B_Buckley's Blog

Alright, politicos ... tee off.

What do you think?

John McCain - a man fond of political gambles - has just taken one of the biggest in years.  With polls showing he was not only closing the gap on Barack Obam, but taking the lead, he decided to take the gamble of his life and name a young, relatively new-to-the-game governor as his running mate.

Here's the instant analysis:

VP nominees rarely help a candidate, but they can hurt them.  When the #1 concern voters have about McCain is age and health, it would seem the #1 quality he'd look for in a running mate would be the ability to take over the presidency, on day 1.

Instead, he appears to have gone for someone who both may pull a few disaffected female voters, appeal to the cultural conservatives in his party and reinforce his maverick image.

Hey folks ...

We're looking to do a story comparing the original Madden NFL video game with the current one.  What we're looking for is someone who has a very early edition of the game - the first, if possible, at the very least one of the first 5 editions of the game and a machine that game can play on.

We'd like to shoot some video of you playing the game and get your view point on how it differs from today's version.

If you can and want to help, email me here at the station:  bob.buckley@wghp.com Or if you know someone who might be able to help ... have them email me.

Thanks!
B

The courts should be open to all Americans to file suit ... but that doesn't mean the suit should go forward.

Suits are thrown out of court every day.  This should be at the top of the list.

What's the point the plaintiff was trying to make?  From his comments, it seems he simply wanted some attention.

The judge said he originally wanted to throw the suit out on process - he couldn't see how to serve God with the court papers.  But then, if God is, indeed, all-knowing, he wouldn't need to be served.  He knows all about it.

Since the suit seeks an injunction on what the plaintiff sees as God's not-so-pleasant handywork.  Good luck.  I think God has bigger issues and, of course, this leads us to the debate on whether God ordains the pain and sin in the world or is that our free will.  If so ... the plaintiff needs to change the defendant on the suit.

Time for a little sound-off.

How are you being, "Nickeled & Dimed to Death?"

One of my "favorites," is, when you buy a ticket through Ticketmaster or any of those services, you pay what they call, "A convenience fee."  Convenient for whom?

I understand Tickemaster is providing a service.  And some might consider that service a convenience.  It just sounds a bit patronizing, to me.

Let's hear from you.

There are a few people you meet in life who have a profound effect on you.  Tony Snow was one of mine.

I had listened to Tony on the radio through the early '90s and then, when word came down that he was going to start a political talk show on Fox, I ran to the general manager's office.

"Boss, let me go up to Washington, DC and do a series of stories on this new show Tony Snow is starting ... we can send them to all the other Fox stations so they can preview the show for the rest of the country."

"Sure, kid," he replied.  "Just don't embarras us."

I spent the better part of a week hanging around the Fox News Sunday offices just north of the Capitol and found a mentor.

There's a saying that the measure of a man is what he does for you when he knows you can't do anything for him.  Through lunches, phone calls, emails and long talks, Tony, time and again, was there for me when he knew there wasn't a thing I could do for him, other than say, "Thank you."

He went to Davidson College and began his newspaper career at the Greensboro News & Record (my other "excuse" for going up to DC to do the stories).  He always had a fondness for the people of this area and his favorite recreation:  playing basketball at the Hayes-Taylor YMCA on East Market Street.

Even those who didn't agree with Tony never found him disagreeable.  He believed in himself, America and Americans ... and none more than his children and the woman he always called, "The sainted Jill."

America needs more people like Tony:  bright, hard-working, endlessly optimistic and selfless.  He may have only lived 53 years but, boy, did he make the most of them.  We'll miss you, buddy.

So ... should English be the official language of the state?

This doesn't mean the only language. Many who oppose English as the official language claim that it does mean that. It simply means that all government business should be done in English and immigrants should demonstrate that they can speak it proficiently before they become citizens. Speak what you want in your home (or any non-governmental entity).

If you look at our history, every time we feel as if we're being inundated with immigrants who are too numerous to assimilate, we do what we're doing now: We force the issue and start the process that restricts the borders.

Around 1915, the number of foreign born (and foreign-language speakers) peaked at about the level it is now: Somewhere around 17% We began closing the borders until we hit a nadir of foreign-born people here (somewhere around 7 or 8%)

America is the most accepting country on earth. All we ask is that - if you come here - you add being an American to whatever you were when you came. Is that too much?

****************************
Ed.: Feel strongly about this issue? Join Bob Buckley for an online conversation Friday at 12:30 p.m. http://media.myfoxwghp.com/live/index_livechat.html>

The, "He said, she said," advertising may be the most aggravating part of politics.

I realize we're never going back to the days of the Lincoln/Douglass debates, where each man got 90 minutes to speak and then an hour to rebut the other.

But it would be nice to get more detail from candidates and less half-truths in advertising. And just about all of them do it.

We're much to blame in this, ourselves, because we don't demand more of our candidates.

What we want to know is, how much do these ads influence your decision about for whom to vote? If so, how? If not, why not? (I sound like a high school essay question, n'est pas?)

And how much do the "Fact Check" reports help you in finding the truth?

Cheers,

BBuckley

Does It Add Up? Fact-Checking Richard Moore's Ad

Fact or Fiction? Dissecting Bev Perdue's Ad

Okay ... so John Dingall (D, Michigan) wants to add 50-cents to our national gas tax.  In North Carolina, that would bring our total gas tax to about a dollar a gallon.

I'll give Dingall credit for taking on an issue that is very unpopular in the home state of GM, Chrysler and Ford.

Two questions, here:

1)  Are you willing to pay this much?

2)  What benefit would it create, if its true that eliminating all American cars would reduce emissions by less than 1%?

