Who Decided That This Election Was Going to Be About Sex?

So anyone noticed lately that the election has turned from "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs" to "Sex, Sex, Sex"? Who decided that? This is the question that David Brooks and Gail Collins of the New York Times set out to answer in this week's "The Conversation", a weekly opinion column that takes place in between weekly columns. (Anyone still worried that print media is having a hard time keeping up with the 24 hour broadcast media?)

Though they pose an interesting question, Brooks and Collins unfortunately never get around to answering it. They mull over the sexual revolution of the 60s and 70s, bemoan the theologically- driven arguments presented by presidential candidates Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum, and finally trail off into a discussion about birth rates amongst unwed mothers in different class settings and the advantages of waiting to have children until after marriage.

Brooks and Collins are sort of contemporary journalism royalty. They're well-respected, each have op-ed columns in the New York Times, are frequent guests on NPR's All Things Considered, and publish best-selling books. So it's curious to me that the two of them don't consider who is setting the agenda here -- the Media.

I would posit that there's a good possibility this issue is being driven by media outlets who know that "sex sells" and theocrat candidates such as Santorum can't resist weighing in. In class and in recent readings we've discussed how much influence the general media has in setting the agenda. In "The Conversation", Collins aptly points out that "Teenage pregnancy rates are down. Abortion rates are down. Crime is down. There are problems with the social fabric but they no longer have to do with the sexual revolution..." So it would seem to me that this was not an issue weighing heavily on the minds of voters until the Obama Care - Catholic church debacle allowed the media to run amuck over this particular policy. Could it be said that they moved sex to the top of the agenda? Or is the stereotype of "sex sells" in this case an example of zombie political (media) theory?

"Romneycare" versus "Obamacare"... and a little bit about healthcare?

"Romneycare" versus "Obamacare"... and a little bit about healthcare?

(Article: http://www.redstate.com/aglanon/2012/01/29/why-mitt-romneys-electability-is-not-inevitable/)

Well true to the political bias that most display when selecting news sources...I decided to look at our handy dandy recommended blogging guide, ultimately choosing "Redstate." Might as well embrace my inner conservative. I mean, as Jill can attest, I am the one to say "No we cant sit on the blue metro seat, lets sit on the red one...RED...power color." It was a joke at the time but it is an example of how conservatives really respond to elephants, the color red, and states rights.

This growing partisanship in the United States electorate is just baffling, I mean its not like our culture embraces hanging out with like minded people and perpetuating "fads", however that is besides the point. Reading Redstate today, well it was refreshing to not read another blog about how Romney is the savior to our political party or how Democrats do not know anything. It actually attack the heart of a potential debate in American politics and pointing out the hypocrisy in partisanship when we are all moderate at heart. In this case blogger Ben Howe confronts Governor Mitt Romney on his major weakness: The Massachusetts Health Care Insurance Reform Law.  The bill, known by most as Romneycare, is the basis for the much "maligned Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act", otherwise affectionately known as Obamacare.

Howe, comments how Romey supporters claim that Romneycare vs Obamacare isn’t about socialized medicine vs the free market. They say it’s actually the core of the Federalist struggle and that "Romney will channel Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and march onto the capital steps, fulfilling the dreams and desires of tea partiers nationwide by finally standing up and saying, “Enough is enough! Let the state’s make their decisions Obama! Your days of tyranny are at an end!” And they all rejoiced." WHERE THIS ARTICLE REALLY GETS INTERESTING....Howe offers up some main points that the Romney campaign will use to battle in the general election...and it’s all right out of the Obama playbook and talking points. How about that for some added center left/center right equality.  Their plan actually seems to be to take the fight to the capital by saying:

• "Public health insurance didn’t crowd out employer sponsored insurance in Massachusetts
• That any mandate, be it for public schools or for car insurance, is evidence that a mandate is perfectly acceptable even when it’s a mandate related to your right to exist.
• That costs are being contained and kept down as a result of the bill and that the uninsured are now insured and the free rides are over.
• That the mandate is only a technicality because anyone can choose not to be a part of it by simply paying a fee every year.
• That the people of Massachusetts wanted healthcare reform and that a duly elected legislature passed the bill and thus it’s perfectly acceptable and reasonable."

If these defenses sound familiar it’s because they are virtually identical to the defenses we heard for a year and a half leading up to the passage of Obamacare. So get ready for Elections 2012, a battle to identify center right from center left, because lets face it there is truly no difference in the 21st century. Ultimately, despite the attacks that this article does make from time to time, the blog post does demonstrate how both political parties are in reality identical books, however option B used a theasaurus for every eighth word. This is a case where the media covers something of significance  and what I would in fact consider modern day muck-racking...journalists and bloggers going out to identify the lack of continuity in political speech by politicians. Healthcare was an issue that bloggers and media analysts alike converged on in the past few years, debating the mandate, and the constitutionality of it all. It became an issue that was fought on partisan lines when in reality there wasn't much difference in what everyone was seeking when you looked at the moderates and avoided the fringes. I commend Howe for stepping up against his political party and partisan blogging and highlighting the issues at hand, if more bloggers took on their own party and helped to identify their weaknesses and strengths then the debates in the coming Presidential election could be quite substantive.

I guess we will just have to see how this whole healthcare deal works out come September...