As I am sitting here reading the articles on The Porch, I receive a phone call from one of the candidates running in my district. It is one of those recorded messages wherein the opponent is accused of: wanting children to burn in their pajamas, wanting a terrorist attack, wanting to send all American jobs to China, wanting foreign investors to own America, and wanting more taxpayer dollars to go to the rich. At least he wasn’t accused of kicking children in the face.
Politico has put together some of the more egregious ones nationwide.
On the clever side, we could teach philosophy through attack ads.
While I am not of the opinion that elections have gotten nastier over time, there are some distinct differences. There is no marketplace wherein claims can be disputed. There is no opportunity (other than voting) for those receiving the message to pushback. The candidate is limited only by his or her funds and reaches mass, though anonymous, audiences. There is no transparency regarding who is saying what on behalf of whom, creating only more confusion in the electorate. We are unfortunate to live in the age of the professional campaign manager, whose sole interest is in winning elections. I regard them as a blight on our political landscape.
Undecided on Katz, opposed to Kant. And there are children who need a good kick in the head. In any case, both of the ads are definitely superior to what we are getting in Texas.
The “Kant ad” is funny, but the Kierkegaard ad is better…. mmmmmmmm, Danish…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uYO0vsI6UM
Comments are closed.