Presidential Candidates and Student Financial Aid

Since I work in a Student Financial Aid Office, I thought that it would be interesting to see how the media is addressing, what I consider, should be an important campaign issue:  financing secondary education.  While I realize that many people do not feel that support of higher education policies should rank high on a presidential candidate’s forum, I disagree.  Education is the key if we want to compete and succeed in the global economy.  With the cost of education rising, the gap between financial aid and what a family/student must pay is widening. 

Since education is a “social” issue it is not surprising that education issues rank higher with democratic candidates than with their republican counterparts where national security is a more pressing issue. 

The following Democratic Candidates have financial aid proposals:  Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, Obama, and Richardson.  Gravel and Kucinich had non-specific statements.

The Republican side is bleak—none of the candidates have statements concerning postsecondary education and student financial aid. 

The following websites provide very interesting additional information:  http://www.finaid.org/educators/presidentialcandidates.phtml; http://chronicle.com/blogs/election; and http://www.vote-smart.org/.   

            Society’s standards for beauty and physical attractiveness are a very prevalent part of our society today.  It starts the moment we are born and follows us our entire lifetime.  Think about it, when we someone we know has a baby girl, we buy pink and say how “pretty” she is.  However, when we see male babies, we are more apt to say look how strong he is; we rarely say isn’t he pretty.  These standards of physical attractiveness may change over time, but may affect our employment opportunities, social interactions, and even our friendships and how people respond sexually to us.  

            I believe that the media is the basis of our knowledge of what is “beautiful”.  They inundate us with what “beauty” is—they set the standard.  They then flood magazines, TV, and the internet with images of these beautiful people.  More often than not, these “beautiful” people have bodies that the normal person cannot obtain.  I believe that although in the past women may have been more affected by this; I believe that men are also falling prey to this beauty standard.

            Women and girls have been more inclined to feel negatively about their bodies and their appearance than boys and men.  When young girls and women begin to feel societal pressure as to their “beauty” their self-esteem is lowered.  Low self-esteem can contribute to eating disorders.  

            It is interesting to see all the young (10-16) year old girls looking at and buying Victoria’s Secret “Pink” line.  This line of teen lingerie was created to “hook” these young girls on what a beautiful body is and keep them coming back as they grow older.  Abercrombie and Fitch uses attractive, young men and women as live models in the front of their store, many times the young men are shirtless showing off their attractive bodies.  Likewise, the young girls are scantily clad in tight fitting outfits showing off their bodies. 

            Some advertisers are choosing to select more non-traditional body types such as heavier models, but this type of advertisement utilizing “normal” women and men appears infrequently.  As shown in class, the Dove commercials and “bucking” the stereotype.  Until we stop buying into it, this type of “brainwashing” will continue.

 

            As an aside, while searching for information on gender and advertising, I “stumbled” across the following website:  http://www.genderads.com/ .  Very interesting!

  

Debates . . . A new approach

The Pew Research Center’s survey on “Voter Impressions of Leading Candidates” http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=356, released September 20, 2007 reiterates what we have been talking about in class.  Based on this research it should be interesting to watch the political advertising that will be coming out and how each of the candidates may use these perceived personality traits in this advertising.  Along those lines, I believe that the personal strengths that survey indicates voters are beginning to focus on will be obvious throughout the debates.   According to the survey, “Clinton is viewed as ‘Tough” and “Smart” and Giuliani is viewed as ‘Energetic’.”   I believe that Hillary Clinton, or any woman, must work twice as hard to project her strengths, especially in this male dominated arena of politics.  Her strategies are paying off, if the Pew Research is correct and she is viewed as ‘Tough’ and ‘Smart’.  She would not fare well, if she were perceived to be a whimpering woman who needed a man to succeed. I find the approach that CNN and YouTube has taken on the debates is very interesting and refreshing—a game of sorts.  Having questions submitted via video to YouTube with a chance that your question may “win” by being asked to the candidates in the debate is a great way to garner viewers and engage the public.  In the democratic debate, Although Anderson Cooper made reference to one candidate “stuffing” the question box; it appeared that the questions were varied, original, and representative of the issues. That is just one problem I see with this way of choosing debate questions.  Another concern I have is that the questions are posed by a specific audience.  Maybe this should not be a concern.  Now that I am thinking about it, the use of a game type atmosphere where you can submit a video via the internet, and you can become a winner, but to see your win you must watch the debates on television.  Maybe this is a good way to get people involved in actually watching the debates.  This then is a very creative idea.   While watching the democratic debate on YouTube, even though Anderson Cooper emphasized that the candidates should “answer the questions,” they still answer in that “canned” response—whether it actually addresses the question or not.   I think that we should prepare a video in class and submit an entry, http://youtube.com/republicandebate, for the Republican Debate to be broadcast November 28!  

