The Campaign Catwalk

There’s no question that this election has gotten out of hand. In past elections, candidates’ experience, education and stances on issues have been analyzed, scrutinized and overblown.

In this election, it’s dress to impress.

Thanks to vast media coverage of the presidential election, the candidates are constantly under pressure to not only sound good but to also look good. In my opinion, it is a good thing to look presentable at all times. But it seems like the candidates are being judged based on their fashion sense.

Governor Sarah Palin’s $150,000 wardrobe was under fire last week. The Democrats, as they are frequently known for their ability to make a fuss over nothing, had a field day with this. Palin confirmed that the clothes were not hers and were auctioned off after she wore them. What’s more, the wardrobe was financed by the Republic Party, not the American people. What’s the big deal? I’m sure Obama doesn’t buy his suits from Wal-Mart.

Before her expensive wardrobe was purchased, Palin was criticized for wearing “plain” and “dull” outfits. Now that she has more fashionable clothes to wear on the campaign trail, she is criticized for wearing clothes that are too expensive. I think Sarah Palin is a beautiful woman who looks excellent not only for her age but also considering that she’s had five kids, including Trig who was just born in April.

Not to mention Palin’s outfits blow Hillary Clinton’s pantsuits out of the water. This slideshow from Newsweek details Palin’s looks and guesses how much the various pieces cost: http://www.newsweek.com/id/165227

Even the men are being criticized when it comes to wardrobe choices. Or, in some cases, their choice of neckwear. An article from Newsweek analyzes the candidates’ ties, saying that the knots they choose tell a lot about who they are. McCain’s Windsor knot, according to the article, conveys an elite image. Obama’s four-in-hand knot is more common, therefore sending a message that he is the quintessential “every man.” (Here is a link to the Newsweek article: http://www.newsweek.com/id/163334)

Yet another feature from Newsweek has fashion guru Tim Gunn of Project Runway fame criticizing the candidates’ looks. Not surprisingly, he seems to favor the Democrat’s looks over the GOP’s. Imagine that. He calls Palin’s outfits “schizophrenic” and isn’t a fan of McCain’s distinguished sweater with a crisp dress shirt underneath. And he completely ignores Cindy McCain’s adorable pink tweed skirt and blazer. But he likes Nancy Pelosi’s look, calling her the “most fashionable woman in all of Washington.” Please. I’m not a fashion expert (who can compete with a fashionable gay man?) but Tim seems to have a bit of a Democratic crush. Of course, Obama and Biden get kudos for their clothing as well as Michelle Obama, who I admit is a very fashionable woman.
(Here’s a link to Tim’s Democratic Love-Fest. Just kidding. Or not. http://www.newsweek.com/id/166200)

In fact, I really think that all of the candidates are stylish. And they should be, as I’m sure they have plenty of campaign advisors telling them what (and what not) to wear. I guess what bothers me about fashion and the campaign trail is that it turns it into a sort of red carpet gala instead of a serious turning point for our country. Okay, I admit it’s fun to see what they wear and it’s important to look good. But you shouldn’t decide on a candidate because of what they wear, and there are more important issues to focus on.

It's a bird! It's a plane! Wait...it's just Obama.

If you've watched any of the election coverage on television, you know that the media is biased toward one of the candidates. I'm willing to bet that you can tell me which one it is, too.

Barack Hussein Obama. You've undoubtedly heard this name hundreds and hundreds of times since he announced his presidential campaign. I remember hearing the name even before his candidacy. And chances are, you've heard a positive message along with Obama's name most of the time.

John Sidney McCain. The chances that you've heard his full name are lower. Because of the media bias that envelopes the news waves, you've probably heard words like "old" and "Bush" along with the name McCain.

Obama has mystified the United States, and apparently the media as well. He's become the golden child of the left, the messiah for the masses of people that believe he will bring about change. He's a downright media darling next to John McCain.

But Obama has received some bad press; he has been accused of hanging out with terrorists. That wording sounds harsh, but William Ayers is described as a domestic terrorist. He participated in the bombings of the New York City Police Headquarters, the United States Capitol building and The Pentagon. But none of Obama’s supporters seem to care. A few months ago, Obama was also under attack for his ties with his radical pastor Jeremiah Wright. Again, liberals brushed it off as nothing. Perhaps it is not fair to link Obama with a man who participated in radical terrorist activities almost 40 years ago or a pastor whose radical sermons didn't exactly concern Obama. But it bothers me that no one is stopping to investigate this, or at the very least consider the fact that Obama may not be all he’s cracked up to be. The company you keep says a lot about who you are.

It seems like Obama can do no wrong in some eyes and the media propagates that daily. Fox News is the only exception I have seen, clearly advertising for McCain. But they are also in the wrong; news should be objective. Voters should decide for themselves. After researching the candidate, of course.

Journalism today is definitely biased. Networks lean either left or right, making no effort to cover it up. Voters are looking to be informed when they tune into the news; instead, they are being smacked with an agenda. And from what I have seen, most of the time that agenda starts with an O.