Let the mudslinging begin!

With elections looming on the horizon and the historic vote on health care reform about to take place, politicians are taking no prisoners in their ad campaigns. These emotionally charged and sometimes completely unethical attack ads and the masterminds behind them have no problem calling their opponents’ morals and integrity into question, all the while sinking to new levels.

In February, California Senate candidate Carly Fiorina released an ad against her opponent Tom Campbell that could quite possibly be the strangest and most disturbing ad in political history. The ad, which has been described as both psychedelic and terrifying, features images of a red-eyed demon sheep frolicking with its ruminant fellows, a seeming wolf in sheep’s clothing. While obviously meant to be serious, the ad is so bizarre, so outlandish that it seems almost impossible to watch it and still keep a straight face. This animal themed ad is obviously not cut from the same cloth as Ronald Regan’s memorable 1984 “bear in the woods” television spot.

Fiorina’s more recent ad targets Barbara Boxer, depicting the senator as a gargantuan head, floating over California like the Goodyear Blimp while an ominous voiced narrator tells of her “liberal partisan elitist ways”.

Sure they may border on fear mongering and character assassination, but this type of political mudslinging is nothing new and the television ads have been around nearly as long as the medium itself.

Who can forget the “Daisy” ad, a campaign commercial for Lyndon B. Johnson that only ran once during the 1964 presidential election? The ad juxtaposed images of childlike innocent with images of nuclear war, while a voiceover used phrases like, “These are the stakes!” and “We must either love each other, or we must die.” Preying on the public’s fear of the escalating threat of nuclear war, the ad portrayed Johnson’s opponent, Barry Goldwater as some kind of nuke-happy psychopath who would bomb the world into oblivion if elected. It only aired once, but that was enough. The seed had been planted in the public’s subconscious and, in the end, Johnson won the election by a landslide.

The newest attack that’s stirring up controversy targets not only Ohio representative Steve Driehaus, but also his family. The ad, which prominently features Driehaus’ underage daughters, has been called outrageous by critics and even earned an apology from the Washington-based committee responsible for it.

The art of frightening and confusing the public while simultaneously hurling accusations and allegations at lightening speed is as old as politics itself, but how much is too much? Where does one draw the line on what information the public needs to know and, more importantly, how that information is conveyed? Perhaps voters will be able to look past the floating heads and demonic sheep and see the real issues at hand, and make an informed decision on voting day. More than likely, they’ll find the ads offensive or even laughable and simply change the channel whenever they appear. Whether full of surreal imagery or overly emotionally, ads like these only succeed in alienating voters and being counterproductive to their true purpose.