Do Congressional Candidates play fair?

     The process of campaigning is a crucial effort to all candidates.  Campaigning allows the candidates to advertise to the voters while making their positions on issues relevant.  The film "The Candidate" portrays an interesting take on the electoral campaign for a rookie candidate.  

     "The Candidate" gives a real perspective into the world of politics.  As a viewer, you follow the entire campaign trail from beginning to end and are a witness to the inside motives.  The movie starts off with a search for someone who would run against Crocker Garmin, the Republican incumbent.  Bill McKay decides to run after finding out he will surely never win and he can utilize the campaign to discuss his liberal views.  McKay begins to gain followers because of his interesting methods of approach and stands on issues.  However he finds out that he will be defeated by a landslide in the election and decides he does not want to be humiliated.  McKay begins to listen to his campaign staff and play the politics game.  In the end he wins but jeopardizes his morals.  This movie leads us to question how far do politicians go in order to win?

     In the article "Congress: The Electoral Connection" the author, David Mayhew, discusses three things that every candidate partakes in during the election process.  Those three topics are position taking, credit claiming and advertising.  We can incorporate all three into the movie "The Candidate."  McKay takes a position on various issues throughout the movie such as his pro-abortion stance, his views on the California Fires, the environment such as the eroding beaches and various other issues.  McKay's challenger, Garmin, partakes in credit claiming, such as during the fire scene.  Garmin shows up to announce that he will attempt to enact the Water Shed bill to Congress to try to prevent theses fires from constantly erupting.  Both candidates advertised throughout the campaign.  Bill McKay and his staff filmed all of his encounters with the constituents and turned them into commercials publicizing his stance on working for the people.  Crocker Garmin advertised as well.  In the beginning of the movie he threw a barbeque to advertise himself for reelection.  He shook hands, kissed babies and ensured every one's happiness.

     Advertising makes a huge impact on elections.  2010 Badvertising, an article from ABC News, portrays our politicians attempts to degrade their opponents.  We can compare the 2010 campaign to the electoral campaign in "The Candidate," and see that even though there are extreme differences, there is also similarities due to Mayhew's three specific topics seen throughout campaigning, which I earlier discussed.

Should pornography be protected?

     This past week we have been discussing the subject of pornography and the government.  Should pornography be protected by the first amendment?  Should it be censored from the public and communities?  Does the government have the right to censor it?  These are all valid questions and do cause quite a debate.

     "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." (The First Amendment)

     This article discuses whether pornography rights are protected under the First Amendment.

     A film that goes along with the theme this week is The People Vs. Larry Flynt.  The movie follows the life of Larry Flynt, who was the original publisher of Hustler magazine.  Throughout his life Larry goes back and forth through the courts in regards to his raunchy magazines.  Larry Flynt was the first person to try something new and the country apparently was just not ready for Hustler magazine and the images that it portrayed.  The people were not ready for such a public display of obscenity.  If you walk into a store today and see Hustler magazine behind the counter (which we usually do) we think nothing of it.  In 1973, however, this was just unheard of.

     I do personally agree with pornography being protected by the first amendment, but I do not agree with it being completely censored from communities.  I know there are still small towns in our country that do not want to be subjected to obscenity, however, it is just impossible with the amount of media outlets available to the population.  I found an article that is very interesting.  It is in regards to the  UK and France, these countries are largely looked at as leaders, as is the United States, so I question whether or not other countries may follow suit.