Since the 2004 election, lots of things have changed:

• Grassroots Republicans are pissed off at the party.
• We lost majorities in the House and Senate.
• The economy is anemic.
• President Bush’s approval rating is at record lows.
• President Bush hardly enages with the media or the American people.
• 55 members of the House are retiring.
• While the surge is working in Iraq, one must wonder how long it can be sustained and what will happen after we leave.
• I consider myself a Crunchy Conservative rather than a Republican.
• Republican and conservative no longer mean the same thing.
• Hell froze over and John McCain became the GOP nominee.

However, we can always count on the stability of Democrats:

Rush Limbaugh was tampering with the primary,” Kerry said “If it was not for Republicans taking Democratic ballots, he would have won,” he said of Obama.

It’s nice that this little graphic is still relevant. John Kerry, bless you. In these uncertain political times, if the misguided voters of Massachusetts have to keep re-electing you at lease I can count on you to keep whining. Thank you for keeping some things the same.

Rush and Project Chaos tampered with the primary! Wahhhhhhh!

This afternoon I saw Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, the Ben Stein documentary on intelligent design. In full disclosure, I love Ben Stein* and I’m a creationist, so I pretty much agreed with his perspective.**

It wasn’t Stein’s discussion intelligent design that made me think. Rather it was the obvious bias that exists in academia. Towards the end of the film, Stein mentions how we fight for every freedom in America except the freedom of inquiry, especially in academia.

It’s this pervasive thought, the one that you must agree with the established secular world view, that bothers me the most about our society. It’s one that I keep butting my head against. When we have so many freedoms in this country, why is it unacceptable to disagree with accepted or politically correct thought? I seem to run into it at every turn.

I’m drawn to the academic world because of the pursuit of ideas. However, my thoughts and perspectives aren’t welcome within these circles. It’s the lack of respect for opposing thought that offends me.

It kills me that we’re no longer allowed to pursue ideas at the academic level. Rather, we must pursue research within a limited paradigm. If you stray from this perspective, you’re fired or your career is ruined. Between Indoctrinate U and Expelled, the case is well stated that there’s an obvious bias against center right thought in our institutes of higher education. For example, within my profession, a lot of time and research dollars have studied the role of women in public relations. In reality 80% of the field is female. However, because gender studies are so popular and well-funded, countless grants have gone into studying the role of women within the field of public relations. I’m still at a loss to what this has accomplished.

Oddly enough, most of my friends are liberals or moderates. I love the discussion and debate of our conservations. These people know me and respect me for my views. In turn, I respect them for their views. We rarely agree, but I love our discussions. Sadly, this is more the exception than the rule. In professional and academic circles, I’m viewed as intellectually inferior or insignificant because of my political and religious perspectives.

Just this week, someone mentioned to me that he/she assumes everyone is liberal until proven otherwise. It’s gotten to the point where I enjoy seeing the faces of people when they discover that I’m a conservative. Sometimes, there’s a night and day difference in the way that they treat me, or it comes up at every turn in conversations that have nothing to do with politics, religion, or philosophy. (”You prefer sausage to pepperoni pizza. Oh yeah, I forget that you’re a conservative.”) The concept of enjoying the presence of a smart, educated, woman who is also conservative, is so foreign that they constantly make remarks like “I keep forgetting you’re conservative. You seem so normal.” I’m an anomaly that those on the left just can’t grasp.

This bias or lack of freedom of thought, was so entrenched in my previous job that higher level management sometimes apologized for their lack of sensitivity towards my views. I’m fairly certain that I’m the only conservative that many people in the District of Columbia know.

This type of thought is at its worst in academia. Actually, I encountered it more as an undergraduate at the University of Tennessee. American University was so liberal that they just didn’t care about the U.S. right/left spectrum. If my professors or fellow students realized that I was right of center, they were shocked but open to the idea of knowing one of those red-staters. I filled a slot as the token conservative and was the subject of many a happy hour conversation (”Well, according to my conservative friend, Adrienne, conservatives feel this way…”) Even when I wrote my thesis on the lack of online activism within politically conservative circles, my professors embraced my topic. They questioned why I cared about Republicans and their lack of support on the web, but supported my research. This is very uncommon in the world of academia.

It disappoints me that our nation has devolved into academic yes-men for the sake of getting an A or tenure. That is so contrary to the original concept of universities. If we ban one train of thought just because it opposes the popular view, aren’t we harming our research? Science is rife with examples of banished researchers who dared to oppose popular thought. Many times, those people were persecuted but eventually proven correct. Aren’t we doing that today with political correctness? By hemming ourselves into one worldview, aren’t we harming the intellectual capacity of students and higher ed?

