There's joy that we killed Osama bin Laden — so show us the photos.
The family's foundation isn't just shaken, it seems to have vanished.
I can only hope to live up to the example my grandpa set for our family.
More formatting goodness for journalists running WordPress Web sites.
And you thought ‘socialism’ was the new ‘N’ word.
Columns
Share

Dirty politics? Get over it

By Tom Chambers • 11:09 p.m. May 19, 2006 • 0 Comments 0 Trackbacks

Ahhh, the good ol’ days.

Remember back when politics was clean and candidates ran campaigns based on the issues? When our leaders were true statesmen, dedicated to the debate of ideas and not smearing the other side?

If you claim you do, you might want to jog your memory.

In the ever-more confusing battle for the 50th District congressional seat, both candidates — and their supporters — are crying fowl that the TV ads are getting a little bit nasty. “Negative ads” they sneer, as if uttering curse words under their breath.

This back-and-forth whining about candidates “going negative” has somehow become a staple in every politician’s game plan.

C’mon. You’re running for Congress in a special election that’s being watched by politicos across the country. Expect to get a little mud thrown at you.

And we are talking about a little.

Sure, there’s an ad linking Republican Brian Bilbray to Ephedra deaths, and another implying Democrat Francine Busby supported a teacher convicted of owning child pornography, but the rest are pretty innocuous.

In the latest round, the Republican Party is calling Busby a liberal who wants to raise taxes. The Democrats are calling Bilbray a lobbyist. Both, though “attack ads,” are true.

Since he left office after losing in 2000, Bilbray has been working as a lobbyist. Lots of former congressmen do.

While running against then-Congressman and now-prisoner Duke Cunningham, Busby said she would repeal the Bush tax cuts and raise gas taxes. Lots of Democrats say that (well, maybe not raise gas taxes this year, but look for it two years from now).

“Denounce those ads” some on both sides demand. “Get back to the issues” others say. Yes, it’s easy to attack one’s opponent, but it’s even easier to call your opponent out for “going negative.”

Here’s a concept: negative ads work. If they didn’t, politicians wouldn’t run them. They also serve a purpose. We can’t count on a politician to “run on the issues” and enlighten us about each one of their shortcomings. Campaigns are about issues, yes, but they are also about fettering out candidates that shouldn’t be holding office.

Besides, attack ads are as old as American politics. Those statesmen we revere so much were master craftsmen at “going negative.”

Thomas Jefferson was accused of all kinds of sexual scandal, and threw his own mud back at his opponents. He and Alexander Hamilton even ran their own newspapers by proxy for the purpose of attacking their political opponents as our nation formed.

Andrew Jackson was called a murderer and cannibal in 1828. His wife was dubbed a whore.

In the election of 1860, Abraham Lincoln was referred to as stupid and called an ape (“he looks like an ape, smells like an ape and is an ape” was the exact terminology).

Harry Truman compared Republicans to the Nazis. And we can’t forget the Lyndon Johnson mushroom cloud commercial implying Barry Goldwater would start World War III.

Ahhh, the good ol’ days.

Share

Comments are closed.