The Obama campaign is running a negative campaign message on the internet. It is not the first, nor (likely) the last. Yet I see a very specific difference between the Obama campaign’s official messages and those of his opponents John McCain and Sarah Palin. His are factual and pertinent to the debate about wether his opponent is fit for the office being contested:
Yes, this message is ugly, messy, and very, very negative against Senator John McCain, but it is also factually true, accurate, and directly addresses a concern many people have about wether John McCain should be trusted with the power of the oval office. If McCain has a public record history of protecting criminals from justice, and making the public pay for the mistakes; is that not very important information we need to know and be reminded of before we vote?
Compare that, if you will, with Palin and McCain’s outright lies about Obama and Obama’s positions every morning on several different campaign ads in every television market where a competitive state makes running ads attractive. McCain has “approved this message” on so many false statements that we are questioning his integrity and ability to continue serving as a Senator. He has falsely claimed that Obama was trying to teach children about sex (Obama was trying to teach them about sex offenders, which is a big difference). He’s falsely claimed Obama would raise taxes (as much as I don’t like it, Obama is talking about Reagan-like tax cuts). In the Virginia TV market we get bombarded with these lies and misdirections every day. It is almost, but not quite as nauseating as the normal bombardment of crappy drug commercials for problems we don’t have.
Question is, will America notice the difference between negative and accurate and negative and deceptive? Obama is making a pretty big gamble that Americans are smart enough to figure it out. I pray he is correct.
{ 1 } Comments