Politcs of the Meanest. Again, and again, and again.

It seems there are lots of people out there, not just me, who are turned off by the negativing campaigning of the four candidates running for the top two slots in the executive branch. Today alone, I counted at least 6 articles on CNN and Fox News that talked about it. This is something that is transcending partisan politics. Washington - take note. People want the negative campaigning to stop.

Campbell Brown has an excellent non-partisan commentary urging the candidates (both of them) to stop the negative campaigning:

By now you've probably heard about how ugly things have gotten out there on the campaign trail in the last 48 hours.

But we thought for just a moment we would take you back to kinder, gentler times.

Remember this:

Sen. John McCain: "I pledge again a respectful campaign. A respectful campaign based on the issues and based on the stark differences we have on the vision for the future of America."

Sen. Barack Obama: "I said I was looking forward to a civil substantive debate on the issues and he agreed."

McCain: "I've pledged to conduct a respectful campaign and I urge, time after time, various entities within the Republican party to also do that."

Obama: "We don't need John McCain and I to be demonizing each other. You won't get that from my campaign."

Oh how far we have come in such a short period of time. . . . There is just one month left. Please, please don't let this devolve into a campaign you are sickened by and embarrassed to be part of.

Here's a purely practical reason: The negativity you are spewing now will only make your job harder after Election Day.

Bipartisanship is really tough to achieve when everyone on both sides is left with a bad bad taste in their mouths.

There's more. Please be sure to read the rest of her excellent commentary.

And on the same day that Ms. Brown's commentary was published, there were many other articles on many different news services, both liberal and conservative, about the ugliness of the campaign:

Here's one about independent voters and the riskiness of attack ads. Independent voters, who make up nearly 25% of the electorate, and who are a) likely to decide the next election given how close it is, and b) likely to be repelled by negative attack ads. And honestly, those who have decided are likely to be repelled by the ads, too.

And finally, here are two stories about the brand-new ads being released where the two candidates call each other liars: here and here.

As I proposed in an earlier article: Lets make fear-mongering, negative campaigning ineffective. Let folks of both parties know you won't be swayed buy such negative ads.

Bipartisan Politics of Meanness, Part II

In part I, I mentioned how vicious individuals can be, when confronting political ideas that differ from their own. Individuals aren't the only mean entities out there. So are political parties, and so are the candidates. All candidates. Doesn't matter if they are red or blue.

Nearly all accusations of spin-doctoring, waffling, lying, are all universally true about any candidate. They outright lie. It's a sad, though true situation. Just do a search of "fact check" and you'll turn it up plenty of examples on both sides. It always puzzles me, when I hear someone accuse a candidate of these things, and then give these problems as reasons why the candidate is a bad choice for office -- their own candidate can also be accused of these things, too. And the accusations would be true. For both of them.

I don't hold such behavior against candidates particularly, because that's what they have to do to get elected. If one candidate ran a friendly campaign, never spun anything to their advantage, they would lose. Because fear-mongering is EFFECTIVE.

Actually, I guess I do hold it against them, but against all of them. I just don't use those things when making my decision, because I'd never vote for anyone at all if I did, and I do think we should vote.

But I would like to propose something radical. Lets make fear-mongering ineffective.

Don't just blindly believe everything your party says about their opponent, because they really aren't above spinning things to their advantage. Be cynical, especially if your information about the opponent comes from a campaign ad, or from a candidate.

Try to avoid giving money to anyone who will use nasty rhetoric. If that's not possible, then start policing your own party -- let them know that you don't want them to fund mean statements or be affiliated with vicious politics. Whenever you see a nasty ad, call your party, call your senator, write your representative, whatever. They will -- eventually -- get the picture. Don't just stop there - complain to the opposite party too, when they do it, and they most certainly will.

Bipartisan Politics of Meanness, Part I

In politics, as in everything else, people that don’t agree with you aren’t stupid for holding other opinions. And, even if they hold other opinions, even ones you disagree strongly with, please don't fall into the easy trap of making vicious statements toward them that you'd never in a million years say to their face (or if you would, stop it. You are doing the world no good).

Orson Scott Card wrote in the afterword of his novel Empire:

But any rational observer has to see that the Left and Right in America are screaming the most vile accusations at each other all the time. We are fully polarized -- if you accept one idea that sounds like it belongs to either the blue or the red, you are assumed -- nay, required -- to espouse the entire rest of the package. . . . and yet, if you hold any of one group's views, you are hated by the other group as if you believed them all; and if you hold most of one groups views, but not all, you are treated as if you were a traitor for deviating even slightly from party line.

It goes deeper than this, however. A good working definition of fanaticism is that you are so convinced of your views and policies that you are sure anyone who opposed them must be either stupid and deceived or have some ulterior motive.

Want some examples? Here you go, although they are comparatively tame:

Not an Obama fan? Yeah right. All your lies/talking points come straight from the DNC. Please.

Or:

The reason they don’t want her to speak to the press is because shes a loser bozo who cant talk let alone think. how stupid is she when she believes the **** she does. No wonder they want to hide her, she’s a right wing religious exstremist who wants armageddon.

Asterisks and misspellings belong to the original authors. Both comments were left on a Christian Science Monitor article entitled "Why won't Sarah Palin talk to the press?")

I can't help but wonder what the respondents were trying to accomplish. Calling the Democratic National Convention attendees a bunch of liars isn't very nice, isn't substantiated in any way and isn't going to convince anyone of anything. Republicans already agree with the sentiment, and Democrats aren't going to change their minds because of it. And calling Governor Palin a "loser bozo" is also nasty, and will accomplish nothing, and is just incorrect; by most measures of success, she can be considered one. I don't think she would have gotten where she did, regardless of her politics, without some brains. In the end, those who don't like her will agree with the name calling, and those who do will just be offended. And I doubt the people who are undecided are really going to appreciate (or be swayed by) comments such as these. It's fine to disagree with her or even an entire party, but name calling is not fine, and just adds to the vicious atmosphere of politics.

So what DO these people accomplish by writing such vitriol? Since it's not going to actually accomplish their surface goal of trying to sway people to their way of thinking, then I can only speculate. It must make them feel better, or superior in some intangible way. And that makes me feel sad that people need to tear down others in order to feel good.

I think everyone should put their political statements to the "mom" test. Would you allow someone to say that about your mom? No? Then rephrase it so that the meaning is there, without the vicious rhetoric.

We have the right to speak out against the government, or about injustices, or any wrongs in particular, and as Americans, I believe we have not just the right, but the responsibility to do so. However, as decent human beings, we need to share the ideas, but without the vitriol.

Put a stop to nasty politics on the individual level. Agree to disagree and give those who you disagree with a measure of respect - because though you disagree, they are in the end, human beings who deserve courtesy. If you are offended at something you see or hear, then POLITELY respond, or even ignore it. When you respond in kind, you are adding to the meanness quotient. Don’t be a part of that.

Show some respect. Really.