Election time has rolled around. The race for President of the United States is in full swing. You can almost smell the hostility in the air. Even if you have been a hermit, barricaded in your house, you most likely see hostility somewhere between re-runs of Everybody Loves Raymond and CSI Miami. Negative campaign ads on TV are, for the most part, impossible to escape. The opponents sling political mud at each other like children at recess. How mature. Our presidential candidates are making a last ditch effort to win an election. It would seem quite interesting, however, that they resort to tactics used by second graders to degrade one another. No offense to those seven and eight year old kids who may display more maturity. The competition ensues: who can make who look worse? Every negative detail of either party's candidate exposes their flaws as a politician or personal inadequacies.
Negative campaigning has its benefits of course; just like pushing old ladies down at to snag the last remaining model of that new toy for your child at Christmas. It gets the candidate what they want, who cares what they look like doing it. Shockingly enough, the American public doesn't speak out against this sort of behavior. Instead most sit in wonder with eyes glued to the appropriately named boob tube, soaking in the negativity. This tactic, while very effective, reveals a great deal about character. These candidates spend time, energy, and money on put-downs while our country has valid problems that need addressed. Mr. Obama actually stressed the need for efforts to be placed on important issues facing the nation rather than negative campaigning. How interesting that just recently ads have appeared on television cutting down Senator McCain. Neither party is innocent of these name-calling games and they will most likely continue until election day. Stepping on someone else to elevate yourself does not show respectability or responsibility. Some of these ads are in defensive response, but acting like one's "enemy" does not show a higher standard. What happened to honor and class?
It is beneficial to know where each candidate stands on issues. This would be the reason for debates, speeches, interviews, and even television ads; but please spare the childish banter. If we want to tickle our ears with name calling, there are plenty of elementary school buses that need monitoring. In school the name-caller must serve detention hall. Why then, when he grows up do we change our standards and elect him to The Oval Office?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Chad's commentary on "Obama's Got a Big Butt" is straight dead on for the negative ads that the presidential candidates sling against each other. Furthermore, he emphasizes that the negative ads have their benefits, but to a certain extent where he states that "Stepping on someone else to elevate yourself does not show respectability or responsibility." In my opinion I also agree to what Chad says about the ads because haven't we been taught throughout our whole life on how we should never hurt someone through negativity as low as a second grade level, but as adults in a honorable way. Anyways I also like the fact that Mr. Chad stated that there are other ways of dealing with the issue when it comes to the candidates. He points this out by expressing that there other ways of dealing with your opponent such as debates, speeches, interviews, other than the negativity which is a mentally of a children having it their way. In addition to that, I think his point is that our candidates can sometimes be childish and need to stop with the name calling in the ads, it is immature and vague.
Post a Comment