Spokane7
53°
October 29, 2010 in City
Vestal: All the mud a million bucks can sling
Chris Marr really opposes negative ads. He says he’s been the victim of “hit pieces” by his opponent. He says that his political campaign for the state Senate ought to be about the issues.
“The public deserves better than what we’ve seen so far,” Marr said in a KSPS debate not long ago.
Michael Baumgartner really opposes negative ads. He says he’s been the victim of “hit pieces” by his opponent. He says that his political campaign for the Senate ought to be about the issues.
“The public does deserve better,” Baumgartner agreed. “This campaign should absolutely be about the issues.”
Yes, yes. The public does deserve better.
If only someone could give it to them.
Marr, the Democratic incumbent, and Baumgartner, the new-to-town Republican, are going to spend more than a million dollars in their battle for the 6th District seat, not counting money from “interest groups.” It’s the biggest legislative mudfight in the state.
And look what we get for the money: a magnificent stream of mire.
Both are heading into the last days of the campaign with TV commercials accusing the other of running an unscrupulous campaign. Ah, yes – the vital issues: Who went negative first? Who was more negative than the other? Whose negativity was just tough politics and whose was an affront to the history of civilization?
Just what the public deserves.
These ads – stamped from the same template of grainy photos, ominous voice-overs and pure manure – leave us with the impression that our only choice here is between the lesser of two weasels. I don’t think that’s true, but that’s no thanks to the candidates.
Marr and Baumgartner might say that’s unfair. Marr argues that unrestrained and unreported outside money, long a problem but now truly rampant, is corrupting the system. Once a negative accusation emerges, he says, he has to respond.
“Do I wish the system was different? That there wasn’t a million dollars (raised by candidates) in a legislative race and maybe a half-million in independent expenditures? Sure,” he said.
But he said if he doesn’t respond, it’s like playing by the Marquess of Queensbury rules when your opponent is playing in World Wrestling Entertainment.
Baumgartner makes a similar argument: self-defense. He says the Marr campaign has lied and misrepresented his record. “You have to refute it,” he said.
He agrees that this element of the campaign season can be discouraging, but notes that there are other, more substantive ways to get information.
“The most important thing is for citizens to pay attention, not just in an election year but every year,” he said. “The more informed the citizens are, the less effective those ads are.”
Fine points, all around. And yet, the bottom line for both of them seems to be: It’s not my fault.
Isn’t it somebody’s fault? Besides the other guy’s?
I like one of these candidates better than the other, but I’m not here to make an endorsement. I’m here to register a futile complaint. A wish that our politics weren’t so stupid.
Baumgartner’s side probably still holds a slight lead in the sleazefest, based on an anti-Marr ad paid for by one of the gutless anonymous “interest” groups that do the dirty work these days. That ad tried to paint Marr as a sexual harasser for settling a lawsuit involving a former employee of his. Even the woman who sued has denounced it.
The ad appeared a couple weeks ago, and Marr was justifiably angered by it. Since then, though, he has gone after that ad with an outsized vengeance, most recently taking out an ad attacking the ad.
It was, he said, an outrage.
Well … yeah. But you know that clear, bright line? It’s hard to see it under the deluge of mud.
Both of these guys have said things that were not true about the other. Both have taken great liberties in describing their opponent’s “stands.” Both have implied things about the other that simply cannot be implied honestly.
The ads aren’t all there is to the campaign, of course. You can watch debates online, there is good coverage at this newspaper’s website, and there is issue-oriented material from the campaigns themselves.
But what the candidates choose to bring to you most prominently – what they spend tons of money to bring right into your home and put in your lap – has nothing at all to do with the issues.
A million bucks. If only there was something of social value that could be purchased with that money. Some need that might be met. Just anything at all. …
There’s another legislative battle here in Spokane, one whose contenders you haven’t seen all that much on the boob tube. One whose ads haven’t required a constant policing of facts by the newspaper. A Democratic incumbent and a Republican challenger. There’s a lot at stake in that one too. It isn’t some Mayberry pie-eating contest.
It’s John Driscoll versus John Ahern. Sixth District House seat.
The Marr-Baumgartner race could pay for the Battle of the Johns three times over.
And yet for the public – remember the noble, deserving public? – it’s been worth so much less.
Shawn Vestal can be reached at (509) 459-5431 or shawnv@spokesman.com.
The draw of the unknowable 
liarsinnews on October 29 at 6:13 a.m.
Chris Marr, is a pathological LIAR. I really have to laugh at the woman who received $75,000.00 from Marr and recently jumped on the band wagon backing Marr for office. I would think Marr should ask for a refund. Common sense dictates the lady charging Marr in the first place either lied or as it looks now, was a willing victim. It appears Marr may have given her more money. Why else would she come forward after suing him in the first place and was sustained, and now support him (for FREE)??
CalJones on October 29 at 7:13 a.m.
Read the lawsuit…she specifically says that Chris Marr was among those sexually harassing her…http://marrharassment.com/Amendedsummons.pdf
Too bad the press isn’t reporting that.
Also too bad that the press isn’t talking about STRONG PAC, a secret pac funded by labor organizations that is putting out mailers chalked full of lies about Marr’s opponent.
Nick42 on October 29 at 7:24 a.m.
