The Truth in Campaigns

Those of us who have been following political campaigns for any length of time have long since learned that candidates are going to stretch the truth over and over again during the course of a campaign. Candidates are going to describe themselves in the best light possible and at the same time cast their opponent in the most negative light possible. We understand adds for commercial products operate this way, and campaign adds are certainly no different.

My problem has always been that the mainstream media in the past has felt constrained to equate all questionable statements as equal. The impression that was often left was that both sides are doing it and therefore they are all alike. The corollary of that often winds up being that politicians are all crooks and none of them are any good. This turns out to be not a very edifying prospect for the art of politics. Perhaps the ironic thing is that with the advent of talk radio and Fox News there is not much of a media that can really be called mainstream anymore. Evenhandedness no longer seems as important, and there are reasonably neutral fact checkers out there who I think are doing a better job of differentiating somewhat minor mistatements from truly outrageous statements. Plus, if you want the spin for a particular side, and many of us do, you can always go to Fox News or Keith Olbermann on MSNBC.

For my part, I believe that the McCain campaign has truly gone over the top with its aggressive determination to distort the truth, tell outright untruths, and continue to insist on the veracity of these statements even when their fallacies have been pointed out by objective sources. I think many of us expected more from Senator McCain and as a result are very disappointed with the tenor of his campaign.

Certainly the Obama campaign is not without sin. For how long did they milk John McCain's comment about having troops in Iraq for 100 years? They are distorting the truth with their use of McCain's comment that the fundamentals of our economy are sound. They have also on various occasions none to subtly played the age card. Many additional examples could be given.

However, there seems to be a deliberate and organized attempt by the McCain campaign to say just about anything if it will help them get elected. There is also a determination never to back down or admit the falsity of what they have said no matter how clearly untrue their statement may have been shown to be. Unfortunately this pattern seems to be all too familiar from the George Bush administration we know so well. Again, probably the most disturbing aspect of this campaign is that it seems so uncharacteristic of the John McCain we thought we knew. I find it difficult to recognize the presidential candidate of 2000.

Let's start with the continual refrain that Barack Obama is going to raise taxes on everyone including the middle class. No one knows what might happen after the election, but Senator Obama has never indicated such an intention. He has stated over and over that he will raise taxes only on those making over $250,000 a year. He would lower taxes on everyone else. Neutral analysts have charted that Obama's plan would lower taxes more for the average family then Senator McCain. Where did the McCain campaign get this notion that Obama would raise your taxes? It appears that they just made it up. What did they do when they were told that what they were saying was untrue? They simply kept repeating the untruth and refused to accept the objective facts in the case.

In part of the silly season, the McCain campaign insisted that Barack Obama intentionally insulted Sarah Palin with his comment about putting lipstick on a pig. Never mind that no sane candidate would ever utter such an insult about their opponent intentionally. Never mind that John McCain had used the same expression several times himself. Never mind that the context of Senator Obama's statement was clearly directed not at Sarah Palin but at the policies of Senator McCain. I watched surrogates for John McCain when questioned by other commentators, say that they had observed Senator Obama making the statement and they could see that he was addressing his comments to Sarah Palin. How did they know that? How could they know what Senator Obama was thinking? Reality didn't seem to intrude on their thinking at all. The goal seemed to simply be that stating this notion over and over again may turn some people off to Senator Obama, so that was a good thing whether or not there was any truth to their allegations. It seems like the strategy of the "Big Lie" is alive and well.

And then there is the charge that Senator Obama wants to teach comprehensive sex education to five year olds. It has been clearly shown that the bill passed by the Illinois legislature was designed to protect kindergarten age youth from possible sexual predators. The content of the training revolved around good and bad touch explanations. Again, several McCain supporters when questioned insisted that they were right in their allegations. The more they insist, the assumption must be, the more people will believe them.

Unfortunately, I could go on and on in this vein. Any hope that this campaign would be conducted on an honorable level appears long gone. We might be better off if we carefully lesson to all the debates, and analyze them for ourselves. Avoid as much as possible the spin doctors and even the political commentators (present company excluded, of course). And above all, let's turn off all campaign adds as soon as they begin to air.