How easy is it to simply focus on the perceived failings of your competitors and do nothing to differentiate yourself other than to run down the scorecard of these failures? It’s very easy. How easy is it to focus on the shortcomings of your co-workers and use them to promote your own self up the ladder? Again, it’s very easy. My personal opinion on the people and businesses using this copout way of “attracting” attention is that they are showing you their true colors, their lack of character depth, and their lack of quality product or ability.

If you have nothing to differentiate yourself other than to constantly run other people down in an effort to make you or your product appear better, do you have anything better to offer in reality? Shouldn’t your product speak for itself? Shouldn’t your work ethic and character makeup speak for your ability? Shouldn’t you focus on what makes you better and not what makes the others worse? The reason why you see more and more people and businesses take this line of product differentiation is because they lack the cognitive ability to promote their own product ethically with integrity. Of course, that is assuming their product is at minimum, equal to their competitors.

You don’t have to be a marketing major or industry analyst to differentiate your product in a manner that is both ethical and positive. But, it does take more effort than constantly running your mouth about the weaknesses of your opposition. Your consumers, and or coworkers, are not oblivious to the real world, no matter how inept you believe them to be. People do not need to be fed their information as if they cannot form a rational opinion on their own. If you believe they need reinforcement in the manner of spouting negatives about your competition, then your product doesn’t have the natural distinction to win their attention on its own.

It’s not as simple as a “build it and they will come” philosophy, but it is as simple that if you build a product that is inherently better than the competitor, you can differentiate yourself in a positive and ethical manner. Simplistic minds and questionable character development allows a fertile ground for these negative differentiators to grow and exist.

I’ve personally seen more and more of this in my life from individuals and businesses. It turns me off from having a relationship with either of them. If they believe that I need a push to choose them over their competitor, they should show me the positives of their product. If all they can focus upon is a negative laundry list of their competitors, it tells me they don’t have a product I want.

People and businesses choose the easy way out in our lives more often than not. They choose not to focus upon creating their own positive image. They are too worried about getting ahead this instant. Their only traction in society is to belittle and publicly damage those who are “in their way.” Do you want to associate with these types of people or businesses? If they are so superficial and lacking in character, how much importance do you think you are to them? Are you nothing more than a contributor to their bottom line as long as you “agree” with their sentiments? Are you nothing more than a friend when you “agree” with their laundry lists?

I choose to deal with people and businesses of real character. For those who lack this capability, I refuse to augment their financial sheets and I refuse to incorporate them into my life. Focus on differentiating yourself in a positive manner. Yes, it takes more effort, but in the end, it makes you stand out above your competitors more than any list of failings they may have. Build some character, be positive, because guess what, you’re only the flavor of the month if all you have to win people over is what’s wrong with everyone else. What’s right with you? My guess is not a whole lot. Have some class and integrity… it goes a long way.

In the past, candidates utilized gimmicks to get their name out amongst the masses, but as times change and new information avenues open up, new ways to spend money appears. No longer are large campaign signs featuring the latest memorable slogan or supporters walking around with t-shirts and signs stamped with their candidate’s name enough. No longer are stump speeches enough to get the policy stances out. No longer are debates the focus of differentiating the candidates running for President. No longer are we in a world where the focus of the campaign is on the actual policy stances and historical voting records of our candidates.

We have entered an age where the campaign for President has become a popularity contest. Never in my life had I ever witnessed a campaign for the most powerful office in the world run more like a high school prom king contest. The news media, television and print, spent more time bickering over such inane topics such as lipstick, hairdos, age, dresses, and just general non-essential subjects than ever before. Sure, some of the information is pertinent to the situation because we all want to “get to know” the candidate, but when there is an economic meltdown occurring while we are engaged in two foreign wars, I think there were better ways to spend our time.

Reports about how much Sarah Palin’s wardrobe cost came out before the election. Obama’s campaign flunkies continually focused upon the wardrobe of John McCain’s wife (which was mostly irrelevant considering her family fortune). Of course before Election Day, all we heard about the Obama campaign was how diverse his fund raising ability was and how much money he collected… over $600 million in his run for President.

Finally, we have some publicly available reports about how Obama’s campaign spent their money over the last few weeks of the campaign. It turns out that Obama spent over $147 million in the final weeks and the purchases would surprise some of you. According to the New York Daily News, Obama spent $4 million on Google advertising and an additional $9.4 million on online advertising, $4.4 million on print ads, and $62 million on television advertising. Also amongst the campaign purchases were 400,000 temporary Obama tattoos and payments to people like Jimmy Buffett and the remaining Grateful Dead band members for appearances and concerts.

