Co-workers, Ad Campaigns, and Laci Peterson...

A co-worker of mine asked me today, "did you know kerry voted against the laci peterson act? That's what the ad on t.v. said." At first I thought, "there's a laci peterson act? What's this?" And then I said, "nope, I don't really pay attention to the whole laci peterson thing", and walked away.

So I get home and I'm still thinking, "laci peterson act?" -straight to google. It turns out that this law will make it so that if a pregnant woman is killed with a fetus inside of her, the murderer will be charged with the murder of two human beings. Kerry voted against it. Since I don't really watch much t.v. these days, aside from the daily show cuz it's friggin hilarious, I haven't been able to see the campaign ads that are out there. In this particular one, bush attacks kerry for voting against the laci peterson act, as well as not showing up to vote for combat funding and lowering heath care costs. "Kerry has his priorities, are they yours?", the ad states.


First, I would guess that these ads sound very convincing and in substance are true, but in context are much different, much like that certain element in micheal moore's films that aim to persuade, to get to one's emotions. So apparently 30 or so democrats voted against this same bill, and one might then ask, "why?". Because to define a fetus as a living human being is to further tighten the grips on abortion laws. It does seem that such a murderer should get more punishment for killing an unborn child, but then one would seem to have to apply similar standards to those who choose to abort a pregnancy. If not, then there is a double standard, and I would guess that this is the wrong issue to apply double standards to. Whether Kerry and 30 other democrats should have voted against this or not, the issue takes on a different angle in the context of abortion.


As far as the other things mentioned in the ad, kerry wasn't able to vote on many things recently because he is campaigning for president. I imagine that this is time consuming. In any case, I don't believe that people get the "real deal" from either side of the spectrum as they are both foaming at the mouth with pathetic rhetoric meant to appeal to the values of the "common person", and they do, and many people don't get the whole story, which usually changes everything... high on rhetoric, CANT I JUST HEAR A ONE OF THESE GUYS TALK TO ME LIKE A FREAKING PERSON, NOT LIKE A ROBOT WITH A LARGE ENOUGH MEMORY TO STORE 20 DIFFERENT PRE-RECORDED EUPHEMISTIC AND DYSPHEMISTIC SOUND BYTES?!


Sorry if that didn't make any sense, but really, it's ridiculous, but is it possible for a presidential candidate to survive without using these attempts to appeal, which only end up steering people away from the truth, which doesn't seem good. As another co-worker today said to me, "man I just want the facts, ya know." But it doesn't work that way, and both sides take things out of context, twist the truth, and prevent voters from making informed decisions... THAT SUCKS.