Tuesday, September 04, 2012

Political Ads

I have often said that I would not vote for any candidate who runs political attack ads. As a rule, that stance has help us relatively well. Before saying how it has, and has not, stood the test of time, let me explain what I mean.
 
I define political attack ads fairly narrowly. I do not mean any statement that may be construed as mean spirited or as an attack on a political candidate. Instead, I interpret an attack ad as an address on an opponent's character or record without a context from the candidate's own position. If the charge is made without the claim that the candidate takes an opposing position, and that the position in question is important to the political office being sought, then it is simply made to diminish the person against whom the candidate is running. Intentionally demeaning statements are not acceptable to me. Neither are attacks on character that have no direct relevance to the political process. To say that a candidate is ugly or immoral or a drunkard or too short is not fitting election language. Neither are their opposites.
 
The rhetoric that George Bush was "a more moral candidate" gained him many votes as he ran for his second term. Because he belonged to the Christian right, Bush was credited, perhaps unfairly, with being of more moral character. The claim won him scads of votes, yet was not particularly meaningful to intelligent political discourse. Religious background and participation should never be a political issue. But is has been. Remember JFK?
 
I want to know where candidates and parties stand on the meaningful and important issues of the day, not whether a candidate drinks beer, smokes cigarettes, is faithful to a spouse, is a devout whatever, or wears designer labels. I do not care how pretty or handsome a candidate's spouse might or might not be. I want to learn about stances instead of superficialities, issues instead of pretenses.
 
Few campaigns live up to that simple standard. I will only vote for the candidates who do. I was accused recently with using the stance as a cop out of political discourse. On the contrary, I believe that, if enough of us were vocal about the standard of acceptable advertisement, I think that the process might change.
 
Eternal optimist that I am...
 
See you Sunday!  

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I am with you Carl. I know that the ads are twisted and spun in to oblivion anyway and they usually tout the party line over what the candidate might actually stand for. If I need to know something about a bill or candidate I go find an independent source on line. The ads and the amount of money spent on them make me sick, so I found a way to skip them (and all ads) with Auto Hop on my Hopper DVR. My life is almost attack ad free; the sole exception being the ads on the TVs in the DISH call center in which I work, but those are easily ignored. Ads aside, I am waiting for some debates so I can see what these guys really have to say to one another