In an historical first, Barack Obama even purchased a 30 minute television commercial which delayed the start of a World Series game. Obama even bought advertising in video games which will be seen forever. Barack Obama embraced the popularity contest and utilized his enormous campaign financing edge to win the office of President. McCain followed through on his promise to accept public financing which limits the total amount of money available for campaign spending but Obama reneged on his promise and chose private financing. His choice allowed him to generate over $600 million in contributions while McCain was limited to maybe 20% of that for his general election campaign.

As we have seen, Obama dominated the airwaves and advertising avenues by well over a three to one margin and his publicity stunts were effective in maintaining his lead throughout the election process. Turning our election process into a popularity contest is a major disservice to the American citizen. We should not be treated to a “purchased” politician running our country. We should be treated to a man who would run our country for free, and a campaign which focuses on the policies and direction of our country. I think the campaign for President should be 100% volunteer work and if elected, every cabinet official and advisor should work free from taxpayer provided money and assistance.

If that were the case, I would think we would have a much different political landscape because people would run for office that were true patriots and not power and money vultures. Work FOR the people who voted you in and NOT for those who financed your purchased seat in office.

Citation: http://www.nydailynews.com/

Usually in a public place with a variety of individuals in close proximity, people often try and speak softly or in vague terms in an effort to preserve some privacy and also extend a branch of respect to the other people. However, some people tend to miss this standard common sense rule and treat everyone to their business in an effort to garner some much needed attention in their lackluster lives. This is the situation I was in while waiting my turn at our local DMV. Two teenage girls, recently out of high school based upon the information me and the rest of the public were so graciously given, were intent on having a “cool” conversation so that the rest of our lives would pale in comparison to their “awesomeness.”

As I sat there with my paperwork slowly being twisted into garbage by my whitening hands and fingers, I was given a play by play of their plans for the day, their recent history, and their future plans for the week. I felt as if I were sitting in an auditorium listening to some cackling teenagers on a public address speaker informing us of the upcoming spirit week at school. To my delight, only about 20 of my 30 minutes were under this deluge of nonsense and I completed my task without bothering another single human being while doing so. I even had the chance to engage in a polite conversation with the clerk and elicit a genuine smile and laugh from her.

What does this have to do about my scholastic tax dollars at work? Let’s see, where to begin… Returning the focus to the teenage girls, now in college based upon their announcements, their intellectual speaking level and grasp of English left me in a state of amazement. At one point, I began counting the word “like” in their sentences and according to my last count they could not create a single sentence without utilizing the term more than four to five times. I lost count of the overall total at somewhere over 30 (after only counting for about 3 minutes) because I felt like shoving my birth certificate into one ear and my proof of residency in the other.

I made the correct choice and allowed my ears to bleed internally as their inane chatter bludgeoned my ear drums so I could actually finish the process of getting my new license. What I have a problem with is not the two girls and their lack of public sensitivity (that is to be expected by the youth these days). What I have a problem with is their skill level in both English and thought to sentence to speaking ability. I understand shorthand and people speak without having to focus upon perfect grammar and whatnot, but seriously, can’t someone make coherent statements when released from 12 years of publicly financed school?

At times during their conversation, I felt like I was trying to decipher some sort of audible version of hieroglyphics. I believe these two teenage girls have created their own dialect solely focused upon the word “like.” I felt as if I were a CSI investigator trying to find the motive behind the story. After 20 minutes of speaking, their lives seemed to center around a few highly important issues: no money, getting their nails done, buying a new dress for a frat party, and moving out even though they have no clue how they can afford it and their parents disagree with it.

Of course, my investigating prowess may be a bit non-professional, but in between all the gibberish, I’m pretty sure I’ve nailed their conversation. I guess my tax dollars served them well because they both seemed to be able to integrate within society and function without the help of a parent (well, they did talk to one of their parents on their cell phone so maybe not). After my brain returned to normal size from the enlarged state it was in from the incessant bashing of it by their baseball bat-like conversation crushing my skull, I realized, this is the generation that is going to be running my country when I’m old.

