Negative ads are out again … and they will not cease until the last vote has been made and the last ballot turned in. Every campaigner has used this form to get elected. In order to make yourself look better, make the other person look worse.

Easy enough concept and it makes logical sense. Granted, the negative ads are annoying. Every time I see a negative ad I turn the channel. I know that things are taken out of context but I also know that these ads work on na‹ve, undecided voters who are easily swayed.

As a timeless clich‚ says, “When you are slinging mud you are losing ground,” but I can deal with the negative campaigns. They are not nice, but they are the standard for television and radio ads – at least every two years.

But when does it go too far?

The event that happened in Iowa this past week is an example of sneaky politics going too far.

A very close race for United States Senate between Republican Greg Ganske and Democrat Tom Harkin has been thrust into the national spotlight. By whatever method, a transcript of a Ganske meeting had been obtained by the Democrats.

Whether Harkin knew about this transcript is beside the point

At first, they denied they had anything to do with it.

According to coverage in The Des Moines Register, Jeff Link, the Harkin campaign manager, said it was a “junior staffer who obtained the material from a person who was promised confidentiality by the staffer.”

Did Harkin know about it? Again, it doesn’t matter. A person hired to work for a certain company (or campaign) represents that company (or candidate).

This junior staffer who obtained the recording is a representative of Harkin’s campaign and a representative of Harkin. This junior staffer’s actions reflect Harkin and his ethics (or the lack thereof), whether he likes it or not.

Harkin was quoted by Time magazine on September 23, 1991, saying “Always attack, never defend” and in the same article referred to politics as “combat.” Tom Harkin has been running smear campaigns for a long time.

This is not to say that the Ganske campaign isn’t airing negative ads. Of course they are; it is politics. But the Ganske campaign has not done anything as underhanded as recording a meeting.

Harkin would do almost anything and everything to bring his competition down. This summer Harkin began the smear campaign.

The Register commented that Harkin was already beginning to bring out the negative ads to bring Ganske down before he even got up on his feet:

“The purpose is to start destroying Ganske as a candidate before he ever gets going. It’s the political equivalent of ‘you kill a snake before it gets out of the hole.”

If his platform is so shaky that all he has to stand on is negativity and sneaky politics, it’s not a very sturdy platform.

But I’ve always felt that way. When I was ten years old, Harkin was having a “meet the public” stop in Carroll.

My family happened to be having a family reunion at the same building. Harkin went through and shook all of the adults’ hands but passed right over my cousins and me. I turned to where he continued walking and shouted, “Sure, ignore your future voters.”

As soon as I had said that, he turned on his heels and came to shake our hands. At the tender age of ten I realized what a two-faced politician was and that Harkin was one. I knew when I was old enough to vote, I wouldn’t vote for him.

It is time to give someone else a chance. With the idea of sportsmanship in mind, who is playing a fair game?

Which candidate would get the sportsmanship trophy in this situation? Politicians should keep that in mind because it just may be the deciding vote.

Sarah Bolton is a senior in English from Glidden.