I opened the Herald on election eve to see that a letter writer seems to imply that the Herald’s recent editorial, “Overturn Citizens United,” blamed the decision in Citizens United allowing unlimited campaign contributions for starting negative ads. (Monday letter, “Citizens United is not the culprit.”) The writer’s logic was that somehow the Herald’s supposed bias was hurt, and would benefit from repeal or other action to overturn it, but wanted to clarify that both sides were responsible.
I’ve be around long enough (not since Jefferson, however) to know negative campaigning didn’t start with this election cycle, but has certainly escalated. We came home yesterday and turned on the TV to a five-minute barrage of “attack, smear, attack, smear” before we could get the recorder going. Thank God for On Demand, DVR and fast forward. I am like the little girl in the YouTube video that just wants to make it stop, and not start up again so soon. Perhaps next time it would be a good thing to limit the time and money we spend tearing each other, and our total being, down. A possibility is to just have ads limited to one channel, or two channels and call one FOX and one HOUND, which one could tune to if he has the stomach, or sense of humor. I have neither, so I watched reruns, for me, of “Gunsmoke,” even during the debate.