How are candidates viewed on websites . . .

What will former President Clinton’s role be if Hillary is elected president?  According to the msnbc.com website,  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21148401/, former President Clinton will continue his philanthropic role he has been playing since leaving the presidency and “lead efforts to rebuild the United States’ tarnished reputation abroad.”  I think that although some Americans and other candidates may make an issue over what role Bill Clinton will play, while others think of it as an enormous advantage because “knowing is half the battle!”  Whatever role the former president takes on, it will definitely have different dynamics than that of a “First Lady”! He won’t be the “social hostess”, but rather a strong and valued partner.

This press release was accompanied by a picture and video clip of a smiling Bill Clinton and a smiling and proud looking Hillary looking on in front of an American Flag in London.

Another story hit the internet via CNN’s Political Ticker,  http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/, where Rudy Giulani attacks an idea thrown into conversation by Hillary Clinton about giving every newborn child a $5,000 bond.  This was accompanied by an AP photo of Giuliani where the look on his face like he was just surprised—not a look that inspires trust or intelligence. The “feel” I received from this was negative, it went on to attack the other three leading Democratic candidates.  

As with any news source, one must read it with an open mind.  It is interesting when you start looking closer at these websites and noticing the little things in the background or what type of clothes and the colors of their clothing the candidate is wearing.  Are they trying to appeal to a particular audience. 

Music a Catalyst for Change: Is the message the same today as it was in the sixties?

It is my belief that music is meant to make you think and feel.  The feelings and thoughts that are generated while we listen to music, whether it is consciously or subconsciously, can and do serve to motivate individuals or society to change by bringing to light political issues such as civil rights, poverty, global warming, war, and human rights, etc.  Protest music can be general in nature speaking out against war for example like “What’s Going On?” by Marvin Gaye, or it can be about a specific event such as the song “Ohio” by Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young which we talked about in class. 

Can protest songs of the past take on new meaning?  Yes. expecially those songs which take on social issues.  ”What’s Going On?” by Marvin Gaye suggests that with understanding and love we can solve alot of our problems–the war may be different but war is war and by understanding and listening and opening our hearts we can end war.  This song is not unlike the Lenny  Kravitz song “Let Love Rule” where Kravitz suggests that “love can conquer any war”. 

I was thinking after class what makes today different from the sixties and early seventies in relation to protest songs, marches, college students, Woodstock, “Make Love Not War”, etc.  I believe that one of the differences is with the Vietnam War there was a national draft which affected all males once they turned 18.  With the draft affecting college age students, protests and political music became a part of the college culture.  Today, while I believe the sentiments are still the same, the military consists of a different type of soldier.  Although he is still young, many of the new soldiers come from small towns, lower socio-economic groups, and minorities.  Thus the war protests do not “seem” to be as widespread because we are not seeing these protest on every college campus, but rather music or concerts where political issued are tackled.

If I had to pick a favorite “protest song” I believe I would have to choose “Where Have All the Flowers Gone” by Pete Seeger.  I believe that this song is as relevant today in protesting the war in Iraq as it was in the sixties protesting the Vietnam War.  “When will we ever learn?”