After realizing such a nightmare no horror movie could ever hope to achieve, I felt a little nauseous. I know common sense has become uncommon sense, but given the billions of dollars we drain from our citizens’ bank accounts can’t we expect a better product? Can’t the product of 12 years of school be something better? Our kids are in fact a product of our system and it seems that we are failing at producing young men and women who we would be proud to have lead our country. I know, there are lots of good kids out there, but where are they when I am out in public? Are they hidden away from public view as to save them of the horror we all face? Are they hiding out in the ignorant masses trying to fit in like some undercover mafia agent waiting until the time is right to show their true colors? Please normal young men and women, come out and show yourselves, I am begging you… for the sake of our country, show us that our tax dollars are not being spent in vain.

Obama has the eyes of the world upon him. He is not only our rock star… he is the world’s rock star. In our time of globalization, Obama is sitting on top of the world’s political pulpit. After a projected record amount of voters have utilized their one true democratic tool, Obama has been elected the leader of the free world. After many campaign promises have been made in exchange for votes, our eyes as a nation are going to be squarely placed upon him. Obama will face the ultimate political scrutiny… not only from the American public, but from the world as a whole.

I watched Obama give his gracious acceptance speech last night. He is a very good speaker and he can motivate with his words and demeanor when he’s speaking. However, his actions are now required. No longer is campaign and political rhetoric going to be enough. There must be substance to his speeches and there must be evidence of his political ability. At this point in time, we have yet to see either because of his lack of political service.

What exactly Obama will accomplish over the next four years remains to be seen. Many are awaiting some sort of Holy Grail to materialize and make our nation resemble a fairytale of the grandest proportions. Others are nervously and anxiously awaiting what true agenda Obama may be harboring. Obama, based upon his past votes and publicly stated positions, is still regarded as a “Hard Core Liberal.” His political viewpoints and Democratic Party affiliation still direct his decision making that will undoubtedly create great public and political divide. Promises of bi-partisanship is one thing, actually compromising on some of the most important divides is another.

We have seen how political divides have separated this country. For many, their newfound ecstasy achieved as a result of their chosen affiliation’s rise to power will come under distress as the reality of the political process diminishes the many campaign road promises. Yes, Obama will be in office with a dominant position regarding both the House and the Senate. However, he does not enjoy a veto-proof House and Senate. That means that any law or political action he champions MUST be made with inherent compromises in place.

Obama is our next President and he deserves the respect this office places upon him. However, the respect of the person himself is on the line. If Obama can truly earn the respect of his opposition as a true political leader charged with bringing our country forward together, then I will gladly stand in line and support Obama. Until that day comes, I am a skeptical citizen waiting to see what the true agenda of the Democratic Party’s most liberal President has in store for our country.

The President is sworn to uphold the Constitution upon inauguration. Our nation was born upon the ideology of freedom. Free markets are at the core of our capitalistic economy. As our country moves forward, I implore you to watch with keen eyes how your rights are being protected, how your country’s foundation is being protected, and how your country’s moral and ethical values are being protected. Many of Obama’s campaign promises directly affect each one of these core issues. If our American citizens are so easily fleeced of our rights for monetary gains, we will no longer have a Constitution, a free market, or a free country. Be thankful that we have democracy and we must make sure that we preserve it. We must not allow the rock star persona draw a veil of deception over our nation’s eyes which will allow its complete rape and destruction from within.

Why exactly would Brown call Obama a liar? Why now? What is her motive behind this? We’ll get to that, but let’s take a look at her statement first. Brown says, “One year ago, he made a promise. He pledged to accept public financing… Obama went back on his word… He broke his promise.” She did not “specifically” call him a liar… semantics… Brown was right in calling Obama out on his reneged promise. He publicly stated his position and then did the exact opposite. However, the timing of this is the issue for me. This issue is old, the campaigns have been running for almost two years and now, less than one week from the election and Brown comes out with this “hard hitting” ethical dilemma story?

Brown needs to conserve at least some semblance of credibility to be an effective journalist… even on CNN. Knowing that Obama has all but wrapped up the election and with only a few days separating his anointing as our country’s savior, she dropped this story upon her readers and listeners. She knows this is a non-story at this point and it will in no way affect the outcome of the election even though ethical and moral codes have been broken by Obama. So, she runs with it, props up her façade of non-biased reporting and puts a notch in her belt for credible journalism.

