This blog was originally started as a class project for my advanced online media class at Arizona State University. All eleven entries up to this point were written while I was sitting in and/or on the rooftop of an apartment building in the middle of Tempe.

I’ve moved from smack-dab in the middle of McCain country to the soon-to-be center of the Obama universe.

Starting with this entry, I will be writing from a spot which millions of people worldwide will want to be for a few days in August; less than a mile away from the site of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

Growing up in Denver, I know the atmosphere of the city. I can tell that even on the first day of July, the political winds are already blowing. I can’t wait until August.

Although it’s pretty hard to bowl worse than Obama did the other day, I was a witness to my roommate bowling a 32 last year. I have a picture (somewhere) of the scoreboard with his 32, and he has no pictures to prove that he has ever gotten better than that. So in my eyes, Obama is a better bowler than my roommate, and that is just sad. I do not want people to think that Obama can out bowl me. Here is proof that he cannot.

“Why in the world would he want to go back into politics, go back to Washington? He’s won an Oscar, a Pulitzer, he’s a rock star, he’s got it good right now. I don’t know why anyone would want to be thrown back into that scene.”

That is not an exact quote, but it’s close to what my professor Nancie Dodge said when describing her thoughts on Obama’s announcement that if elected, he would consider assigning former Vice President Al Gore to a high level Cabinet position as a “Global warming guru.”

I can’t seem to decide what I would do if I were Al Gore. On one hand, I agree with my professor that Washington is a brutal place to be, and that someone who seems to already have it all with his awards and work in his post-Washington days might not even want to go back to Washington.

On the other hand, if Gore decided to return to Washington on Obama’s offer, he would not be the vice president this time, and his duties wouldn’t include anything except being the “Global warming guru,” as Obama put it. When you’re trying to get funding and spread the word on such an important issue, there are few places better than a high-ranking position in the most powerful and influential government in the world.

However, there is some question out there that this might not even be a decision Gore would have to flirt with.

Jessica Fargen at the Boston Herald wrote today that some strategists, including Republican strategist Holly Robichaud, believe that the offer is just a strategic political move, and not actually a sincere offer. She believed that by making this announcement, Obama was creating distance between himself and Clinton in the close Democratic race.

Robichaud went on to state that she believes it helps out the Republicans. “It’s kind of a funny thing. We don’t like Al Gore. Once again it solidifies Obama’s image as the liberals liberal.” She believes that this move widens the gap between Obama and some of the more conservative Democrats.

Sincere or not, I think Gore is going to have a tough time deciding which road he is going to take.

With all the hype about the upcoming election, sometimes the news about the man that is going to be replaced goes under the radar for me. It’s been a while since I’ve read anything about Bush, or even seen anything about him on television. Maybe I’m not paying close enough attention, but I think people are getting to the point where they are more interested in who is next than what Bush has to say anymore.

While I was settling in to watch opening day of the Major League Baseball season, I was lucky enough to catch the ceremonial first pitch being thrown out but none other than the president.

Although it was a pretty decent pitch, I found it amazing how loudly George W. Bush was booed while tossing it. Compared to the clip below, which was from the World Series in 2001, just a month and a half after the September 11 attacks, you can see the how the nation’s thoughts on the president have changed.

And even with all the boos, Bush still had that damn smirk on his face, the “Yeah, I run this country, what are you gonna do about it” smirk. I hate it.

Only nine more months…

It’s finally that time of the election season when politics seem extra ridiculous to me. There really isn’t too much progress being made in the nomination process – the next primary isn’t for another 33 days – so the news outlets are struggling to make stories and create controversy with every topic, going as low as to saying Obama is not patriotic because he doesn’t wear an American Flag lapel pin.

I agree with Dave Gergen, a Republican political analyst, who said, “I don’t think an election should be determined by if a man wears a pin or not,” while speaking on CNN last night. An election shouldn’t be decided on petty little things that in the big picture have no relevance to the actual issues that should be focused on.

It’s nice to see that the candidates themselves feel the same way, and that even they need, and take, breaks from politics every once in a while, even in the middle of a heated nomination process.

On the same show as Gergen, Anderson Cooper 360, a clip aired of Cooper spending a full day with Obama, from a rally in the morning in North Carolina, on a flight to West Virginia and a rally later that night. Cooper stated he was surprised to see Obama working so hard on the plane, as he sometimes takes the time on the flight to rest. When Cooper approached Obama to see what he was working on, he found out all of the hard work was going toward Obama picking his bracket for the NCAA tournament.

As I mentioned, it’s nice to see that the candidates need a break too, and also helps you realize that these aren’t just political machines who are running for president, they are actual people who do the same stuff as you or I would do.