“I’m here to register a futile complaint. A wish that our politics weren’t so stupid.”
Our political process is a reflection of our society. It will become less stupid when our society does. In other words, don’t hold your breath.
hawken on October 29 at 7:37 a.m.
Either Vestal is lying, or is grossly incompetent with actual facts!
when he writes…
“Baumgartner’s side probably still holds a slight lead in the sleazefest, based on an anti-Marr ad paid for by one of the gutless anonymous “interest” groups that do the dirty work these days. That ad tried to paint Marr as a sexual harasser for settling a lawsuit involving a former employee of his. Even the woman who sued has denounced it.”
Marr was in fact sued by Dawn Folwer alleging this:
:”Defendant Marr asked female employees if they enjoy sex, and made comments about other female employees sex.”
Read the suit for yourself here…. if you like.
http://marrharassment.com/Amendedsummons.pdf
My assessment is that both Vestal and Fowler are lying, based upon the written complaint filed by Fowler through attorneys Dunn and Black.
Vestal goes on to say….
“I like one of these candidates better than the other, but I’m not here to make an endorsement. I’m here to register a futile complaint.”
A second misrepresentation in this article…. Vestal is clearly endorsing Marr!
Mr. Vestal…. you are fallacious in what you write!
Maybe you should have read the suit before publishing this article. If in fact, you did read the suit…. then clearly,,, you are a liar.
Your hypocrisy seems to have no limits! You condemn “mud slinging”….. while you underhandedly, “sling mud” at Baumgartner yourself in this article.
You should be terminated by the SR for publishing such incorrect and fallacious information.
hawken on October 29 at 7:42 a.m.
Oh yes…..
Dawn Folwer settled for $75,000.00 relating to her sexual harassment suit against Chris Marr, et al.
http://marrharassment.com/Agreement.pdf
mikeln on October 29 at 8:24 a.m.
The only way to stop these ads and return to civil politics is to hit these sleazballs in the pocket book. Money is power and if you take it away from these liers you take away their power. If you are caught doing these things you should be removed, for good, from the political theater. You should be fined, a lot. These people fine us for every little thing we do wrong, it’s time to return the favor. All material that is to be aired should be approved by the candidate, even the ones they say they have no control over because that is a lie. If they take part in this crap, they are not only out of politcs for good but fined not millions of dollors but billions of dollors, that is the only way to make these wealthy sleazballs take note. In other words, the only way to stop this crap is to threaten these people with the loss of their wealth and ability to take part in the political process.
misjustice on October 29 at 8:35 a.m.
Publicly funded elections, with 60 day time limits on campaigns; simple solution. But it won’t happen. Pols like the campaign $$$ and “donors” like buying Pols…and so it goes.
; )
hawken on October 29 at 8:41 a.m.
The fact is that negative ads work with the public,,,, and get politicians elected, all the while the public moans and complains about them.
Secondly, some negative ads are “truthful” negative ads.
Negative ads are not a problem for an informed electorate.
Let the negative ads continue…. As for me, I prefer to sort out fact from lie for myself.
Besides, negative ads are part of our American Heritage, dating back to the earliest elections we held as a new nation.
I think most people have the intelligence to sort through them… Some of the negative ads are so absurd and stupid…. even the uninformed can tell lie from truth.
Oh,,, but how we love to complain about negative ads!
zac1974 on October 29 at 8:55 a.m.
For once I actually agree with Hawken, if the negative ads didn’t work, they wouldn’t run them. Sad…
EdubU on October 29 at 9:16 a.m.
Negative ads work for the uninformed or those who don’t take the time to research and look at what candidates stand for. A lot of candidates are relying on these folks to vote for
them. The same with initiatives, most voters have no clue
what they are or aren’t voting for.
liarsinnews on October 29 at 9:38 a.m.
Spokane has so many political illiterates who vote. These are the kinds of voters that vote name recognition and haven`t taken the time to investigate the truth, investigate the facts and vote accordingly. Sad but true.
hawken on October 29 at 10:15 a.m.
Doug…. you are correct…. there are few cures for “stupid.”
Certainly, big government cannot legislate away “stupid.”
Nor, can regulating the content of political ads cure “stupid.”
We certainly don’t want government to regulate negative ads,,, do we…
A Republican government will be favorable to Republican ads…. and, Likewise for Democrats.
Let’s keep government out of regulating political ads….
And PLEASE! Do NOT raise my taxes for the so-called “publicly funded elections” such as Misjudgment suggests above.
Government, cannot fix “stupid.” “Stupid” is our American right!
MrNatural on October 29 at 10:41 a.m.
For all the candidates that speak
I hear those rank and those that reek
Clamoring up manure piles peak
A quest to wet the scoundrel beak
As sheep the masses bleat the score
To bellow whom their voting for
As if to threaten blood and gore
Perpetuate uncivil war
With commiseration to Omar Khayyam
greenlibertarian on October 29 at 11:29 a.m.
Close elections are decided by the 5% or so that are still undecided near the termination of the campaign. Some of those folks are studiously examining the real issues and the candidates’ positions, however a big majority of such folks will make a voting decision on nothing more than name recognition, whim, or which candidate’s campaign commercial they just heard/saw.