What was Obama’s motive for breaking his promise? Money, power, and greed of course. He rose over $600 million in campaign contributions. What was Brown’s motive for reporting something so blatantly against her character? Money, power, and greed of course. Brown cannot retain her job on a show labeled “No Bias, No Bull” and NEVER offer some sort of disparaging report against her true nature. People won’t listen to her and eventually will tune her out resulting in her subsequent ousting from CNN’s lineup.

Obama and Brown aren’t any different than the majority of the public in our world today. Given the opportunity for more money and power with the only sacrifice being a broken promise or an ineffectual report against your poster boy, the vast majority of us would take the money and run. Let’s face it… promises don’t carry much weight in our world today. No longer can we trust in a person’s “word.” No longer can we believe what people say and truly believe they mean it because they have ulterior motives behind their actions and words.

Brown has utterly amazed me in the fact that she would actually follow through with a story detailing an ethical mistake by the liberal’s greatest politician to date. However, after reading between the lines and understanding the motives behind her actions, it’s not so amazing after all. She saw an opportunity to write a story which can uphold her “stature” in the journalism world and not harm the central figure of her cause. Very effective and very smart on her part, I’ll give it to her.

Citation: http://www.cnn.com/

Personally, a sense of appreciation from those I interact with is priceless. I freely give away time and effort if there is a sense of appreciation from those involved. However, if I feel like I am being taken for granted or even artificially used, resentment supersedes any positive emotion I may derive from my time and efforts. I am willing to bet that most of us out there act and respond in similar fashion.

There is a big difference between being appreciated and expecting to be pampered. Appreciation can be as simple as a smile, a handshake, or even a spoken and meaningful thank you. Pampering is an extreme form of appreciation in the fact that every need or whim is satisfied at its beck and call. Pampering is reserved for special treats or moments in life, not an everyday or every minute occurrence.

Some people expect appreciation to be in the form of pampering. I recently ran across an article involving a sports figure which drudged up imagery of a pampered life. Lance Armstrong, one of the greatest cyclists ever, is attempting to come back after retiring a few years ago. He won seven straight Tour De France championships among his vast athletic accomplishments. On a personal level, he has overcome cancer and continued to excel at his sport. He is an amazing athlete and has done many things to promote cancer awareness among his work with charities and health organizations.

Even though he has done all of these great “human” things, I can’t help but think about how pampered he must be, given the following sentiments regarding his attempt to return to professional cycling. “Lance Armstrong could still race in the 2009 Tour de France, as long as race organizers make him feel welcome… For the moment, we are going to determine his program based on where he is really welcome and invited … and we will see about the rest… So the main thing is that he is definitely not excluding riding in the Tour, but it would have to be in an atmosphere that is serene and respectful.”

I understand his point of view, he doesn’t want to go where he’s not wanted or appreciated, neither would I. But Lance himself has said that his goal is to “draw more attention to his global campaign to fight cancer.” Appreciation on a personal level is a priority, but not the highest priority if your goal is publicly stated as helping other people. Helping other people involves sacrifices and in this case, appreciation is likely to be his sacrifice.

Why is the Tour de France not welcoming Armstrong back with open arms and being supremely grateful for his return? Well, through the years, he has been tied to various blood doping and performance enhancing drug cases but has never been specifically charged or failed any tests. There is a mountain of coincidental evidence involving his name, team, and trainers through the years however. While there is no smoking gun, there is a deep sense of suspicion. On top of that, the team he has chosen to join and represent in his comeback has been cited and suspended for violations. He didn’t do himself any favors with that choice.

He is right in wanting to be appreciated, but the statements above leave me feeling like he wants to be pampered. He wants to be welcomed back with some sort of lavish return ceremony in an attempt to reclaim his crown as the world’s greatest professional cyclist. If your goals are to raise awareness about cancer and fight the impact it has on our lives, he should sacrifice a bit of his needs for appreciation for the overall good his celebrity brings back to the event. Lance Armstrong returns to the Tour de France in an attempt to regain his crown… all of this while he has battled and beaten cancer. Imagine the headlines and news attention that would be paid to him and his cause. Sacrifice… we all do it, even the superstars in our world.

Citation: http://www.espn.com/

However, after a few of these “real” news items were exhausted, I was treated to “headline news” involving the impending divorce of Madonna from her husband, a report about a soldier’s dog returning home, and even a major story about a delayed Playstation game because of a music track within the game. I’ll be fair… CNN’s website actually lists the bulleted topics under their section labeled “Latest News.” While it’s not specifically labeled Headline News, it is in fact, their depiction of the most important, time sensitive information that the public needs to be informed about.

