Under the exposition of media attention, people in the news can hardly escape transparency. That is, they can't really hide the truth about the actions they take while the media is watching. So when Sarah Palin exclaims that Obama has ties with terrorists, this is scrutinized and found to be a fallacy. When McCain says Obama will raise taxes and he'll cut them and Obama says he'll cut taxes while McCain will raise them, it becomes clear that Obama plans to raise taxes for the rich while McCain plans to cut them for the rich. The media explains the details and it all becomes transparent.
Why do Palin or McCain try to get away with these cheap tricks? Do they really think they won't be found out? Do they think there are enough stupid voters out there who will believe whatever they have to say? The more they do this, the more voters they lose. This isn't the fifties. Everything is scrutinized, blogged about, and commented on in detail by everyone. Not just the pundits but also thousands of their followers and bloggers.
At least Obama doesn't do this. Maybe he's just honest and forthright. Maybe he's wise to the information age and knows he'd never get away with dishonesty. For what ever reason, he comes off as the honest one with little to hide. He doesn't always tell the whole story. But when we do find his skeletons they turn out to be hardly worth mentioning.
McCain tries to stay off the economic issues and change the agenda to smears. It doesn't work, because this very tactic is transparent for all to see that he's running from the issues that will bite him. Palin is much worse. Even her hair smacks of the fifties. Does she really think no one is onto her cheap pandering game? Then again, it worked for Bush. But this time the issues are too grave, and too much on everyone's minds. So when Obama addresses them and McCain doesn't and then Palin smears Obama with fallacies, it all becomes clear that McCain's campaign is of little substance, as his administration would be. What ever substance he brings is behind the scenes in the smoke filled back rooms where the deals are made to sell out the American people; the deals that can't be spoken of in public. It's all too transparent in this information age.
When Jim Lehrer questioned both candidates on what programs they'd have to cut in light of the recent bailout, both were hard pressed for a definitive answer, "...how this is going to affect you not in very specific -- small ways but in major ways and the approach to take as to the presidency."
McCain's response was, "How about a spending freeze on everything but defense, veteran affairs and entitlement programs."
Obama's was, "The problem with a spending freeze is you're using a hatchet where you need a scalpel...."
They still weren't clear on exactly what they'd cut. Then again, no one knows what they'll be faced with in the future. But at least Obama takes a thoughtful approach to say that he'd look carefully at each program and maybe take a little something from more than one of them, but wouldn't axe an entire program, unlike McCain. This is one very important distinction between them.
Their track records give us more transparency. To project what a McCain administration might be like, just look a t the last eight years. To project an Obama administration, look the the previous eight Clinton years. The Clintons have both strongly endorsed Obama. I've heard pundits say that an Obama administration would resemble a Clinton administration. Clinton took G.H.W. Bush's astronomical deficit and reversed it into a surplus. That alone seems like an amazing accomplishment. Can Obama do the same? If not, it seems he's more likely to come closer now than anyone else could. The more we read and see of the Clinton-Obama affiliations, the more we can trust this relationship and the confidence and hope it inspires. Every president needs their advisers and confidants to make their administration work. To have the Clintons on your side, can't hurt a bit.
I wasn't happy that anyone voted for this trillion dollar bailout. But what can we do? It all becomes transparent as we see that this bailout was passed irresponsibly and hastily. Though we don't have the full picture and a lot of mystery surrounds it. We still can see enough to know we're probably being screwed. I for one will remember the names of my senators and representatives who voted for this bailout.
We may not know everything. But in the information age, we can know enough. You can fool some of the people, some of the time, at least until the media fact checkers get on the case. You can run a campaign. But you cannot hide.