the network's preexisting penchant for highly critical Presidential coverage.

Having spent barely any time tuning into the channel myself, I'm not really sure where the truth lies. So before making any judgments on the matter, I've decided take this opportunity to better acquaint myself with the conservative behemoth that is Fox News. Over the next week I'll tune into the network every chance I can. This way I can finally gain some much needed context on the topic media bias. Whatever mysterious knowledge I glean during this time, be it inspiring revelations of truth or dark visions of insanity, will be posted to my blog.

Sorry Obama, No Olympics for YOU!

Yesterday, the International Olympic Committee chose Rio de Janeiro, Brazil as the site of the 2016 Olympic games. The annual contest for Olympic hosting duties usually falls pretty far below my radar this changed however, after the President decided to intervene personally and champion his hometown of Chicago for 2016 games.

The issue came to a speedy resolution after Chicago was disqualified during the first round of voting. The embarrassing defeat could have easily been confined solely to the city of Chicago, but thanks to his own efforts Obama now shares in the loss of face. By petitioning the Olympic committee in person, Obama was in effect, placing the outcome on his own shoulders.

The defeat made Obama, and by relation the office of the president, appear weak both at home and abroad. It's hard to justify such a risk for the minimal benefit of securing the Olympics for America yet again. This outcome only feeds the public's perception of an aloof and unconcerned President. And in today's 24/7 media saturated environment, the appearance of propriety is paramount to successfully implementing one's agenda.

It was unwise for the President to risk the negative publicity when there are so many other serious problems jockeying for his attention. The multitude of crises plaguing our nation allow the President little latitude for time spent on less severe distractions. Whether this is fair to the President or not is beside the point, this is the reality of the moment and not even Obama can afford to ignore it.

Although in this instance my criticism is focused on the President, I feel just as much disdain, if not more so, for the all the celebratory remarks right-wing commentators immediately flooded the airwaves with. It's deeply troubling to see members of the opposition explode into fits of ecstasy the instant Obama suffers any kind of setback. The difference, and reasoning behind this entry's main topic, is simply a matter of expectations. I expect this behavior from the right-wing pundits, but Obama's behavior I hold to a higher standard. It's rare to see the President miscalculate events to such a degree. This is not to say his conduct so far has been flawless, but only that his mistakes of the past are, more often the not, the result of a calculated risk in pursuit of a worthy reward. At least this is the impression I've gotten of Obama's behavior up to this point.

The President has set out on an ambitious agenda with far-reaching implications for the future of our country. Seeing a possible reversal of political fortunes and backed up by an army of angry protesters, the opposition is doing whatever they can to torpedo any proposed legislation. With stakes this high even the the most minute of misjudgments will ricochet across the media landscape in an eye-blink and potentially tip the scales irrevocably in the direction of failure.

Prospects for a public option grow dimmer

Earlier today, an important Senate committee dealt proponents of the public health care option a stinging setback. The Senate Finance Committee voted against including a government funded plan in the eventual bill.

The fight for such an option has become a pivotal battle ground in the fight for health care reform. I've yet to make up my own mind on the merits of a public option. Sifting through the lies, exaggerations and misinformation has become an almost herculean task.

My support of health insurance reform is rooted, not in any altruistic desire to cover the uninsured, but in the knowledge that our current system is completely unsustainable. While wages have remained virtually the same over the last ten years, insurance premiums have risen like clockwork. Consequently, profits for the insurance industry have risen an astounding 450% over the same period of time.

While resolute in my support for broad industry reforms, I remain unconvinced of the necessity of a heavily subsided government option. I am, however, open to the possibility of changing my mind. There may be valid reasons for including a public option and even if not, I'd still like to hear the other side of the argument. I feel nothing but disdain for those willing to take to the streets in opposition to something they know little about.

Let's put the outrage on hold until all the facts are known, shall we?

A delayed reaction to Wilson-gate is better than none at all

Last week, the mass media's endless appetite for sensationalism was again satisfied thanks to South Carolina's own Joe Wilson. Representative Wilson's timely interjection into the President's address gave news outlets a perfect excuse to ignore the very real (and evidently uninteresting) issue at stake and instead focus on the kind of politically fueled controversy American's love to watch.

