Stoneage Ramblings

By John R. Stone

The recent attack on Paul Pelosi in his San Francisco home is just the latest in a growing series of attacks on elected or appointed officials by people who have been led to believe that those people are evil and need to be eliminated.

The issue here is that the attacker was really after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, third in line for the presidency of the United States.

This has happened to leadership of both politic parties, Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana was shot a few years ago by a liberal attacker for his political views.

Of course after this happens everybody says how terrible this is publicly. But those same people don’t do the one thing that will stop this nonsense: tone down the political rhetoric.

We don’t expect politicians to agree on everything but what they disagree on is how to address issues. Too many use the disagreement on issues to claim that another person is a bad person because he or she thinks the way they do.

But many of the politicians who condemn the latest incident with Mrs. Pelosi are part of the groups of politicians of both parties running dark ads on television demeaning officeholders or those seeking office. Some of the tricks:

Selective quotes or carefully edited quotes to make a politicians position seem extreme.

Black and white ads that paint a dark picture of an opposing candidate.

Ads that show the most unattractive picture they could find of a candidate to promote fear of that candidate.

Ads that just plain lie about a candidate’s position.

Ads that misrepresent issues dealing with the position, like blaming a state legislative member or governor candidate for not solving inflation, something that is not solved at that level of government.

Ads with these features are run by organizations like the various congressional campaign committees where money is directed by members of Congress. They are also run by political action committees (PACs) with strange names that may or may not represent what they actually stand for using money collected from people who have a vested interest in a specific outcome.

So some of the PACs are technically “owned” by political parties. They belittle others while wanting to look sincere and mature. Nonsense.

Technically PACS are not supposed to be in direct contact with candidates (or visa versa) but if a candidate found some PAC that supported his or her candidacy started running black ads about an opponent that candidate could denounce the ads. He or she could let the PAC know that the ads were not helpful.

You just don’t see that happening.

It is perfectly fair to compare two candidates’ positions honestly to show why one candidate might better represent you than another. It is fair for an incumbent to brag about his or her accomplishments. It is fair to criticize a vote taken by an incumbent or his or her record. It is fair to be critical of a candidate for not attending votes, committee meetings of sessions. It is fair to question a candidate’s background as to how it would relate in his or her ability to do an elective job.

But, just because one might disagree with a position on an issue, ability to do the job or past action doesn’t make that person a bad person.

It’s the bad person picture that encourages those who think they are doing good by eliminating bad people, people who may be mentally ill or who are so radicalized that the end justifies the means.

Elected officials can solve this problem if they join together to promote decency in campaigning. If they don’t, they will continue to be victims of the results. It is largely their own fault.