While in a conversation about being a conservative, a fellow conservative and I were talking about where we stood on policies. As we were comparing notes, I realized that she was conservative in finances alone--not caring about the positions that are social in nature, but rather how our money is being spent.
While I care immensely about where our money is going and how to shovel our way out of debt and dependence on other countries, we have to stand strong on the values and issues that fight for others. If we neglect to fight for unborn children in favor of saving a dollar or two (which I definitely want to do!), we are just as dense as those who are recklessly spending the money that we are concerned about to begin with. If we divide as a party on these issues, then we as a group lose our focus and do not have the power to plunge forward straight ahead.
We have to protect our mission as an entire package or risk tearing our entire party apart.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
2010 Elections: Do We Have a Chance?
Each week the media is shifting sides to report how well or how poorly the Republicans are doing in the polls for the 2010 elections. Some pollsters are even predicting the 2012 elections for the presidency depending on this information. Whether this data is flawed or trustworthy is irrelevant to the job that Republicans need to be doing. Our message must:
Be Consistent
Be Creative in Delivery
Be Confident
If we falter on any of these points, our message will be watered down and we risk our chances of obtaining those seats in play that would give us a stronger push in 2012.
Do we actually have a chance? Of this, I am confident.
Be Consistent
Be Creative in Delivery
Be Confident
If we falter on any of these points, our message will be watered down and we risk our chances of obtaining those seats in play that would give us a stronger push in 2012.
Do we actually have a chance? Of this, I am confident.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Is the Pendulum Swinging Back?
With the elections for this year coming to a close, we can be thankful that Republicans had two key victories--Virginia and New Jersey. These key swing states are coming back toward the conservative side of things in light of promises that have not been kept by the current administration. It may not even be that the promises were broken, more so that the promises made last year are not happening in the timetable that Independent voters would like.
Congratulations, McDonnell and Christie!
Congratulations, McDonnell and Christie!
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Implications of the Lost Olympic Bid and the Reason for the Silence
What can we learn from this past week's news concerning the highly promoted trip to Germany in hopes to win the Olympic bid for the 2016 Olympics to be in Chicago? PLENTY--and most of what we learn is from our national leader and the position of our country.
1.) Obama does not hold the national appeal as we may believe! Globally, his bargaining power does not reach as high as other people who tried to promote him in the past seem to think as others didn't feel drawn to his swagger as we may have believed. Perhaps they only thought that he was there to apologize and didn't realize he was actually there to have the Olympics in the U.S.
2.) Obama felt that it was more important to discuss the Olympics and where such events should be rather than deal with our other issues (the ones he was hired to cover). Maybe he just really wanted to go to Germany with his wife. I mean, after all, they've already vacationed in Hawaii, NYC, and other getaways that would offer him relaxation from his tough position in the White House.
3.) Obama assumes that he will be in office during the 2016 Olympics, and this will be his last farewell.
I know that I have been harsh on our leader in this post, and I still intend to keep my promise to respect him (and question) as our leader. He has caused some uproars and given many reason to raise eyebrows, but I will still not slaughter him, and I will make sure that I keep my wicked comments to myself... which is the reason for my silence.
I have taken an extensive sabbatical from HMD simply because I didn't have anything positive to say. I know that I had many opportunities to discuss key political events this summer such as Van Johnson, death of Ted Kennedy, and even the resignation of Sarah Palin. I still may backtrack and pop in a post about the monumental events that transpired (I will be speaking on the Palin resignation shortly), but during the past few months I couldn't focus on political issues because I had to be taking action rather than ranting.
I have now made a vow that I will be proactive in the whole process. I have seen what some people who are on the conservative side have done to our side, and the smearing that they have done to people has given me reason to not want to stand with them. Therefore, I will be different during this whole process, and stick to my motto to HOPE TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
1.) Obama does not hold the national appeal as we may believe! Globally, his bargaining power does not reach as high as other people who tried to promote him in the past seem to think as others didn't feel drawn to his swagger as we may have believed. Perhaps they only thought that he was there to apologize and didn't realize he was actually there to have the Olympics in the U.S.
2.) Obama felt that it was more important to discuss the Olympics and where such events should be rather than deal with our other issues (the ones he was hired to cover). Maybe he just really wanted to go to Germany with his wife. I mean, after all, they've already vacationed in Hawaii, NYC, and other getaways that would offer him relaxation from his tough position in the White House.
