Smear campaigns can be good

Did you know that Will steals the ideas behind our columns from the news he finds on the Web, or that most of his articles are just the same old recycled jokes and stupid puns used over and over and over again? I bet you also didn’t know (hold on to your socks, people) that Will throws puppies over cliffs in his spare time.

Yeah. Now who’s the better writer?

I know that last one might surprise you. Will, throwing puppies like they’re water balloons? But trust me, I saw a video on YouTube, and although the guy looks nothing like Will, I still assume it was him. I’ve known Will for almost an entire 10 weeks now, so let me be the first to tell you that deep down he is a sinister narcissist. Seriously, all he ever does is talk about himself and how funny he is when, in fact, he isn’t.

As for the other accusations I’ve made, just know that they all come from extremely reliable sources, a.k.a. myself. And I can easily discern the facts from the made-up lies that seem similar to most of the stuff you see in Will’s columns. I know he likes to make-believe that he’s using hard evidence to back up his arguments, but usually its just stuff he pulls from Wikipedia.

You’re probably wondering, “Eric, what’s caused this complete turn-around on your compatriot?” To be honest, nothing has changed. I am in no way hurting Will or trying to make him come off as a bad guy, although, as I finish this sentence, I think he just threw another puppy off a cliff. It’s that I am exposing the truth about him. I am letting you the people understand the real Will Mari.

If anything, I am just taking a page out of the Clinton campaign, which has been viciously attacking Barack “Saddam is my father” Obama for months now. Obama, always the cool and collected one, apparently doesn’t understand that if you want to win, you have to play dirty. Politicians have relied on taking the most inconsequential information and blowing it so out of proportion that it somehow becomes vitally important to the election.

But in reality, it’s important for us to know every little detail about our candidates. These are going to be the people we have to live with for the next four years, so they had better be a perfect representation of my own ideals and beliefs. For instance, had I known Bush’s favorite movie was Friday Night Lights, I would have never voted for him.

So for all those who have been bashing Clinton for her lowbrow politics, just know that she understands the game. But more importantly, she understands that the truth is what matters most, even if it seems irrelevant to the more important matters at hand.

Oh, there goes another puppy.

[Reach columnist Eric Uthus at opinion@thedaily.washington.edu.]

Smear campaigns bring us down

My esteemed colleague is attempting to smear me. I could say that I don’t want to dignify his drivel with a response, but I feel inclined to react to his twisted version of an attack ad.

I absolutely do not throw puppies off cliffs in my “spare time.”

Seriously.

I love puppies. And I don’t have any spare time. Believe me, if I even had spare time, I would never use it in such a sadistic fashion. Instead, I would rescue puppies that had been chucked off hilltops — I would rappel down crevasses with a rope, doggie treat in hand, saving puppy lives.

But you can see the damage a false accusation can inflict. If this was a presidential campaign, and my dear comrade in rhetorical satire was an activist working to destroy my career, I’d have to hold a press conference to address the “Puppygate” crisis.

There would be cameras, lights and throngs of reporters. With a solemn face, I’d take the stage and stare straight ahead, my family standing resolutely behind me.

“I do not massacre puppies,” I would say, tears streaming down my face. “And I resent this Swiftboat-style attack on my dignity. As a staunch advocate of puppy rights, I can’t believe people would think, for a moment, that I’d ever harm a puppy. I’ll take questions now.”

Immediately, dozens of reporters would pop up, waving their hands in the air.

“Yes, you,” I would point toward the journalist in the middle row.

“Is it true that the Uthus Campaign for Puppy Freedom has uncovered photographic evidence of your puppy slaughter?” the reporter would query.

“Those so-called pictures are obviously Photoshopped; it’s laughable that they’d even be considered evidence,” I would say. “Next question.”

And so on.

Smear tactics don’t uncover the Truth with a capital “T”. They distract and hurt. Yes, campaign ads should sometimes be rough and also highlight weaknesses in an opponent.

But people shouldn’t believe unsubstantiated accusations designed to politically outmaneuver the other candidate. Government isn’t a game. We shouldn’t elect our leaders based on who has the more devious methods of delivering falsehoods via TV, the Internet or word of mouth.

This isn’t some cheesy, overly noble ideal. This is the right thing to do. If a candidate messes up, he or she should be called out on it. But campaign ads shouldn’t contain cheap or dirty shots.

Once more, for the record, I love puppies.

[Reach columnist Will Mari at opinion@thedaily.washington.edu.]