We know now, thanks to the public statement he released shortly after the fact, that Rep. Wilson regrets his actions and that he's learned a valuable lesson in humility. Besides, it was never his intention to rudely interrupt the President, he just momentarily lost control of himself because he cares so very much.

Despite his public admission of regret, there's no doubt that Wilson isn't a little pleased with the way events have panned out. What politician wouldn't welcome the national attention and public outpouring of support? He's a hero for all the Americans who share in his vehement disdain for the President and these supporters have flooded his campaign with cash.

Ok, I admit it. I'm more than a little skeptical of Wilson's claim that his outburst was an entirely spontaneous reaction. It's unfathomable to me that a grown man, an elected official, who is listening along all of Congress to a Presidential address would just unthinkingly blurt the first thing that popped into his brain, no matter how passionately his feelings on the subject may be.

It's just too difficult to believe that an elected official could have such little control over his own actions in public. Wilson's outburst makes far more sense as the calculated gambit of an ambitiously clever politician. Many politicians, from both sides of the aisle, have been co-opting the health care debate as a means of furthering their own selfish interests, whats one more name in the pile?

Lacking any other reasonable explanation, we're left to conclude one of two things. Joe Wilson, Representative of the great state of South Carolina, is either another in the long line of opportunistic politicians more than willing to trade on populist anger for their own advancement, or a man possessed of a frighteningly low level of self-control has somehow become a powerful state official.

If anyone reading this entry has a more reasonable explanation, please contribute your thoughts. I'm curious to hear a less cynical observation.

Latest controversy: Obama's school speech

In the minds some, Obama's recent back to school speech was actually part of a secret plan to indoctrinate the country's youth. Many conservative parents are convinced that the President was using this platform as a means of pushing partisan politics to their kids.

Has the political scene in America devolved to such an extent that the President can't even speak in front of children without being accused of some ulterior motive? Unfortunately, this appears to be the case.

I've always believed that one of the many roles one assumes as President is to serve as a source of inspiration for future generations. As far as I can see, the President was doing just that, giving children someone to look up to. There's no evidence to suggest that his true purpose was some kind of liberal brainwashing. Obama should be applauded, not demonized, for his efforts to engage the youth of America in a meaningful manner.

Also discouraging is the method with which the administration has chosen to respond to these baseless accusations. Instead of acting with the righteous outrage such an absurd claim deserves, the administration has tried to assuage the people behind it.

Immediately wilting in the face of public opposition has traditionally been a weakness of the Democratic Party. Their propensity for acting defensive only lends credence, regardless of actual merit, to their opponents. Members of the opposition are well aware of this trait and have zero qualms using it to their own advantage.

Acting before a crisis

Does America possess the capacity to act before a crisis occurs? The current debate over health care reform has strong implications regarding whether or not we as a nation can offset a problem before disaster strikes.

When confronted with a crisis, America is quick to put aside political differences/considerations in favor of the common good. Unfortunately, such cooperation is short lived. The status quo of extreme partisanship is quick to reassert itself. The mindset on capitol hill seems to favor the notion that what’s good for me (or my party) is what’s good for America. And if one believes that, then it would mean that what’s bad for me (or my party) is bad for America.

Such beliefs are making it practically impossible to hold a serious debate on the merits of health care. Instead, one party seems hellbent on derailing any progress so that they may reap the rewards of failure. Even worse is the method with which they have chosen to carry out their plans, by spreading lies and blatant exaggerations.

Such fear-mongering has whipped a certain segment of the population into apoplexies of rage at the thought of reform. So far, this strategy appears be working as the media, smelling blood, zeroes in on instances of public outrage.

It’s impossible to hold an intelligent debate, unfortunately, when one side has zero inclination to participate in a meaningful capacity. In fact that’s the exact opposite of what certain politicians want. If both sides were to discuss the issue civilly, it’s possible they could come to agreement, and if that happened all the people who’ve placed their political future on failure would look awfully cynical.