I think one aspect of West that is always interesting to note is "The Blame Game."
Although Dr. Pimpare has pointed out that this year's campaign is not as negative as those of years past there still is a significant amount of finger pointing.
For example:
1) Obama (and Biden in the debate) constantly comparing McCain to President Bush and saying that they are one in the same.
2) Sarah Palin constantly being called "inexperiences" (and for that matter Obama constantly being called "inexperienced" [remember he has NO executive experience])
3) McCain attacking Obama for "taking from the rich and giving to the poor"
4) McCain (and Palin) blaming (and attacking Obama) for his lack of support for the "surge" in Iraq.
These are just some examples, and I think that unfortunately this will never go away.
Attacking and blaming will always, as much as I hope this isn't true, be a necessary evil in campaigning.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
But, but, but. . . .there's a difference between "attacking" and "blaming" and legitimate comparison and criticism, no? As you point out, both Obama and Palin lack experience of a particular sort -- surely that's fair terrain for debate? I actually think all the examples you cite are probably in this category. . . . How would you distinuguish more clearly between legitimate comparison/contrast and illegitimate attacks?
I MUST ADMIT I WAS MISTAKEN.
I did misuse the term "blame" (probably because I was not focusing %100)
To respond to Dr Pimpare's Quesiton, I believe that the way to distinguish between "legitimate comparison" and "illegitimate attacks" is first and foremost in the truth of the statements. In order for something to be legitimate it must be true (using this first indicator many of the recent attacks become illegitimate because they are plain false). Second, even when stating something that is true, all the parities involved are not necessarily to "blame" equally. We, or at least I, can't say that all of the members of Congress who vote for a specific bill are equally responsible to its results. Surely those who write the bill and push for its passing should be help more accountable then those who simply vote (many times against their wills because of party affiliation).
To summarize what my post should have said:
It is clear that the "Blame Game" is at play in this campaign as it is in almost every election.
The most obvious example of this is the Obama campaign constantly blaming John McCain for many of the faults of President Bush (note: I think my second mistake in my original post was trying to find equal examples from both parties so as to not show bias, and here too I am not showing bias I am simply trying to state the facts).
I think another important aspect is how the attacks are presented. I believe it is legitimate to "attack" the other candidate on previous policy decisions appealing to the logos of voters. I think the problem arises when the attacks come in a form that are appealing to the pathos of voters.
Post a Comment