Fear and the GOP

On national security McCain wins. We saw how that might play out early in the campaign, when one good scare, one timely reminder of the chaos lurking in the world, probably saved McCain in New Hampshire, a state he had to win to save his candidacy – this according to McCain’s chief strategist, Charlie Black. The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December was an “unfortunate event,” says Black. “But his knowledge and ability to talk about it reemphasized that this is the guy who’s ready to be Commander-in-Chief. And it helped us.” As would, Black concedes with startling candor after we raise the issue, another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. “Certainly it would be a big advantage to him,” says Black.

That was Fortune magazine describing the words of Charlie Black, lobbyist and McCain’s chief strategist. Everyone, including Senator Obama, Senator McCain, and Charlie Black himself have denounced his statement as being “a complete disgrace” and “inappropriate.” It was certainly both of those, but what seems more interesting is whether or not he was correct. If one looks back over the last few years, one can’t help but notice that when the electorate was scared they voted for the GOP(2002, 2004) but that when the electorate is outraged about government corruption they vote for the Democratic party(2006, local 2008.) I’m not defending his comments and I think that it’s good Senators McCain and Obama denounced them and that Charlie Black apologized for them. However, the facts do support Mr. Black’s thesis which is something that should be noted and brought up by the media when a McCain allied 527 inevitably launches ads based on fear.

92% of Americans Believe in God or a Universal Spirit

The Los Angeles Times released an interesting poll today which says that 92% of Americans believe in some sort of higher power and that 58% pray daily. The poll confirms the stereotype that religious belief is more prevalent in the Midwest and South as well as highlighting how California differs from the rest of the nation. Californians are more likely to believe homosexuals are their equals and are less likely to be certain of their belief, less likely to take scripture literally, less likely to attend religious services, and less likely to feel threatened by Hollywood.

The article about the poll features a quote from John Green, a senior fellow of the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life:

“The West Coast generally is less religiously observant, less certain about religious beliefs, the West Coast was settled last, it has been growing fairly rapidly and has a unique amount of dynamism in [its] societies.”

His quote seems fairly accurate given that California’s diversity makes it far harder to create stereotypes and generalities than it would be in the Midwest. This isn’t intended as a knock against the mid-west but rather a recognition of the fact that it’s far harder to generalize in a population made up of every race, creed, code, and gender than it is in a homogenous bubble.

49% of Americans support creation of an Internet FCC

According to a Rasmussen poll which was released on Saturday, 49% of Americans think that the government should regulate the Internet as it does other media sources such as television and radio. 35% think the government has no place regulating the Internet and 16% were undecided. I can sympathize with those who believe the government should regulate it, but I don’t agree with them. The FCC places its focus primarily on regulating vulgarity and obscenity and while both certainly exist on the Internet, both can also be easily avoided due to the sheer quantity of content which is available online. My objection to government regulation of the net isn’t just because it’s unnecessary but also because it would damage the Internet’s greatest asset which is its neutrality.

Viewpoints and movements which traditional media sources ignore(for various reasons) such as the 9/11 Truth movement, Ron Paul’s campaign, etc. get a fair shot at success on the Internet. That’s not to say that there’s no downside to an unregulated Internet as there are serveral. One downside is that falsehoods have an equal share as the truth but that’s the case in traditional media as well(as shown by the run up to the war in Iraq where falsehoods dominated the discourse.) Another is that it allows people to segregate themselves based on ideology, but again, this was already possible with traditional media due to partisan sources on radio and television. The Internet as it currently exists has its fair share of problems, but they’re problems that the FCC has been unable to solve.