Negative reporting

The cynicism of this campaign season’s negative advertising is breathtaking. Campaigns will take some minor irrelevant fact about the attacked candidate, puff it into a horrifying negative and hope we’re too stupid to notice the irrelevance or the exaggeration. Meanwhile, relevant points about the candidate get ignored.

For example, the most relevant point about Jeremy Shaffer is that he’s a Republican running for the House of Representatives. As a Republican, he’ll be free to represent his constituents.

But Chris Deluzio will have to do as Nancy Pelosi commands. It won’t matter what the people of the 17th District think. It won’t matter what Mr. Deluzio thinks. He will vote as Nancy tells him, or she will neuter him politically. If he’s too independent, the Democrats will primary him in 2024.

Instead, we hear how Mr. Shaffer worked for a billion dollar corporation that had dealings with China. People aren’t supposed to notice that the majority of us private sector workers work for such companies. It’s also held against Mr. Shaffer that he’s been successful. Apparently the ad’s sponsors believe being competent should disqualify you from political office.

But the biggest whopper is the focus on the abortion stance of candidates for federal office. The whole point of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision was that, under the 10th Amendment, abortion rights are a question for the states. As federal officials, Oz, Fetterman, Shaffer and Deluzio won’t have any say in this matter!

Democrats are clearly desperate to distract us from the falling standard of living that they’ve engineered.

FRED ANDERSON

Ross Twp.