Maybe I’m being a bit too judgmental. Madonna’s divorce is a big deal to some even if I can’t name a single person that cares. Maybe her divorce is a story because there appears to be some issue between the two individuals revolving around Madonna’s belief in Kabbalah? Well, that would make it a story now wouldn’t it? It’s not “just” a divorce of a high profile celebrity. It’s a story about something that’s potentially charged with a newsworthy religious angle. The story about the soldier’s dog returning home? Well, news wouldn’t be news without at least one bullet point associated to our current war in Iraq and/or Afghanistan. No car bomb or civilian murders to report today? Let’s go with the feel good story then…

This brings me to the headline news bullet point of the Playstation game being delayed because of a musical track. Initially, you may think that it may have something to do with profanity or non-licensed material included, but you would be wrong. The issue revolves around a particular track that may offend Muslims. A musical track in the game contains words from the Islamic holy text, the Quran. Feeling the politically correct pressure, the game designer and distributor were forced to pull the product and delay the launch so they could remove the “offensive” track. Oh, now I get it. The delayed Playstation game receives headline news status because of the issue within… a potentially offensive musical track which “might” be offensive to Muslims.

Sometimes we are just trying too hard to be politically correct. While being overly correct, we are actually offending many. If our news agencies truly believe that headline status should be given to this particular subject matter, what are their angles? Most news today isn’t objective and is inherently biased by the conglomerate media giants. Given that ratings equal additional revenue, their reward is viewership and readership counts. They give a “best effort” at real news reporting, but they generally focus upon hot topic issues within society and not actual news. Let’s face it. “Real” news is boring when done correctly because it’s based upon facts and reported without sensationalistic undertones.

Knowing this, the media giants focus upon divisive issues and also hot point terms to instigate clicks, buys, and channel attention. We hear real news, but we don’t listen. When we hear hot button issues such as Kabbalah, Muslim/Islam, and Iraq, we listen. Some listen because they want to make sure their issue isn’t being treated negatively, others listen because they want the issue to be treated negatively, and others are just intrigued by the issue and want to know what all the fuss is about. Tell me honestly, are you more likely to listen to the Federal Reserve chairman testify about our economy or read about how much money Madonna’s husband may get in a settlement and find out how Kabbalah may be the root of their problems? One is intensely boring but very much headline news while the other is entertaining and not headline news but given the same status by the news agency. News is not news anymore. It’s an entertainment avenue.

Citation: http://www.cnn.com/

Now, I don’t know if it’s just me, but I remember long ago while in school, this particular action occurred on a routine basis. People generally invade other people’s space and even though it may not be the best course of action, pushing someone away from you is a fairly standard response. Should we criminally charge and prosecute our youngsters for such dastardly acts of lawlessness? This entire situation is a result of someone’s feelings being hurt and it’s a “get back” issue. Oh, did I mention that person “A” was a star football player and person “B” was a female and the incident occurred at a nightclub?

What a heinous crime. The football player should be locked up and the key thrown away or melted down. He should never see the light of day again. I mean, how could he do such a thing? I’ll turn the sarcasm off now. Even the crime report calls this a “simple-assault” charge. Why are we so intent on litigating every single action human beings can engage in? Next thing I know, I’ll be reading about a lawsuit or criminal charge brought against someone for butting into the line at Subway or for going through the quick checkout line with too many items.

Our society has routinely tried to make sure that every aspect of our life is protected. But, we don’t seem to mind that murderers are continually freed from prison. We don’t mind that rapists are set free every day. We don’t mind that sex offenders are allowed early release for “good behavior.” We don’t mind. Why don’t we mind about such truly heinous criminal behavior but we seem to care about such trivial aspects of life?

I have no idea and thus the reason for my utter and complete state of awe regarding this particular crime. I suppose we are all criminals because I can guarantee that at some point in your life, you have pushed someone who was in your space. Did you hurt their feelings? I’m sure you did. Did you deserve to be charged and prosecuted while facing a potential 6 month term in jail? Of course not. Female person “B” in this case was likely rebuffed in her attempts to gain the attention of the star football player and his reaction to the situation was to push her away. He pushed her away with an open hand against the side of the head. Was there criminal malice or intent to injure? I think not.

