I think it would make rather more of an impression if one couldn't write more or less *exactly* the same piece on McCain & Palin (with the exception of "you're a great speaker", admittedly, and with different names in the corruption-and-stretching-the-truth allegations, and different factual errors). I bet someone could even come up with similar inflated rhetoric about how McCain is like the antichrist *and* Hitler *and* Nixon (and possibly already has).
It's a pity is that both sides are now doing this sort of campaigning (mud shows the character flaws and blindness of the side throwing it more than the side it's meant for), and it's a pity that both sides have enough ammunition to work with.
I do dislike choosing between these two options, though. I also dislike that the political system systematically weeds out people with solid character; you get more voters if you tell each state/group/person what it wants to hear, so things are not likely to get better. At least neither candidate is in favor of conquering Canada?
I don't know that I can agree that mud shows the character flaws of the one throwing the mud more than the side it's meant for.
I also don't think that McCain is clean or perfect... but we hear all about his negatives and missteps in the daily news reports, and most of Obama's stuff is swept under the rug.
I think that this write up could have done without the pretense of a letter to Obama and been just as fair and articulate to the area(s) that Obama is a concern. The write up could also have done without the comparisons to Hitler, Mr. Clinton, and Nixon.
And just because some might see it as mudslinging and be frustrated with it-- the facts are there, and we need to know them so that we can make an educated vote. If the facts of his lies and deceptions were laid out clearly without all of the extra "you lie" "you lie" mumbo jumbo in it- would you still call it mud slinging?
Comments 3
It's a pity is that both sides are now doing this sort of campaigning (mud shows the character flaws and blindness of the side throwing it more than the side it's meant for), and it's a pity that both sides have enough ammunition to work with.
I do dislike choosing between these two options, though. I also dislike that the political system systematically weeds out people with solid character; you get more voters if you tell each state/group/person what it wants to hear, so things are not likely to get better. At least neither candidate is in favor of conquering Canada?
Reply
I also don't think that McCain is clean or perfect... but we hear all about his negatives and missteps in the daily news reports, and most of Obama's stuff is swept under the rug.
I think that this write up could have done without the pretense of a letter to Obama and been just as fair and articulate to the area(s) that Obama is a concern. The write up could also have done without the comparisons to Hitler, Mr. Clinton, and Nixon.
And just because some might see it as mudslinging and be frustrated with it-- the facts are there, and we need to know them so that we can make an educated vote. If the facts of his lies and deceptions were laid out clearly without all of the extra "you lie" "you lie" mumbo jumbo in it- would you still call it mud slinging?
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment