Why are we so dishonest?

[Onlooker]

Why do so many people here act like they're members of a politician's inner circle? Why don't people stand up and be honest for a change? Isn't it obvious as day that Obama, Clinton, and Edwards are playing various strategic cards to get an advantage? The Clinton campaign played the sensitive woman card in New Hampshire, and the Edwards campaign played the male card by questioning her strength. The Clinton campaign drew attention to Obama's race, and the Obama campaign responded by questioning her racial sensitivity. The Obama campaign gave a homophobic gospel singer a prominent role in one of their campaign events, and Obama alludes to religion almost as much as Huckabee does. The Clinton campaign uses phrases like "God bless" as if the American public was having a chronic sneezing attack. But, we know (or should know) damn well that Obama, Clinton, and Edwards would strongly oppose homophobic, racist, and sexist legislation, and are not driven by fundamentalist Christian values. They would all support a woman's right to choose, gay rights, immigrant rights, civil rights for people of color, welfare for kids, improved health care, and so on. They are all social liberals, and their approval ratings from various groups demonstrate that.

But, this is an election, and the way elections are today they are no different than sports matches. Each side tries to manipulate public perception in order to get an advantage. That's how politics works, and the most ethical politicians are not ever the front runners any more. What annoys me is how we, who know better, too often choose to be party to these games. We have no need to engage in their dishonesty. If we don't like that kind of game, then we should support someone like Kucinich or Gravel who seem to have no guile. If we accept that kind of game, then we should stop taunting each other with the transparent lies and deceits of campaign machines. Instead, we should stick to the facts, and present the real reasons we support one candidate over another.

[catnhatnh]

1. So JEDE....if we wish to use the broad brush of they're all alike...

I guess I should not complain since I called for inclusion...why don't you post something about "ALL" of their ties to corporate contributions???

[HughMoran]

2. Good post

There certainly is an excess of intellectual dishonesty here lately. I suppose it's to be expected when rooting for a "team", but that doesn't excuse the poor behavior.

[peacetalksforall]

3. Excellent post, but missing something. All true and this sentence is very accurate:

"They would all support a woman's right to choose, gay rights, immigrant rights, civil rights for people of color, welfare for kids, improved health care, and so on. They are all social liberals, and their approval ratings from various groups demonstrate that."

What is missing is this - their positions on killing children and innocents, their positions on torture and perpetual imprisonment without legal procedures, their position on privatization, their positions on vote thefts, their positions on the Patriot Act indecencies, their positions on our loss of privacy, their positions on selling-trading-giving away our jobs and technology - all missing?

Or are there a few jabs here and there?

How many admissions are there?

How many plans are there?

How much focus in speeches and debates?

Are we half a party - yes to historical social interests and nothing about the crims of the 2000's? The new crimes in our lives?