When I recently saw a Callahan campaign ad attacking Charlie Dent over his veterans' stance, which included photographs of one soldier with blood streaming down his face and another holding a prosthetic, I was upset but gave Callahan the benefit of the doubt. The flyer did not come directly from his campaign and I figured he probably had no idea that someone was sending out such tasteless material on his behalf.I thought wrong.
At Sunday night's JCC debate, Callahan acknowledged and actually defended his classless ad.
Now I enjoy a good, negative campaign. But I also think we should stop short of inflammatory photos or calling each other crooks or liars. Unfortunately, that's the trend this year.
At Sunday night's debate, neither candidate responded very well when moderator Glenn Kranzley asked what efforts they've made to restore civility in politics. Today, Glenn elaborated in an email, and he was kind enough to allow me to share his thoughts with you.
"I've been thinking about Charlie Dent's repeated use of that campaign mailer from Callahan at the debate. Strictly speaking, it was a violation of the ground rules, which said no campaign material except the things placed on the tables along the wall. OK, it wasn't HIS campaign material. If I'd been thinking quicker, I should have taken it from him after the first time he used it. I'm guessing that particular piece came from the state Democratic Committee or another campaign committee from outside the Valley. Just today, I received a Dent mailing calling John a liar about three times. It was paid for the the Republican Federal Committee of Pennsylvania. Certainly doesn't qualify as "civil discourse" that the faith-based organizations are pleading for.
"My point is that when money flows into a community or electoral district from outside, things get nasty fast. Over the years I've seen this happen again and again. The Pat Browne vs. Jennifer Mann campaign of a few years ago comes to mind. Two decent, qualified candidates who tore into each other with state organizations paying the way.
"There's no solution to this and it's only going to get worse. The SCOTUS ruling in the Citizens United case last year says private companies can spend on campaigns and created huge loopholes by which campaign funders don't have to disclose where the money comes from ... two big changes, neither of which offers hope for more civil discourse.
"No wonder people feel they have to take a shower after they take these things out of their mail boxes."
Probably because they feel it's an easy win and they'd rather spend the dough on another race with a Republican that's harder to beat.
ReplyDeleteCitizens United may well change our entire electoral paradigm
ReplyDeleteBernie -
ReplyDeleteI like Glenn, but his liberal side is certainly apparent in his e-mail to you.
The Citizen's United case is simply not what Kranzley implies. I find it maddening that we must defend the right of free speech for terrorists, the KKK and others to spew their hate but a business should be stopped from advocating their position.
The huge loopholes on campaign funding that Glenn mentions were also there in 2008, but I don't remember Glenn having a problem when those loopholes were exploited by then-candidate Obama.
Again, I like Glenn. But I don't miss his bias on the Call's editorial pages (not that Glenn was the only problem in that regard or that the liberal bias has diappeared).
Does anyone know who writes the Lehigh Valley Political blog?
ReplyDeleteProblem with candidate attacks ads are they are too effective. In the end voters think they are both stinkers. Perhaps explains why so few turn out to vote or form 3rd parties.
ReplyDelete"Does anyone know who writes the Lehigh Valley Political blog?"
ReplyDeleteIt's Chris Casey. Sometimes Michael Molovinsky cross posts there.
I'm on the opposite side of you on this race Bernie, but I completely agree the race to the bottom approach is sad. Both candidates are guilty of perpetuating it too. I get upset with each Dent mailer I get calling John a bad Mayor and a liar (his exact words in last nights debate), but I also agree sensational vetrans pieces can go to far also.
ReplyDeleteWe will never get two passionate people with apposing view points to hold hands ans sing Kumbaya, but we could highlight the differences and let the people decide.
I was really dissapointed in how early and hard dent started this race, "unapposed or hard" I guess was the moto. Now he is getting back what he delivered, sad but true.
Civil Discourse!Yeah like the Morning Call under his leadership practiced civil discourse.Time and time again they sensationalized in the name of the publics right to know.Its all about money and power.Glen is full of shit,hows that for civil discourse.
ReplyDelete