Stupid?
I too am sick of the merry-go-round, the spin makes my head spin.
Brian, I am glad that you presented this from a neutral position. This will be an interesting discussion if we can keep it on general terms rather than specific examples (Ouch).

The operable term here would be 'viable'. What did Ralph Nader get us in 2000 except George W. Bush? If I were voting my conscience it would be a write-in for Bernie Sanders for President.

@Brian Carlson...I find this piece quite a delight. I too am tired of the world in 30 second sound bites, catch phrases and speaking to the lowest common denominator. Why is it that they think that all of us must have our information diced, chopped, digested and expelled in chunks so simple and in such rapid succession that it is almost impossible to assimilate anything of worth. It's not that we are stupid, but they assume we are. Until we stand up and say NO MORE; will the situation ever change. It is time for the adults to take control.

Unfortunately, I've seen the "man on the street" interviews where ""huh?" answers come from seemingly normal folks who should have been held back.....for l-o-n-g periods of time. Seems the necessity of 7-word sound bites and catchy bumper stickers has been necessitated by a lowest common denominator that should be embarrassing for us all.

Brian... you don't like the 30 second sound bite.
Then, what are you proposing, the 30 minute infomercial? Yeesh.....
hmmm.... I'm liking that 30 seconds of silliness.

As far as the ads go, they're no different than any other ad. They have a point to make in a short period of time with as much visual impact as possible. They're logged between Kelly Rippa portraying Samantha Stevens for whatever brand of kitchen appliance (see how well that works?) and David Gruber solving all your inattentive driving related problems for you with "One call, that's all..." (that works, despite being annoying).

They don't bother me until I've heard them for the umpteenth time and even after that I just tune them out. I actually find them kind of interesting in how they attempt to make that point in a short period of time. It's TV, they're ads. What do you expect?

I also don't worry too much about their impact. I find much more disturbing the amount of time supposedly ethical (for lack of a better term) news sources such as NPR spend on Obama coming out in support of gay marriage or Mitt Romney's teenage indiscretions. I expect them to spend more time on the issues, not lend credence to the nonsense that doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.

It has to be kept simple ,base and to the point whether its the truth or some shade there of. America is turning to a dependent culture that has a wide population of stupid,ignorant,easily manipulated voters. Going into the real world takes effort. Its so much easier getting told what you should do. It would be horrible if they had to actually be responsible and on the hook for what is being done in their names. Just sleep in and we will take care of ya. Read an AFSCME or WEAC mailer once.

I too really appreciated this opinion piece Mr. Carlson. Very well put and wonderfully balanced. I am tired of politicians on both/all sides just trashing their competitors instead of telling us what they will do/can do if they are elected or what their opinions are on various issues. It's using fear to get votes instead of providing information that would allow voters to make their own choices. I also can't stand the inaccurate information being given but that's a whole other discussion....

Thanks Lyle and Jennie for the nods. Thank you all for your thoughts. We can kick around the "need" for the sort of mental jingles I mentioned due to our short attentions spans. Certainly there is no "Need," for one more smiling faced color shot candidate framed alongside the frowning black and white rival. The real issue though is our willingness to accept watered down spin, lopsided and extreme propaganda, and a sort of perpetual pamphleteering style of discourse from people who intend to run our state or nation. Moreover, when we think in these dogmatic kneejerk manners, we become "dummies" for their ventriloquism. In fact we are less than that... ventriloquist dummies are funny because they "talk back" to their operators.
I think that Robert has a very fertile point. I quote him here, speaking about those who are willing to let others steer them or take care of things on their behalf: "It would be horrible if they had to actually be responsible and on the hook for what is being done in their names." Quite so! The thing is Robert and all my sisters and brothers in the Patch... WE ARE HELD RESPONSIBLE for what is done in our names! Just as surely as when people refer to what IRAN is doing they do not distinguish between Iranians...and their despotic government, when the world talks about America...they are talking about what the effective policies of this country are...good or bad.

(cotinued) In fact, the people living in totalitarian regimes are barely responsible for what happens in them...or at least far less so than we are for what goes on here...as in many, their votes are worthless, the elections are complete shams, there may be only one viable candidate, and there is a very real threat that any voiced protest about the government will be met with serious repression. In America we still have... still have...the opportunity to do what we are doing here. It is quite possible notes are being taken when our voices become to strident... but by and large we can still speak up. The little flag I am waving with this thread is to say... lets speak up like individuals who think for ourselves...not as parrots of the last ad we saw. Because, I bet... we have a lot more in common, despite our leanings, than most candidates acknowledge in their campaigns. We do want a just world, we do want to raise our families in peace, we do want our children to be better educated than we were...or at least as well, we would like to work and to work at jobs we can at least make living wages at... we want to be free to practice our own faithS, and... we would like our government to actually represent its people...not just some of them, not to have one big ear bent towards the wealthy and a tiny one tilted toward the rest of us.

I think what I want is more content and less smoke. When you claim you will create x numbers of jobs you either do or don't and its relatively easy to tell how far you are off, or exceed your promise. If you claim you will restore workers right to bargain, again...we know what your plans are and can make a decision, also based on whether or not we believe you can accomplish the expressed goal. It would be good to know more depth on each issue...for instance, how the latter benefits the general population or how much it costs and, in the case of the former, what sort of jobs are you talking about... burger flipping jobs or a cross section of living wage jobs. What I cant stand are the great abstractions...some of them nearly unintelligible. What does it mean (in reality) to move forwards? What specifically do you mean by "unite the state." Just examples. And, on the national level, the platitudes about our great program of making the world safe for democracy...as though we were some sort of benign Swiss Grandpa dispensing gifts and had no ambition of empire... we dont get to peace through violence...the world is no safer for all our wars. Its just massive self delusion..to my mind.

I am impressed. I had gotten to the point where reading the Patch on anything political turned into a Walker,Obama, Bush or ALEC hate fest .Reading got to be just like a driver going past a car accident. Digesting well thought out meaningful conversation in a non-rant type form is provoking the same on this end. Brian, I dub thee "Non aligned observer" extraordinaire , You are now on my list of Voices I will be looking for in the future. Solving problems in our culture and society more times that not take a look inside ourselves for answers that most wont take because they dont want to be told they are part of the problem. Its easier to march on with a group that supports all bad decisions in our past.

Wow... well thanks. I dont know that I need to maintain total neutrality or if it is possible but I do have the belief that there is probably more that most of us have in common, however deep it is or dusty... than there are issues that divide us. Getting to the commonalities and expecting and respecting the right to differ, turns the boat around toward peace and, I think, progress. Glad you like the discussion.

Look what you started Brian. Some honest and open discussion without name calling and labeling. Oh, what a world, what a world! I'm melting!

$$andS,
I do actually think people basically want the same things. In the blogosphere, or Blog Island, people want to be heard, they would like someone to consider what they are saying, and they would like replies to be at least civil. Of course they must expect disagreement, varied responses and what not. But no one blogs or responds in order to be insulted, called names, etc. Hence my blog on proposed rules for blogging suggested that we speak as though we were seated directly across a table from one another. Other's seemed to agree to the basic thoughts... thanks for the response.