Is it more important that we stay within circles that confirm our own views than build the academic stamina to defend our positions?*** Isn’t the point of academia to challenge ideas and expand research?Anyone? Anyone?

*I met Ben Stein at the 2004 Inauguration when he showed up in a tuxedo and sneakers. He’s extremely gracious and kind and posed in a picture with us. I’ll always be a devoted fan.

**After nine years of creationism at Berean, I was familiar with most of the arguments and anticipated many of the topics in the film. (Actually, Berean taught creationism by refuting evolution, so I often find myself more familiar with Darwinianism than most of my secular friends.)

***I realize that there are circles on the right who are just as guilty as liberals, especially within the religious right.

Does anyone else find this picture of President Bush and the Easter Bunny disturbing?

It looks like he’s enjoying the death grip he has on the bunny’s paw.

Over lunch, I took a few minutes to walk outside and look at the anti-war demonstrations going on around my office. Sadly, there were no conservatives near me to join in my mockery.

These people are supposedly protesting the deaths in Iraq. Personally, I think they look more like followers of the Dark Lord Who Can Not Be Named.

These guys seem to have the utopian progressive platform down to three lines.

More power to the protesters for assembling and expressing their misguided and naive opinions but don’t disrespect my flag. The upside down flags really bothered me.

A few tourists on their Segways stopped by the hullabaloo.

I also may or may not have passed Cindy Sheehan. I’m rather grossed out if I did.

My whole problem with peace protesters is that they’re disruptive, inefficient and disjointed. From a strategic perspective, I get your point, but it isn’t effective. Why have five or six small protests around the city? Focus on one thing and make a lot of noise. Furthermore, you don’t win any fans by disrupting traffic and morning commutes. If you want us to pull out of Iraq, present reasonable arguments to win people over to your side. Don’t piss us off by causing traffic jams.

Knitting Grandmas outside the Veterans Administration? WHAT DOES THAT ACCOMPLISH?

At this point, President Bush has about 10 months left in his administration. It’s time to drop the Impeachment line! Think back to the 90s. It took years to bring Articles of Impeachment against Clinton. If you insist on rallying around one message, make it a worthwhile one. Take a few minutes and lean how a President of the United States is impeached.

Stop being whiny and focus on articulate and accurate points. But then, perhaps that’s why I’m a conservative. Aging Hippies and spoiled college kids aren’t known for their reasoned viewpoints.

As part of my job, I write a lot of email alerts. This causes me to critique other email alerts that somehow make their way to my inbox. The RNC is a frequent offender.

Sometimes, I wonder if the RNC is stuck in a January 2004 time-warp. The emails offering exclusive offers to buy calendars of President Bush, chat with the First Lady or holiday-themed games seem so irrelevant in Election 2008.

Today, they offered me a grotesque green elephant in celebration of St. Patrick’s Day.

Yes, for only $35 that bizarre-looking pachyderm is mine.

I also sometimes wonder at their data matching abilities.

As a top supporter of the RNC, I am offering you a special opportunity to help elect GOP candidates and give a gift to your favorite Republican this St. Patrick’s Day.

I guess it’s safe to say that I’m a “supporter” of Republicans, but of the RNC? Typically, I go out of my way to not contribute to the RNC. I merely attribute all those pictures of President Bush that they keep mailing me as an acknowledgment that I’m still in the database. “Yippee!” I generally think. “I haven’t been purged yet.”

Or give Paddy to the “Green” Republican in your life who is dedicated to improving the environment.

Is it just me or the quotation marks around “Green” suggest that Republicans taking stronger stands on environmental issues are not really Republicans. It also strikes me as odd that just because something is green, it supports the environment. Do all pink things support breast cancer? Is every red object made in support of the (RED) campaign or Go Red for Women? I also highly doubt that the stuffed animal is environmentally-friendly.

I’d really like to grab the RNC by the shoulders and yell, “The majority of Republicans are furious at you, yet you keep sending us $!#@ like this. When will you wake up and realize that the party has absolutely no idea how the average Republican feels? Have you seen all the resignations in the House? Downticket votes are going to set us back decades in November! Do some bloody focus groups and opinion polls instead of asking for freaking donations all the time!”

I have a feeling that would get me kicked off the list.

Sitting in the Going Offline breakout session. This is a topic that plagues everyone in the online grassroots sector.