She had her feelings hurt and thus she decided to make him “pay” for his lack of interest. I’m sure she also knew his history with previous domestic run-ins and that made this a clear cut case for her to “win.” What does she get out of this? More than likely, she will receive nothing monetarily since she was not injured or “damaged” psychologically. However, she will prove her point (whatever that may be) and win. She will have proven that he should not have rebuffed her advances.

Is that what our legal and justice system is about? Proving points? I surely hope not. These types of cases and laws on the books only bloat the judicial system. They cost our country both in time lost and in money spent. We should be worrying about prosecuting the real criminals and correcting our punishments attributed to certain crimes. I say this but I know things will not change so I wait… I wait for another jaw dropping story to turn up (which I can guarantee will happen) and I faithfully promise to write about it.

Citation: http://www.ksdk.com/

The only thing I know about fashion is that you’re not supposed to wear white after Labor Day. Not exactly sure what exact piece of clothing they are talking about, so I just assume white is out for everything, hats, shirts, pants, and shoes. Better to be safe than sorry right? I wouldn’t want to be seen as someone lacking fashion sense now would I? Trends are necessary though, otherwise, we would all be wearing the same clothes we were 10 years ago, or even 20, or 30. We could even be wearing the clothes our grandparents were wearing if we didn’t change our tastes and trends. I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t enjoy wearing what they wore, not to mention if we all were wearing garments from the 1970’s…

Who establishes the trends which impacts our clothes wearing behavior? Segments of society have a great deal of power creating trends. These segments are catered to by the fashion industry and as they grow, different trends are injected into the mainstream. Bikers, country clubbers, musical genres (rap, rock, country, etc), moms, young adults, and the list could continue forever. Remember the “grunge” period of fashion in the 1990’s? That trend came to us via the music scene of alternative rock. Today, we have the “baggy” fashion which has been brought to us by the rap community.

Baggy used to be exclusive to wearing oversized clothing. However, now baggy has gone to the point where clothes are literally hanging off of people. Pants are left hanging on for dear life as underwear is prominently exposed. I’m sure you’ve seen it. Oversized pants barely stay up which forces the individual into constantly “tugging” on them to keep them from turning into ankle weights. Oh, and the pants aren’t shorter so the remains of the pants are always under the person’s feet so they are actually walking on the lower portion turning them into frayed ends of shaggy looking hand-me-downs.

I’m one for feeling comfortable, but the baggy trend has gone a bit too far in my opinion. Since when was it considered “trendy” to show your behind to the public on purpose and walk around on your pants? There was a fantastic invention from years gone by that alleviated such issues. If memory serves, I believe it’s called a belt.

Saturday Night Live featured a performer who chooses this trend as his fashion statement. Corporate executives for NBC were “worried” about his appearance mostly due to his musical content, but also his attire. Lorne Michaels, producer of SNL, went on record and said, “I’m not saying you should wear yours that way, but clearly it’s our job to set trends.” My question, is it really the job of SNL, or television for that matter, to set fashion trends? If so, then no wonder why our younger generations are wearing such attire and believing it to be “trendy.”

Trends used to involve making clothes better looking, more comfortable, or better suited for a particular event. Today, fashion sense is more about making statements. Do we need our society following trends “set” by mainstream media? If someone really believes wearing pants below the butt while walking on the pants legs makes them look good or fashionable, I would like to see their IQ score and compare it to that of a lemming.

Allowing mainstream media to set our trends is one avenue they effectively utilize in an effort to “control” the general public. A large portion of that control involves money. Fashion trends change from year to year, or even month to month, meaning wardrobes must change. Media receives the majority of their revenue from advertising and as they “set” trends, purchasing behavior is thus influenced creating a “need” for advertisers to showcase products. The lemmings are in line to follow the lead of someone trying to control their money. Since “fashion” these days is about making statements rather than making clothes look good and comfortable, money is at the root of these so-called trends. Do some homework, how many of these “trend setter” acts have their own clothing lines?

One of the greatest tricks of the trade in running for President in the United States has become writing a book prior to running which will establish media frenzy and affix a bright spotlight on the up and coming politician. John McCain has five books published under his belt. The first coming in August 1999 (he announced his running for President in September 1999) and the last coming in August 2007 (we already knew he was running at this time). McCain is no stranger to this gimmick. Where does Obama stand? Unless you have lived with no access to television, newspaper, or radio, you probably know he released his first book, “Audacity of Hope,” in October 2006. Barack announced his running for President in May, 2007 (his book has sold well over one million copies). Gimmick number one, publishing a book to instigate attention and hope, tied 1 to 1.

