As the year drones on at increasing speed, there seems to be one thing that just can't get here soon enough. No, I'm not talking Thanksgving, Christmas, or Football season. I'm talking about the Presidential Election. Maybe it's because I live in Virginia and am so well connected to people back in North Carolina, two of the so called "battleground" states for this election, but I've reached my breaking point with the campaigns, and we're only at the halfway mark.
Be warned: the political blog is coming and it's a two-parter.
Romney/Ryan or Obama/Biden - that is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the dregs of one with outrages fortune, or to take arms against a sea of angry conservatives, and by opposing anger them?
... Or something like that.
I'm gonna go ahead and throw a huge spoiler alert out there for you all - I'm voting Obama. GASP!
Now really that comes as no shock to anyone who is reading this blog. At least it shouldn't. But I'm going to go ahead and save you the trouble of clicking out of this tab and tell you that which way to vote is not why I'm writing this. Vote Romney. Vote Ron Paul. Vote Cthulhu for all I care.What I'm ranting on today are the things that are already bothering me about the campaign season in general so far.
Such: campaign ads and the candidate response.
Being in Virginia, now more than ever we are bombarded at every commercial break with a PSA or two about what Obama hasn't done, or how Romney is going to screw the middle class. It's absurd. I actually look forward to the crappy commercials that come after because at least it's not something trying to change my vote. Newsflash: most people, especially in the Shenandoah Valley, already know who they're voting for. You're not going to change my vote by showing me the ticking debt clock, or by saying Romney is attacking the middle class.
What bothers me the most about these ads is not the content, that is to be expected, but where they originate from. This stems from the Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Committee in 2010, stating, basically, that corporations were people too and therefore could give money to political campaigns, as long as they disclosed where the money goes.
Sweet, easy enough. But, oh wait, they don't do that. Why? Because they fund special interest groups and PACs, not campaigns, so the uninformed viewer only sees ads sponsored by Americans For Prosperity, Restore Our Future, or the Democratic and Republican National Committees.
Again, perfectly within the law (via a nice loophole provided by the highest court in the land), but what bothers me most is the ending of each one. You know how there used to always be that line "I'm (insert name here) and I approved this message" that finishes up each political ad? At least you have the satisfaction of knowing that the candidate has seen it and endorses the message. But now it's not an even split. Check out the ads bashing Obama and then the ads bashing Romney. Romney, at least in the one's I've seen, seems to endorse about one out of four of his ads. Obama is almost the exact opposite.
Why is that important? I don't know if it even is. It's merely just something I'm pointing out. Take it for whatever it means to you, which given whatever side of the debate you're on could be a lot or a little.
Carry on to part 2 if you'd like to hear more of my ramblings
No comments:
Post a Comment