3.) Obama assumes that he will be in office during the 2016 Olympics, and this will be his last farewell.
I know that I have been harsh on our leader in this post, and I still intend to keep my promise to respect him (and question) as our leader. He has caused some uproars and given many reason to raise eyebrows, but I will still not slaughter him, and I will make sure that I keep my wicked comments to myself... which is the reason for my silence.
I have taken an extensive sabbatical from HMD simply because I didn't have anything positive to say. I know that I had many opportunities to discuss key political events this summer such as Van Johnson, death of Ted Kennedy, and even the resignation of Sarah Palin. I still may backtrack and pop in a post about the monumental events that transpired (I will be speaking on the Palin resignation shortly), but during the past few months I couldn't focus on political issues because I had to be taking action rather than ranting.
I have now made a vow that I will be proactive in the whole process. I have seen what some people who are on the conservative side have done to our side, and the smearing that they have done to people has given me reason to not want to stand with them. Therefore, I will be different during this whole process, and stick to my motto to HOPE TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Obama's First 100 Days
There have been many events that have culminated to this day, but the progress that has been made has brought rise to concern for Republicans. At this moment, Obama is speaking to the nation about his performance, speaking also about the current conditions that America face. While I am grateful for the mediums that we have in which to communicate, I want to know that I am getting the truth. I do not want to hear what he is saying in an attempt to hide the bills being passed, actions being wrought, and apologies made that go against the foundations in which the Republican party were built.
I know what I think about Obama's first 100 days, I don't need him deciding for me.
I know what I think about Obama's first 100 days, I don't need him deciding for me.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Another One Bites the Dust
Pennsylvania senator (aka battleground state senator), Arlen Specter, has officially registered democrat facing the "right wing conservatism" that the Republican party has become. Should we as Republicans be upset, defeated, or defensive about this decision?
I have to vote that the decision is his choice. This news is not shocking due to his years of liberal leaning, but I will not infringe on anyone else's right to choose how a person believes... especially when his voting record has proven him to be democratic in the first place.
I am, however, a bit disappointed with President Obama's response to Specter's decision, basically welcoming him to the Democratic side. Specter's decision was finalized when Obama promised to support him in 2012. While Barack Obama is a democrat, he is also the president. ONE nation. ONE people. While I recognize that he has his own right to take a particular stance on issues, he is acting in the favor of the entire nation. President Obama has verbalized his desire to bring together party lines, but his actions are not matching up with his message.
True, the Republicans are down one more member of the team, but it shouldn't make our fight weaken, or our message get quieter.
Maybe we just have to determine what that message is.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Should businesses be involved in politics?
Businesses have many reasons in which they ought to be involved and concerned with the political process. Without the American business, the country could not survive on its investments and loans from other countries. Each member of the American business is a part of the American community and has a vote in the affairs of the culture. Participating in the political affairs of the population is beneficial to both the business and the society, and an American right for the individuals in the business. Businesses ought to get involved in the political process because the decisions made by political endeavors affect the business.
Politics is a demand on a business that has high stakes in the changes in the economy. Politicians promise new rules and regulations for a better future with many of the campaign pledges challenging how a company does business (Lawrence, Weber, & Post, 2008). This was seen in the past elections as politicians promised to take charge of Wall Street and other institutions that have reaped benefits in a slumping economy. People became disgruntled with the businesses, the companies were awarded forms of bailout packages and tax breaks, and the government felt obligated to assist the businesses in hopes to keep the economy afloat. The failure of key businesses will cause the economy to falter even further, and people will look to the government for assistance (Phelps, Parsons, Ballas, Dowling, 2006). Businesses must be involved in political situations to voice their opinion about current issues that will affect the business in the future.
Although some businesses are not involved in political acts, politicians and government are actively involved in business affairs. Keeping track of trends and following successful businesses is a common practice for politicians, as it gives politicians an advantage in reaching out to the community and evaluating the economy (Fenwick & Elcock, 2004). Politicians aim to make the product a success for both groups, enhancing the functions of the community and outlying businesses while gaining support for specific political efforts.
Participating in political functions is feasible through the work of lobbyists and other professionals who act on behalf of the business, ensuring that the company has met all of their needs and made adequate contacts for the business (Lawrence, Weber, & Post, 2008). Open communication about this process is mandatory and strict rules apply to those participating in lobbyist positions. Although rules and regulations are made to prevent fraud, lobbyists are fundamental to the business’ operations. Lobbyists are also involved in the political aspect of the business, usually understanding and relaying information that stands for the company in the government (Phelps, Parsons, Ballas, Dowling, 2006). The lobbyist is the voice of the business in politics, and critical to the business’ success in politics.