Let's hear from ya', Piedmont!

BBuckley

This was an interesting story because I went to a number of environmentalists to be a "counterweight" to Mr. Crichton's point-of-view. Some simply had scheduling conflicts, others felt they weren't the best person to do that and more, still, simply didn't want to take on the task.

The problem, as Crichton seems to see it, is twofold:

1) The "consensus" has been wrong so often, before, forcing a consensus on this situation now is playing Russian Roulette with our lives. (Crichton also points out that consensus is not science - it's the anti-thesis of science).

2) Too many people in this debate are more interested in intentions than in results and reality - making one feel good, and morally superior, because they "care."

Cheers,

BBuckley

Okay, folks, this is about as hot a button issue as there is out there in America.

So ... let's discuss this without epithets and gratuitous slams ... real ideas and the basis behind them.

What should our immigration policy be, and why?  What should we do with the people who are here, illegally, now?

How can we do have this discussion without each political party pandering for votes?

Cheers,

Bob Buckley

You don't have to read all 1,168 pages to get the gist of Rand's philosophy. If you read two major speeches - the one by Francisco d'Anconia starting on p. 411 is my favorite - than you'll get the basic idea http://www.working-minds.com/money.htm.  (The other is Hank Reardan's speech in court, later in the book).

One of the key questions every society has to answer is, "What debt - if any - do we owe the innovators and producers?"

Rand is a big fan of those people, arguing that collectivism perversely cannabalizes a society, when those who do not produce nor innovate attach themselves to those who do and demand an ever-increasing slice of their bounty.

Rand is a little too pure for many - even a lot of rugged individualists - in today's society. And most Rand scholars will tell you that her philosophy doesn't square well with Christianity's concept that we are each our brother's keeper.

So ... if you have enough knowledge to "bloviate" (a favorite term of our 29th president, Warren Harding) on Rand, hammer away.

Or, if you simply want to put forward your opinion on what - if anything - we owe our brothers and the producer/innovators in society, we can move from there and make this educational.

Cheers,
Bob Buckley

WGHP-TV

Anchor/Senior Reporter

Ronald Reagan ran to a landslide victory over the incumbent, Jimmy Carter, in 1980 largely because the public saw Carter as vacillating and mired in the minutia of "small" politics.

Reagan, on the other hand, appeared, "Presidential."  That's important, in America, where we elect a national surrogate, rather than simply the leader of a legislating party, as they do in parliamentary systems.

So what is it that makes someone, "Presidential," and is that enough - or at least one of the pre-requisites - for becoming president?

Interestingly, what most voters say they like about Republican Mike Huckabee is that he appears, "Like a regular guy."  From my brief meeting with him, I'd have to agree.  Where this ends up being a Catch-22, is that being a regular guy (i.e., connecting with voters on a visceral level) is exactly what may prevent him from getting to the White House.

When Voters hit the polls in November, often what they look for in a president isn't that he or she is a regular guy or gal.  We often want someone who projects a sense of authority, command and worldliness that is anything but, "Regular guy."

It's somewhat like the difference between the girl or guy you want to date and the girl or you want to marry.  I'm not saying Huckabee isn't the guy who will win the presidency in 10 months ... I'm just saying the things that are catapulting him to the top of the polls are often not the same things that win election.

You can get a complete political rundown anytime with this link.

In the meantime, let us know what you think about what you want in your next president  - as well as what you think America wants, and why.  Let's keep it civil, folks.

Cheers,

Bob Buckley

Why is it that we can't seem to resolve this argument?

What I found interesting in doing this story is how insistent the people from Americans United were that they are an organization of religious people who were trying to protect religion as much as they were trying to protect people from it.

And how insistent most of the pro-expression people were that there is little problem with religious expression in public.

This is not to say there aren't true secularists who are inflexibly antagonistic to all expressions of religion and that there aren't others who want the country returned to the state it was in 1787, in terms of Christianity being pervasive in American life (whether a good thing or not, not likely).

So ... what do you think?  Does America need to be more accomodating to faith?  If so, specifically how?  Where do you think this argument will sit, 25 years from now?

BBuckley

No one condones child abuse.  But as someone who spent 12 years in Catholic schools, I'm no stranger to an occassional swat for getting out of line.

So ... when does discipline cross over the line and become child abuse?  Do you think it is ever proper to physically discipline your child?

I know some parents who, occassionally, think their child might need a spanking for misbehaving in public, but are afraid to do so, because they think someone else will take offense, tell "authorities," and the child will be taken away from them.

Beyond obvious abuse, when is it the government's job to decide what discipline your child needs/deserves ... and when should the government simply mind its own business?

When should the government step in to ensure a child's safety?

Let's hear from you.

This one is interesting because there are good arguments to be made on both sides - whether candidates spouses should be visible and vocal (it's a free country, we know more of what we're getting) and whether they should be seen and not heard (they're not on the ballot).  Let's hear your arguments.

There is a long history of spousal influence in politics.  Abigail Adams had a profound influence on everything John did.  Rachel Jackson's influence over Andrew - not as political as Abigails, but certainly far-reaching - lead him to duel over simple verbal slights.

Woodrow Wilson's second wife, Edith, you could argue was president after her husband's stroke in 1919.  We've catalogued some of Eleanor Roosevelt's influence, in our report ... others since have had a signficant say:  Nancy Reagan, Hillary Clinton.

This all makes sense if you are a believer in the writings of Alexis de Tocqueville, which I largely am.  Tocqueville said that what separated America from Europe, was the quality of its women. 

I do think it was interesting, though, that single people were far more likely to say, "Let 'em have their say," than married people were.  So ... insert your favorite punch line to that, here.

Cheers,

B