Political Advertising Does More Harm Than Good

Dear judges, before I begin this debate, I would just like to point out that the Con has NOT read my speech at all. If he wasted a few minutes of his time before writing the argument, he would have noticed that it is not plagiarism. I have sited most of my sources right before I stated any evidence. There are profound analogies between politics and sports. Grantland Rice got it right more than half a century ago when he observed that winning or losing is less important than how the game is played. Likewise in politics. The temper and integrity of campaigns are more important for the cohesiveness of society than the outcome of any election. Once again, hello this is Forever 23 and I am here upon the platform o bring forth the premise that political advertising does more harm than good. So since there were no points to refute, I will simply restate my own points and introduce a new one. 1. It discourages people to vote in campaigns. 2. Political advertisements have a negative effect on the democratic ideals that this country was fundamentally founded upon. 3. It hurts our country. 4. There are few rules and no referees. My fourth point is that there are few rules and no referees. In politics, there are few rules and no referees. The public must be on perpetual guard and prepared to throw flags when candidates overstep the bounds of fairness and decency. Our system of governance depends on accountability of public officials. So, a healthy regard for freedom of speech and a heavy dose of respect for the offbeat are important. Checks and balances are the American way, but there should not be unrequited tolerance for the intolerant. Politics has a place for accentuating the positive even to the point of candidate narcissism. Issue articulation is even more important: It is always appropriate to contrast approaches to government, to suggest an opponent is too big or tightfisted a spender, too heavy a taxer or too undisciplined a tax cutter, too quick to go to war or too slow to respond to a national challenge. But it is never appropriate to lie, to impugn patriotism, or feed or inspire prejudice. As a candidate in 17 congressional elections, losing the first and last, I had three rules: a) avoid the conflicts of interest that special interest funding implies; b) accentuate the positive in all public pronouncements; and c) respect the opposition, especially when most dismayed with positions and tactics employed. Candidates who maintain independence of judgment and hold to the rudder of respectful dialogue build a resistance to conflicted position taking and the kind of utterances that might be regretted, particularly later in life. In the most profound political science observation of the 20th century, Albert Einstein said that splitting the atom changed everything save our way of thinking. Human nature may be one of the few constants in history, but 9/11 has taught that thinking must change not simply because of the destructive power of the big bomb but because of the implosive nature of small acts. Violence and social division are rooted in negativism. Since such thought begins in the hearts and minds of individuals, it is in each of us that negativity must be checked. In western civilization"s most prophetic poem, "The Second Coming," William Butler Yeats wrote the center could not hold when "the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity. " Apoca"lypse may not be a field of study, but the chaos of modernity seems to have produced a crisis of perspective and of values. Citizens of various philosophical persuasions increasingly disrespect modern-day democratic governance. Much of the problem may flow from society"s fast-changing nature. But part falls at the feet of politicians who use ill-chosen rhetoric and campaign techniques to divide voters rather than appeal to what Lincoln described as "the better angels of our nature. " Negativity dispirits the soul of society. Candidates may prevail in elections by tearing down rather than uplifting, b ut they cannot then unite an angered citizenry. The money problem. What is to be done? The drug of ambition that ever tempts politicians is money, mainstreamed into advertising to assign candidate virtues and attack opponent failings. Dependency on this narcotic is most acute when it is employed independently, where the ugliest charges can be made or insinuated. Federal law authorized the so-called 527 groups, allowing unrestricted big-money donations to advance mischievous ads without candidate accountability. Citizens should insist that these weapons of nega"tive destruction be banned. Process is our most important product. Campaign reform should become a rallying cry for all who want to check the negative and rid politics of funding sources intent on putting candidates in a compromised corner. The duty of public officials is to inspire hope rather than manipulate fear. Whatever the issues, the temptation to appeal to the darker side of human nature must be avoided. The stakes are too high. . http://www.usnews.com... On November 6, 2012, the Washington Post reported that Barack Obama spent $396 million on campaign ads and 85% were negative. Mitt Romney spent $472 million on campaign ads of which 91% were negative. Are these the values and messages we want to impart to our children? Are bad mouthing, lying, bullying, and defaming people a good example for our children just because we want to get ahead in life or have a difference of opinion? Is this how we want them to conduct themselves in the real world? I don"t know about you, but I would be appalled and disappointed if my children felt the only way to get ahead in life was to bad mouth, lie and defame their co-workers, superiors or business competitors. . http://www.50andbeyond.com... Political strategists have been mostly unwavering in the belief that negative ads work during a Presidential race. But the action so far in 2008 has given some of them reason to believe this election cycle may be a different battlefield. Mitt Romney and John Edwards went negative early and often, and both are now out of the contest. For the remaining contenders, negative ads also pose big risks. Hillary Clinton pulled unfavorable radio spots from the South Carolina primary after less than 24 hours, when her campaign's rhetoric against Barack Obama was perceived as racial, if not racist. Ads attacking John McCain's policy for maintaining a long-term U. S. military presence in Iraq must be carefully balanced against his record as a patriot who spent five years as a Vietnam prisoner of war. Some strategists, including Texas-based Democratic campaign and opposition research expert Jason Stanford says the increased role independent and young voters will play this November "makes going negative more complicated this year than in past years. " Other strategists agree. Cynical and overly negative messages seem to be out of step with the country's zeitgeist this year. "Positive is the new black," in terms of fashion, says Deutsch Chairman Donny Deutsch, who hosts CNBC's The Big Idea. Deutsch points to this year's Super Bowl ads as being more positive and uplifting than ads of the last two years, which tended to be snarky, mean, or drawing on black humor. . http://www.bloomberg.com... In 1800 the Jefferson campaign came out with a statement that his opponent President John Adams was a "repulsive pendant," a "gross hypocrite" and "a hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force or firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman. " A Democratic newspaper wrote that Lincoln should not be elected president because he only changed his socks once every 10 days. In 1828 a Republican pamphlet claimed that Andrew Jackson was "a gambler, a cockfighter, a slave trader and the husband of a really fat wife. " My favorite mudslinging quote was attributed to George Smathers who was running against Claude Pepper in the 1950 senatorial race. It was reported that this quote was part of speech given to rural communities in North Florida. "Are you aware that Claude Pepper is known all over Washington as a shameless extrovert? Not only that but this man is reliably reported to practice nepotism with his sister-in-law, and his sister was once a thespian in wicked New York. Worst of all it is an established fact that Mr. Pepper, before his marriage, habitually practiced celibacy. " . http://www.moorecommgroup.com... To Conclude- What are advertisments? Mostly they include filthy things that the candidates state about each other. They hurt our nation and ensure the end of free speech and justice. Thank you. .