Let’s go to another tried and true method of “gimmickry.” I’m not sure how old everyone is out there or how much they paid attention to the Arsenio Hall show “back in the day,” but one of the greatest highlights from his show involved Presidential candidate Bill Clinton “performing” on his show. Clinton, in June of 1992, utilized the popularity of the Arsenio show with younger voters to reach a demographic which helped him win the 1992 Presidential election. Gimmicky yes, but highly effective. Has anything happened comparable to this in our current campaign? Why yes, and I happened to watch it live. Barack Obama, “danced” his way to daytime stardom on the quite popular “Ellen” show. McCain was given the opportunity to dance on Ellen but chose to walk instead. Ellen, 2008’s version of the Arsenio show, played a part in putting Obama ahead 2 to 1 in the gimmick race.

Moving on to point number three, Obama has recently pursued the ideology that if Americans were more efficient with our automobiles, that we could affect our energy crisis at home. There is not one single person I have read or talked to that disputes efficiency creating savings when it comes to gas mileage, it is true. But, to base a portion of your national energy plan on efficiency of tire pressures and car maintenance is absurd. Sure, there will be savings, but not enough to create the drop of multiple percentage points in demand on 20 million barrels of oil per day the United States currently uses. On the other hand, Obama calls McCain’s support of potential off shore drilling a gimmick. Tire pressure gauges and Jiffy Lube stops are in fact a gimmick. Off shore drilling, while not the best solution, is most definitely not a gimmick. The current standings are Obama 3 and McCain 1.

My last look at gimmickry in our current campaign involves something just announced. Barack Obama, the likely next President of the United States, announced that he will inform the world of his most important political choice since his decision to run for President via text messages on cell phones or an email. There is a nice sign up form on his site which allows you to input your contact information to, and I quote, “Be the First to Know. Barack is about to choose a running mate, and he wants you to know first. You have helped build this movement from the bottom up, and Barack wants you to be part of this important moment. “ Great use of technology which the demographic he must win utilizes as a lifeline to their world. Viral and gimmicky, maybe this should be worth double gimmick points. Have you heard of any such information coming from the McCain campaign headquarters? No. We are now up to Obama 4, McCain 1 on the gimmick score.

If I took the time, I could continue this article focused on campaign gimmickry and I’m sure McCain’s number would increase. But I do not think he could ever “hope” to surpass the effective gimmick utilization Obama has seemed to have perfected. I’ve learned to apply the old saying, albeit crude, of “He who smelt it, dealt it” to politicians. If you hear someone criticizing the opponent on something, more than likely, he is doing the same thing and probably did it first. The idea is to deflect attention to the opponent and away from you. Get all of the hot button issues focused on the other guy so you can join the side promising change. We all know that politicians promise change in every single campaign, that’s nothing new. That is just another gimmick. Politicians want change, but only change which makes them more important. The change we need is the exact opposite. Our politicians need, and deserve, less importance.

Obama has flaunted his ability to verbally defuse attacks and statements about his campaign (see the Reverend Wright fiasco here). He has chosen to deflect the gimmick tag by stamping McCain and his campaign with it, often. As I mentioned before, I don’t think Obama has the right accuse anyone of using gimmicks when the majority of his campaign and media time is littered with gimmicks. What does that say for us, the American public? Everyone assumes Obama will be our next President and rightfully so considering the data overwhelmingly shows he is ahead in almost every poll imaginable. But, where is the substance to his campaign? We all know our public votes with very little research into the candidates and media campaigns largely affect voting segments (swift boat anyone?). Gimmicks are easy, they are effective, and they hit the mark every time with the demographic you are shooting for.

Barack’s winning of the 2008 Presidential election revolves around securing the votes of the younger generation and his gimmicks are aimed squarely at them. We hear about McCain being “old” and “more of the same.” We hear about Barack writing books hitting number one on the bestseller list and offering information via the latest technology and being “hip” on television. Tell me, what does any of that have to do with being President of the United States? I want someone who I can believe in, someone who has morals and ethics, someone we can depend on during a crisis. I don’t want a “He who smelt it, dealt it” President. I want someone who has the backbone to stand up for what is right for our country. The change we need is not political party change. We need real citizens running this country who would die for the United States because it is the right thing to do, and not lifelong trained politicians. Change we need, gimmicks we do not.