The girl from Ron Paul and the girl from John Edwards essentially talked about crowdsourcing. In my opinon, the perfect grassroots team would have one person devoted to blogger outreach and crowdsourcing coordination. That’s where you get the huge numbers mobilizing.

Maven Mom just asked if the Google lounge had bean bags. This year, they have slick white and metal sofas. Well done! You can sit on those. They do look very IKEA-like though. We talk about the web being ubiquitous, but nothing is more ubiquitous than IKEA in the world. They’re in Saudia Arabia now. They also have a candy and nut bar. Kudos to Google.

Between sessions, I managed to score some schwag tshirts. Since I rate conferences on the available schwag, this one is better than last year. No stress balls in the shap of the Capitol Dome or coasters. Blogads gets extra props for having pink t-shirts.

Back to the breakout session:

Are the netroots still relevant? Josh Levy of TechPresident is talking. He’s right, the old model of organized online grassroots activties has changed. We’ve already surpassed the 2004 model. Next year, we’ll be talking about the Obama model, which is the most succesful example of a slick marketing campaign with grassroots outreach. Usually, there’s one or the other. Obama has both.

Oh, legalities with the FEC. The laws are outdated and don’t allow for transparency. However, this forces campaigns to give control to supporters.

Towards the end, someone from the floor mentioned the concept of nettops vs. netroots. What an idea! If the web mimics communication in real life, it makes sense to have a hierarchy of voices on the Internet. This is especially true in the blogosphere.

Liveblogging from the 2008 Politics Online Conference while simultaneously working and absorbing thoughts on technology. Call it multitasking 2.0.deaccess of the web in every aspect of our lives.

Last year, I wrote about how the web has changed the control factor of politics and communication. This year, I think we’ve gone beyond that. In my opinion, we’re in the midst of a technological revolution that is changing every aspect of life.

Just as the Industrial Revolution changed the face of the economy, manufacturing and family life, the web is changing how we live. Families went from subsistence living on the farm to living in apartments in cities. As improvements in food and domestic activities took place (processed food, vacuum cleaners) the dual-working family emerged. Our society has adjusted to the norms that the Industrial Revolution created.

Then the web was created and technology started changing at exponential rates.

The web is altering the fabric of our lives and societies. Right now, we’re fitting the web within the confines of the Industrial Revolution perspective, but it’s gradually changing. Concepts such as working from home, satellite meetings, global communities and 24/7 newsfeeds.

Our culture is changing. The concept of privacy is likely to change with coming generations. The kids these days are used to publicizing every minute detail of their lives. This will change social interactions dramatically as they get older.

We’re also seeing a global community emerge. Travel almost anywhere and you’ll see the same stores and same restaurants. People around the world are largely visiting the same web sites. Despite political and historical differences, people are largely growing more similar and our differences are becoming more obvious.

Back to the plenary. All four people are very smart, but all four people are outspoken Democrats. I’ll be emailing IPDI. There are too many good Republicans on this issue to not have an entire political school of thought represented.

Everyone gets so caught up on the digital divide, but it’s the broadband divide hurting the impoverished. Interent speed changes web behavior more than anything. Why don’t we talk about the lack of competition in service providers. If the price of web acesss was cheaper, more people could access it. What good is One Laptop Per Child when they can’t use the web?

Most Americans wonder how the Federal government manages to waste so much money. How is it possible to pass trillions and trillions of dollars in government pork bills every year? The WaPo has a great article today explaining modern day lobbying processes. While the article focuses on the tourism industry, keep in mind that any 501c3 organization with a DC or Northern Virginia address is engaged in the exact same activities. This, my readers, is how your tax dollars are spent.

WHEN PEOPLE THINK OF LOBBYING, they generally envision shadowy operatives and their bought-and-paid-for members of Congress sneaking self-interested giveaways into law. That still happens, of course. Witness the Jack Abramoff scandal. The disgraced lobbyist pleaded guilty in 2006 to arranging all kinds of expensive outings for government officials, including free parties in skyboxes and a golf trip to Scotland on a private jet, in exchange for legislative favors.

But Abramoff was an aberration. Lobbying is much more substantive and out in the open than its ugly caricature. Lobbyists primarily woo lawmakers with facts. Making the case is what effective lobbyists do most and best. They spend the rest of their time persuading lawmakers’ constituents to back the same causes, very much in the mode of an electoral campaign. If members of Congress see merit in a position and there is a public outcry in its favor, that’s the way they tend to vote. Lobbying these days has a lot of moving parts and is, at its core, more marketing than arm-twisting or favor-swapping. It features not only the lobbyists themselves but ad executives, public relations experts, pollsters, Web site designers and other consultants.