It’s a pretty decent bracket overall. I think Obama is a little crazy for putting Kansas, a team that has been upset in the first or second round in the last two years, in the final four. I have the same title game as he does, except I have UCLA beating UNC in the final.

I picked a bad time to stop following the election race. For a week, over our spring break, I decided to take a break from what seemed to be a never-ending cycle of the same political stories from every media outlet. Of course, this happens to be the week when Obama’s pastor and his preachings come into controversy, and Obama responds with what I’ve heard described by many of my peers as “One of the Greatest Speeches of Our Generation.”

Many in the press are praising the speech as well. Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune said, “If political campaigns were political movies, Barack Obama’s big speech deserves a big Oscar…. He bravely fought to save his presidential campaign by affirming principles over expediency as an argument for improving politics.”

Deborah Griffith, an Arizona Republic reader, wrote in to the paper to say, “I want to thank the senator for giving me hope yet again for this country.”

After watching the speech, and seeing the words and emotion Obama and his staff can put together in just a day’s time, my respect for Obama and his staff has just gotten greater.

Obama handled the situation with class and dignity, and addressed the subject of racism without any disdain, even toward his pastor. Although his pastor a prominent part of Obama’s religious background, should not be seen as a mirror of the views of Obama himself.

Ralph Nader has drawn enough support for his campaign to amass 4,034,052 votes in Presidential elections.

Not too bad for a third party candidate.

Until you consider that is a combined number of votes in four separate elections.

That’s about one million votes per election. Or about 0.3% of the United States population.

Does Nader, or anyone for that matter, actually believe that there is a chance he will be the one on the steps of the Capitol building on January 20 next year?

With such an important election coming up, shouldn’t Nader himself consider the fact that he entered the race too late, has no real chance and should let the true candidates, those from the Democratic and Republican parties, take all the votes?

Democrats are still fuming over Nader’s participation in the 2000 election, claiming that the votes that Nader received (2,883,105 votes) would have gone to Al Gore, and in turn Gore would have won the election.

Although Nader won’t accept any blame for Gore’s loss, he does believe that Gore should have won the election, and was screwed over by Jeb Bush and the U.S. Supreme Court.

So far, this has been one of the most watched Presidential races in recent history. With so many people heading to the polls, and the results we have seen so far in this year’s primaries and caucuses, it seems that once again, this is going to be a very close race. Hopefully this year, Nader’s participation won’t influence the results as many Democrats claim it did eight years ago.

Technology is amazing. I can chat online with my friends seven time zones and 5,200 miles away in London. I can view pictures of my friends in Pakistan that were taken five minutes before I looked at them. I can talk on the phone with my friends in Thailand for less than 50 cents a minute, something that would have been unimaginable even twenty years ago. Anybody with Internet access can do any of the things mentioned above. Anybody can chat, write, record and post anything they want online.

That is not always a good thing.

I showed my co-workers the video of Hillary Clinton supporters singing her praises that I posted in my previous entry. Reactions varied from “Wow” and “Oh my goodness, I don’t know what to say about that” to the extreme reaction of “It was the worst thing I have ever seen. It makes me not want to vote. It’s so bad.”

Obviously it’s a little far fetched that my co-worker isn’t going to vote simply because she saw this video, but talking to her more about it, she admitted her opinion of Hillary went down a little bit after watching it, even though Hillary neither produced the video herself nor endorsed it, and probably doesn’t even know of its existence.

We judge people. It is human nature. Even subconsciously, our opinions are shaped by what we see other people do. If we watch a bunch of dancing, singing people praise Hillary with an awful video, our opinion of Hillary goes down just by her being associated with them.

Just the opposite happens when we respect those associated with someone, as it’s written in an article published by the London newspaper The Telegraph.

Neil McCormick, the author of the article, claims, “The video achieves things politicians can usually only dream about,” and notes it inspires this generation to follow in the footsteps of our previous generations who went through the civil rights movement.

McCormick answers the critics of the Obama video, who he says are downplaying the impact this video will have on the masses.

“Can Obama continue to upset the traditional balance of power by getting his young converts to the polls? The message beaming out across the net is: yes, he can.”

The presidential race is not going to be decided solely on YouTube videos. However, when I look at the statistics of the “Yes, We Can” video on YouTube – more than four million views, 13 “YouTube honors” including most discussed video of the month and 18th most viewed of all time – if I was asked if these types of vieo can have an impact, I have no other choice but to say yes, they can.

Obama’s supporters put out a good song.

Clinton’s supporters put out an awful horrible hilariously bad interesting song. There are no words to describe this.

As bad as it is, I did find myself humming the tune about 30 minutes after I listened to it. I’m ashamed.

There are also songs for Republican candidates McCain and Huckabee, but they aren’t nearly as professional, and don’t warrant being included with the Clinton and Obama masterpieces.