While businesses must be involved in political processes, politicians must be involved in businesses because of the business’s culmination of private citizens within the corporation. Each individual that is involved in the company has a vote that will add or detract from the politician’s success. Showing interest in, not only the company but also the community allows the politician to gain support from those in the company (Fenwick & Elock, 2004). This could be seen in a governor joining in at a celebration at a local supermarket, or a mayoral nominee holding a rally in a parking lot of a strip mall. Showing support of the community is a method that many politicians use to gain support from local voters.
A business has too much at stake to stay out of the way of politics. Stakeholders, stockholders, and forms of management all benefit from allowing the company to get involved in politics. Companies that become involved in political endeavors are exercising their American freedoms. Supporting political enterprises will make a stronger company, and allow those involved with the company to know that their rights are being fought for and protected.
References available upon request.
Politics is a demand on a business that has high stakes in the changes in the economy. Politicians promise new rules and regulations for a better future with many of the campaign pledges challenging how a company does business (Lawrence, Weber, & Post, 2008). This was seen in the past elections as politicians promised to take charge of Wall Street and other institutions that have reaped benefits in a slumping economy. People became disgruntled with the businesses, the companies were awarded forms of bailout packages and tax breaks, and the government felt obligated to assist the businesses in hopes to keep the economy afloat. The failure of key businesses will cause the economy to falter even further, and people will look to the government for assistance (Phelps, Parsons, Ballas, Dowling, 2006). Businesses must be involved in political situations to voice their opinion about current issues that will affect the business in the future.
Although some businesses are not involved in political acts, politicians and government are actively involved in business affairs. Keeping track of trends and following successful businesses is a common practice for politicians, as it gives politicians an advantage in reaching out to the community and evaluating the economy (Fenwick & Elcock, 2004). Politicians aim to make the product a success for both groups, enhancing the functions of the community and outlying businesses while gaining support for specific political efforts.
Participating in political functions is feasible through the work of lobbyists and other professionals who act on behalf of the business, ensuring that the company has met all of their needs and made adequate contacts for the business (Lawrence, Weber, & Post, 2008). Open communication about this process is mandatory and strict rules apply to those participating in lobbyist positions. Although rules and regulations are made to prevent fraud, lobbyists are fundamental to the business’ operations. Lobbyists are also involved in the political aspect of the business, usually understanding and relaying information that stands for the company in the government (Phelps, Parsons, Ballas, Dowling, 2006). The lobbyist is the voice of the business in politics, and critical to the business’ success in politics.
While businesses must be involved in political processes, politicians must be involved in businesses because of the business’s culmination of private citizens within the corporation. Each individual that is involved in the company has a vote that will add or detract from the politician’s success. Showing interest in, not only the company but also the community allows the politician to gain support from those in the company (Fenwick & Elock, 2004). This could be seen in a governor joining in at a celebration at a local supermarket, or a mayoral nominee holding a rally in a parking lot of a strip mall. Showing support of the community is a method that many politicians use to gain support from local voters.
A business has too much at stake to stay out of the way of politics. Stakeholders, stockholders, and forms of management all benefit from allowing the company to get involved in politics. Companies that become involved in political endeavors are exercising their American freedoms. Supporting political enterprises will make a stronger company, and allow those involved with the company to know that their rights are being fought for and protected.
References available upon request.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Late Night Laughs
It seems as if the president is showing his face a lot on TV and every other form of media. If he's not hanging out with Jay Leno, he's sharing his favorite music with the queen. With all of the publicity, it is easy to think that he's wasting his time pretending to be a movie star.
He has a plan.
Without telling anyone of his ploy, Barack Obama has srategically placed himself in the media's attention, reached out to other country's, and had gigantic portions of publicity spent on his endeavers. This can't hinder his popularity because we are seeing the "pop-star" side of Barack Obama. We are distracted from the bills being signed, motions being carried, and significant decisions being made because we see our leader show his charisma and personality.
Is this wrong?
