Campaign Doggerel

So John F. Kerry is our bona fide Democratic candidate for the presidency. Or, should we say, bona fido? The media have taken a liking to describing the potential top dog and his pack in the most canine of terms, and their dogged use of canine imagery reduces politicians’ personalities to the one-word descriptions that package them neatly for voters: They’re sometimes trustworthy, sometimes loyal, sometimes frisky and sometimes vicious.

First up is the vice-presidential vetting process. According to The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, “Kerry announced the appointment of prominent Washington Democrat James Johnson to start vetting potential vice presidential candidates.” One of Kerry’s advisors said in The New York Times: “As someone who has been through the vetting process, [Kerry is] familiar with it and wants a process that’s good for the party and good for the campaign.” The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) reveals this definition of “vet”: “to examine carefully and critically for deficiencies or errors; specifically to investigate the suitability of (a person) for a post that requires loyalty and trustworthiness.” The public is fed up with perfidy after all—epitomized appropriately enough in a 1998 movie titled Wag the Dog—and the media’s talk of “vetting” reflects an interest in returning to values Americans want in their leaders. This is what vetting is all about: fitting candidates into their proper political boxes and figuring out which constituencies they woo best, be it the soccer moms or the NASCAR dads. Clearly vetting is not a very nuanced process—for media characterizations it’s the sound bytes that sell.

Runner-up John Edwards is next up on the examination table. Not satisfied to retreat with his tail between his legs, he should take comfort in the words of Linda Feldmann of the Christian Science Monitor: “He’s vetted; that’s very important. Voters know what there is to know, both positive and negative, and they obviously like him.”  I’m somehow imagining Edwards with lights shone in his mouth, Saddam Hussein-style. Wary of electing house pets which are too docile for the voters’ tastes, Helen Kennedy of The New York Daily News cautioned that “Edwards has not been much of an attack dog, a key quality in a veep.”

Meanwhile the candidates are trying to avoid being “dogged” by issues that troubled their predecessors. To dog, according to the OED: “to follow pertinaciously,” “pursue” or “track.” The New York Times reports that a new round of Bush campaign ads aims to counter “charges by Democrats that Mr. Bush has lost touch with the people, a charge that had dogged his father in 1992.” Kerry, on the other hand, has to be careful about how he presents himself with regard to gun laws—”a lightning-rod cultural issue,” says The Boston Globe, “that dogged Al Gore in 2000 and has the potential to swing certain voters in a general election, especially in rural areas and the South.”

Set to spend the next eight months dogging each other, perhaps the most dogged man will persevere. Jill Lawrence in USA Today praised Kerry for “[impressing] people with his dogged persistence, evident in his comebacks this year and in his 1996 Senate race.”  Though Kerry’s legislative record isn’t so impressive, says Gail Chaddock of The Christian Science Monitor, “his signature investigations were models of dogged, even relentless focus.”

In all of the rough and tumble though, voters might forget that these candidates are far more complex than all the media’s talk of vetting and dogging would suggest. Having overhyped the candidates’ bark, it’s time for media to start focusing on the issues, where the candidates can really bite.

Liora R. Halperin ‘05, a Crimson editorial comper, is a history and near eastern languages and civilizations concentrator in Kirkland House.