This is why you, Average Joe American, get so many email alerts asking you to call or email your elected official. Lobbyists often meet with a targeted member, likely sitting on a crucial committee or leadership position, and offer a sales pitch. Usually these involve facts and information specific to that member’s district. If that legislation is backed up with constituent emails and/or grasstops phone calls that voice support, it is more likely that the member will support the bill.

(more…)

Must give props to Newsweek. They did it again. Yesterday when I checked the mail, the cover of this week’s edition made me pause. Not only is it funny, but it’s also extremely true.

The likely McCain nomination captures the state of the GOP. What does it mean to be a Republican anymore? We have social liberals/fiscal conservatives, we have Crunchy Cons (socially conservative/fiscally liberal), libertarian leaning Republicans (fiscal conservatives/”I don’t give a damn about anything else”) and the enigmatic Evangelicals who support anyone waving a Bible around and claim to be pro-life.

McCain represents a party that doesn’t know its soul anymore. The conservative elite and pundits dislike McCain because he’s never courted them. Those loyal to the GOP are begrudgingly supporting him in the face of a Hillary regime or an Obama socialist utopia. What other options do we have? Where are McCain’s excited core supporters? I’d like to meet one.

I’m not thrilled with McCain, but I’ll support him and vote for him next November. The pragmatic part of me, the part that has worked in DC and seen the messy side of policymaking, understands that he may be able to pull off a win and get things accomplished inside the Beltway. Where Bush polarized, McCain can partner.

Then there’s the small voice of a conservative ideologue gasping for air in my political views. McCain sold out to moderates and Democrats too many times to count. He’s pro-life, but the conservative spectrum has so many other issues in it now. His policies on immigration and campaign finance reform bother me. This voice almost wants a Democrat to win, so we can purge the party and re-discover our ideology.

However, with issues like universal health care and the war on terror to be decided in the next administration, I’m terrified at the prospect of a Democrat in power. Face it, the next four years will be filled with so many political landmines that no leader can emerge unscathed. Unless something amazing happens, 2012 is likely to be as messy as this election. I don’t know how any party can tackle the war and a sagging economy and come out winning. It almost looks like the winner of this election is doomed in the next.

Primary day in Maryland, Virginia and DC. Since I’m not a registered voter in Maryland, I get to sit back and laugh at the Dems today. I always relish those moments.

In the few hours of TV that I watched over the weekend, I kept seeing one Hillary ad in particular and was surprised. It wasn’t my normal disgust towards the junior senator from New York, but shock at how bad her ad was. This was from the campaign that gave us the Soprano’s spoof a few months ago.

35 years of experience? Really? The last time I checked you were elected in 2000. Does this mean that Maven Mom qualifies to be a veterinarian since she’s been married to one for 27 years? Aside from misinformation, the ad is just tired. It’s the formulaic political ad that has run in every election since TV started dominating the political process with JFK. I’m surprised that her campaign wasn’t more creative with the Potomac Primary since it covers the DC area, and politics are shoved down our throats on an hourly basis. Is she just trying to turn out the over 65s? It’s bo-oring. Watching floor votes on CSPAN is more exciting.

Last night, I caught my first Obama ad, which contrasted nicely. It also aired during the Superbowl.

Both ads carry the same message: Bush screwed up the country, and I can fix it. Whereas, Obama is hopeful and motivating, Hillary is “me, me, me.” Obama is inspires. Hillary pontificates. She focuses on the economy, while Obama captures the war and environment. That split probably reflects the difference in demographics since Hillary attracts an older crowd and “It’s the economy, stupid.” saved her husband’s butt in ‘92.

Also look at both candidate’s YouTube channels. Hillary has 253 videos with the last one posted 3 days ago. She has 9,882 subscribers and 1,308,485 views.

Obama has 635 videos with the last one posted 10 hours ago. He has 26,394 subscribers and 11,863,552 views.

Do subscribers and Facebook friends translate into votes? It’s sort of looking that way for Obama. Hillary is turning out the typical votes, while Obama is recruiting new voters. Youth voting numbers are up and overall turnout is higher for Democrats. I’m curious to see if Obama is inspiring people to vote or just to vote for him? If Hillary ends up winning, will the young voters carrying the water for Obama show up next November? Or will Hillary attempt to recruit them with other lame attempts to be cool like this.

As much as I want Hillary to win the nomination for the Ds (in order to help the GOP), Obama’s campaign is amazing to watch. It reflects the change in political campaigning. Hillary=old school broadcast/boring. Obama=young, innovative and tech friendly.