OmegaMom

Yesterday’s post dealt with negative campaign ads.

Today, let’s look at a totally different style:  Wussy campaign catchphrases.

I’ve been seeing these yard signs that urge voters to vote “NO!” on Proposition 107.  Hear, hear!  say I.  Prop 107 is an amendment to the state constitution, to wit:

ARTICLE XXX. MARRIAGE
TO PRESERVE AND PROTECT MARRIAGE IN THIS STATE, ONLY A UNION BETWEEN ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN SHALL BE VALID OR RECOGNIZED AS A MARRIAGE BY THIS STATE OR ITS POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND NO LEGAL STATUS FOR UNMARRIED PERSONS SHALL BE CREATED OR RECOGNIZED BY THIS STATE OR ITS POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS THAT IS SIMILAR TO THAT OF MARRIAGE.

We’ve already got a law on the books that covers this.  The proponents of this amendment want to avoid any court challenges to the current law by putting it into the state constitution.

Cool.  They’ve got the right to propose the amendment; I’ve got the right to vote no on the proposition.  I’ve also got the right to hope it doesn’t pass, and to tell all and sundry so on my blog (vote “No”!).

So what is the catchphrase on the “pro” side?  “Protect marriage!”  A rallying cry to the traditionalists out there.  Bold, strong, straightforward.  I think it’s a bunch of hogwash (my marriage doesn’t need any protection, thankyewverramuch), but, there it is–the motto is pretty strong.  It’s a clarion call, code words that automatically get the blood stirring on a particular side on a particular issue.

On the other side?  What are the opponents of Prop 107 using as their motto on yard signs?

“Takes away healthcare”.

Oh, wow.

Y’know, yeah, healthcare is a vital issue to many voters.  It’s high on all those “what concerns you the most” survey lists.

But, sheeit.  Folks, can’t you come up with something stronger?  Something that actually takes a stand?  How about “Denies civil rights!”  Or “Marriage doesn’t need protection!”  Or “Ditch homophobia!”

“Takes away healthcare”–oh, yeah, that makes me want to run right out and stand on the street with a sandwich board proclaiming my support!  I can just imagine the marching songs with “takes away healthcare” as the stirring refrain.  Let’s all go to the “takes away healthcare” rally at the square this Saturday!

Hunh.  Just doesn’t do it for me.

The No on Prop 107 folks are concentrating on the effects to non-gay, non-married couples.  Politically expedient, oh yes.  Courageous?  Oh, no.

Technorati: Politics, political ads, prop 107

November 7 is election day here in the good ol’ U.S. and A.  Since there’s only a week left, that means that the campaigns are going into overdrive.

My least favorite local politico, Rick Renzi, backed by Big Bucks, always comes out with a boatload of slick, four-color, nasty, slime-slinging, insinuating flyers stuffed into the mailbox in the last week of campaigning, and it’s oh-so-nice to see he’s at it again, and in fine form.

The flyer takes the fact that his opponent was a higher-up in the ACLU, then conflates it with the fact that the ACLU has fought for NAMBLA (unpleasantly so, but it’s their shtick to protect everyone’s right to free speech, no matter how vile and noxious) to imply she is specifically being for NAMBLA.  The flyer talks about “her group”, the ACLU, making it sound as if she, and she alone, is the person responsible for any and all unpleasant actions taken by the ACLU.

I just love guilt by association. 

But, since we’re doing that, let’s look at some other folks the ACLU has defended or filed amicus curiae briefs in support of:  Rush Limbaugh (privacy of medical records), The National Rifle Association (opposition of expanding governmental wiretapping authority), Oliver North (right not to incriminate yourself), Phyllis Schlafly (opposition of national “smart card” identity card), Fred Phelps (religious freedom of expression), The Church of the Good News (religious freedom of expression).

A quote widely attributed to Voltaire (but not ever found in his writings) is, “I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”  The ACLU sticks to its principles:  they believe the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, whether we like those people or not.

If ever there was a politician whose campaigns–from the very start–epitomize “negative campaigning”, Renzi is it.

Technorati: Politics, Rick Renzi, negative campaigning