Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Get some dignity

May 28, 2013

Ya no what grinds my gears? These politicians that have these commercials that just completely downgrade their opponents. What a disgrace....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(31)

MrShaman

May-28-13 5:50 AM

"Whatever happened to a good handshake and may the best man win. Is this a thing of the past?" - Jason Merrill

*

Ever since ReRon Reagan said "Well...there you go, again!" (...and, "elevated" debates to stand-up-routine status), the hip/trendy-thing-to-do has become marginalizing/belittling your opponent (rather than attempting to educate voters on the IMPORTANT issues)....and, THE CROWDS LOVE IT!!!!

5 Agrees | 17 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CaveFelem

May-28-13 6:34 AM

When you write in Mr. Gorilla, just make sure you spell his name correctly so the vote counts.

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

May-28-13 7:24 AM

You have every right to do a "write-in" as a vote. As for voting for a gorilla, there are some liberal posters who would tag your vote based on evolution theory.

8 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

May-28-13 7:47 AM

You do know that politicians having been behaving like this in campaigns for centuries. Now we have dark money and protected money raisers who do the mud slinging for the candidates.

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

May-28-13 7:58 AM

Voters have a responsibility to educate themselves about the candidates.

If a voter simply listens to advertisements or talks with friends, then we become a weaker nation.

14 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SteelerFan

May-28-13 8:38 AM

Yep, Ronald Reagan started it. Another rerun Shamism.

11 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

philunderwood

May-28-13 9:41 AM

Negative advertising works with low information voters and that’s a high percentage of voters.

12 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

May-28-13 9:47 AM

"These politicians that have these commercials that just completely downgrade their opponents. What a disgrace.

They just rip each other apart and say how crooked each other are then have the audacity to even ask for our votes."

If negative advertising didn't work, hundreds of millions wouldn't be spent on it every election cycle.

Now we have "dark money" groups thanks to the Citizens United decision. These groups, on both sides are free to spend unlimited amounts of money on the slimiest negative ads, and conceal who paid from them from the American people. It's the ultimate dodge on personal responsibility.

And fasten your seatbelt, because these dark money groups exist for the express purpose of putting out slimy ads. But don't worry, they aren't allowed to "coordinate" with campaigns. Honest.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

May-28-13 10:08 AM

"Negative advertising works with low information voters"

That must be why the vast majority of these negative dark money ads I saw in 2012 were from conservative groups.

0 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnZook

May-28-13 10:50 AM

Hayes- Is Union money "dark"? You know the money they extort from employees as union dues, give to Democratic campaigns, and then are rewarded with generous government contracts, paid for by the taxpayers; it's called money laundering..............

10 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

May-28-13 10:56 AM

"Is Union money "dark"?"

Nope. Liberal dark money would come from a 501(c)(4) group like Organizing for America that does not need to pay tax, OR reveal it's donors.

It's outrageous, and hopefully something will be done about it before the 2016 election season starts.

1 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

May-28-13 11:28 AM

JohnZook-"Hayes- Is Union money "dark"? You know the money they extort from employees as union dues, give to Democratic campaigns, and then are rewarded with generous government contracts, paid for by the taxpayers; it's called money laundering"

Hey LOOK. It's another conspiracy theorist. I just LOVE a good conspiracy, don't you?

Unions backing politicians is the same as any other group backing politicians. The difference is that it's because most unions (not all, so you may want to be careful painting with that broad brush) back Democrats at election time.

If it's a business association or NRA backing politicians it's OK in your eyes, because they will generally throw their money at a Republican.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

May-28-13 11:30 AM

cont'd:

You say the money is extorted from the workers to give to the pols. The truth is that they have voluntary PAC funds to use for backing candidates. Any member who disagrees with any of their dues money (if any is used) being used to back pols can ask that that portion be returned to them.

I used that quite a few times while I was a Member of AFSCME years ago.

So while it's a nice conspiracy theory and it sounds good to complain about it, it's not factual.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

May-28-13 12:19 PM

Unions have supported both Democratic and Republican candidates. However with the recent attacks on unions by Republicans, support from unions for their candidates has diminished.

2 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

May-28-13 12:32 PM

For a union to support a Republican candidate in the current climate, would be like a distillery supporting Carrie nation.

Why would any group possibly support a candidate that would like nothing more than to outlaw their group?

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

May-28-13 3:00 PM

CHayes-"For a union to support a Republican candidate in the current climate, would be like a distillery supporting Carrie nation. Why would any group possibly support a candidate that would like nothing more than to outlaw their group?"

There you go again, Chris. You ASSUME all republicans are anti-union. They're not. Yes, you have the Walkers but not all are like him. I know for a fact my Republican Senator is pro-union. And as far as Unions go, Rendell was as anti-union as any republican Governor ever was.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

philunderwood

May-28-13 4:30 PM

I know of no one who is anti-union, but some of us believe unions get an unfair advantage through laws and regulations that favor them.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

May-28-13 4:34 PM

philunderwood-"I know of no one who is anti-union, but some of us believe unions get an unfair advantage through laws and regulations that favor them."

As there are also laws and regulations that favor businesses. Lets not pretend that everybody doesn't benefit from at least one law on the books, including businesses.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

May-28-13 5:23 PM

Gee Phil then you have not been reading the stuff posted at this forum about unions from others. Very anti union posts.

Mike is correct buinesses and corporations do get favorable laws that benefit them greatly. Unions have been losing not gaining protection and rights.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

May-28-13 9:03 PM

Poor Bobbie, you and your nefarious business types just get slapped with a fine.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

May-29-13 3:23 AM

Bobbie2-"Why then are they not in jail for doing the same thing the Orie sisters were convicted of?"

I don't see the connection between politicians using their state paid staff and public money to run a political campaign and unions (or any other PACs or organizations for that matter) legally contributing to the politicians they support.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

May-29-13 7:32 AM

Mike: "There you go again, Chris. You ASSUME all republicans are anti-union."

You are the ONLY pro union Republican I have ever encountered in my entire life. You are only the only pro union Republican that posts here.

Phil: "I know of no one who is anti-union"

Phil, you have REPEATEDLY posted here that you support a law that would allow management to block workers from joining a union. A law like that would effectively eliminate EVERY union in the US. But you can't think of anyone that's "anti union"?

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

May-29-13 7:44 AM

"I know for a fact my Republican Senator is pro-union."

Pat Toomey has a 13% rating from the AFL-CIO Mike. You can't be serious.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

May-29-13 7:57 AM

Mike, Bobbie doesn't need a connection.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

May-29-13 1:35 PM

I think you have to have a job, or at a minimum a skill before you can join a union, so it shouldn't concern you.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 31 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web