1372 Dis-Claimer

I hate political attack ads. But the interesting thing is, they work. Most people don’t respond to nuanced gentile arguments about policy. But everybody seems to love a vicious attack. And usually an attack that with a little thought and a few un-lazy checks of the facts would be easy to dispute.
I had an election ad epiphany the other day. I was listening to the radio. An automobile ad came on first. It was extolling the virtues and low prices of some vehicle. The first 15 seconds of the ad were about the car. The next 15 seconds were the legal disclaimer that it was actually 2 cars on that particular lot that with approval-of-credit may qualify for the discount offered.
Right after that, a political attack ad came on. The perpetrator, excuse me candidate, proceeded to make a bunch of buzzword-laden innuendos and negative assertions, and then report purported support for those assertions. Then guess what? No disclaimer.
Isn’t it weird that we force someone doing something as innocuous as selling a car to jump through elaborate regulatory loops, and we allow folks running for the highest offices in the land to lie? Or at least omit the full truth.
Maybe the ad should read, “Polls show my opponent has been disapproved by a majority of voters, (non-random polls actually conducted by my private polling firm using people who always vote my way)” Or, “The Seattle Times says (not the actual Seattle Times, quote originates from paid ad from my election committee in the Seattle Times).”
I like it. They’d have to lie less since it would take up too much space to un-lie.
Because if you’re gonna be dissing on someone you should have to use the dis-claimer.
America, ya gotta love it.