Yes...and no. The shielding from the truth is a major distraction and not the way to handle the decisions of our country's direction. However, the coverage and relations that Obama has made by getting out there and showing people his personality is not a bad tactic. Viewers like him because he seems like them. People voted for him because they saw part of their likes and dislikes in him. Obama showed the world that he was likable and that he wanted to make a difference.
We rebuplicans need to take a hint, and do the same.
He has a plan.
Without telling anyone of his ploy, Barack Obama has srategically placed himself in the media's attention, reached out to other country's, and had gigantic portions of publicity spent on his endeavers. This can't hinder his popularity because we are seeing the "pop-star" side of Barack Obama. We are distracted from the bills being signed, motions being carried, and significant decisions being made because we see our leader show his charisma and personality.
Is this wrong?
Yes...and no. The shielding from the truth is a major distraction and not the way to handle the decisions of our country's direction. However, the coverage and relations that Obama has made by getting out there and showing people his personality is not a bad tactic. Viewers like him because he seems like them. People voted for him because they saw part of their likes and dislikes in him. Obama showed the world that he was likable and that he wanted to make a difference.
We rebuplicans need to take a hint, and do the same.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Cat Fighting
Meghan McCain, daughter of John McCain, has been in the news most recently for being the "plus sized model of the Republican Party."
She appeared on The View to refute some of her critics, making lots of news on the Republican circuit. Meghan was a voice for the younger generation of Republicans, and has done an impressive job at spreading positive publicity for Republicans.
Laura Ingraham doesn't think so.
As a matter of fact,this war began because of some opinions shared by Meghan McCain pertaining to Ann Coulter being a hindrance to the GOP (more on this later). Here are some of her thoughts:
"More so than my ideological differences with Ann Coulter, I don’t like her demeanor. I have never been a person who was attracted to hate or negativity. I don’t believe in scare tactics and would never condone or encourage anyone calling President Obama a Muslim. But controversy sells and Coulter is nothing if not controversial. Everything about her is extreme: her voice, her interview tactics, and especially the public statements she makes about liberals. Maybe her popularity stems from the fact that watching her is sometimes like watching a train wreck."
(Meghan McCain for www.thedailybeast.com)
She is said to have not been conservative enough, therefore not agreeing with Ann Coulter. Is that really the issue? NO! Pundits are capitalizing on the disagreement and possible dramas that are invoked on viewers of conservative media. The true issue comes down to the voice that fellow Republicans are listening to. Republicans listening to Coulter will come away with a different view of the political arena than those listening to the musings of McCain. You must know how much I am biting my tongue for the moment from giving MY rant about Ann Coulter!
Laura Ingraham did a "noble" thing to stand up for Ann Coulter (though it probably was not needed, as Coulter has proven in the past that she can handle her own affairs). This did wonders in ratings for both Ingraham and McCain, giving Republicans another opportunity to delve into the media. If Ingraham has an issue with McCain's message-feel free to dispute and refute it. BUT, when you have an issue with someone's weight, or in your refutal you feel that you have to slander someone on the basis of their physical appearance, you are hitting below the belt and losing credibility quickly.
Meghan McCain holds power at the moment to reach into the minds of liberal listeners and fellow Republicans to start the change in the party. Can she do it alone? I don't think so, but I do know that it has got to start with people doing SOMETHING, to make any change at all. Meghan McCain is doing just that.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Did Jindal do THAT Badly?
Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal responded to the cryptic details of the plans to take care of our National deficit the night Obama went on all major networks to release his statement to America. As soon as Jindal finished, pundits on all liberal media circuits were ready to criticize the method of delivery in which Jindal delivered his message. New York Times called Jindal's rhetoric "a form of nihilism" and others commented that it was a "disaster for the party."
Was it that poor?
As one who studied communication extensively for 4 years, I have seen that Jindal is not the only one guilty of faux pas in his speech. Did Jindal need to speed up-YES. However, he could not go too fast and inflection is important as well.
But that is not the big deal.
People did not want to listen to his words because they were focused on his delivery. Delivery is everything. People will listen and respond in a more favorable manner when the delivery is polished and refined. Even when listeners do not agree, they will be more inclined to listen and accept what is being said. That is something we can learn from our current president.
In all, Jindal could have done better with his presentation, but Kudos to a leader willing to nationally take a stand for his beliefs and expose errors in a plan that could be detrimental to our country.
Word to Republicans (as well as anyone who wants to get their message across): A major key to leadership is communication, and without the ability to communicate effectively, we will not be able to further our purpose and our plan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
