Kari wrote: "Isn't it the job of the media to help voters understand the larger context - and provide facts to alleviate confusion?"

Your question is rhetorical, no? Come on, it's the O. This story is exactly what they most often do best: confuse. Seriously, Kari, there's little you or anyone can do about the local corporate media (or the national, for that matter) without coming across as whining. That said, I'm sensing that Mr. Smith may be digging his own hole with his ad approach. Here's hoping ... Beat Smith!

Kari, the reason the Oregonian makes the claim is because YOUR OWN CANDIDATE ADMITS TO RUNNING THOSE ADS.

From the Oregonian:

'Merkley said much the same thing -- he'd rather run issue ads but feels compelled to respond to Smith's attacks, typically in ads that label his opponent "sleazy."'

By all means whack Gordon Smith all you can for his sins, but be careful. There are many Democrats as guilty as Smith when it comes to the current economic crisis.

This is the Senate vote for the Bankruptcy Bill in 2005 that helped grease the skids for this debacle. Note which side Obama's VP candidate was on. He was one of 16 Democrats in the senate voting for this bill written by and for the banking industry.

The way that the DSCC and Merkley has responded to Smith and co. (and the other way around too) has made me realize that it won't matter who is in the position or who is voted into that position - As a single person with no children or no wife, I am, and will be, screwed no matter who is in office. That is why I will leave this race blank - because no matter who it is, the way they are acting shows me that being single with no wife or family makes me a pariah. God help us all.

"Well, I suppose one could label a response ad an attack ad, but not in my book. "

Well, I suppose you should talk to Jeff Merkley, since he is the one Esteve quoted and attributed in the piece, and it is Merkley who made that definition, Kari.

"Jeff Merkley has NOT run a single attack ad in this fall campaign"

Unfortunately his "surrogates" have. And it's a fantasy to believe most voters will distinguish the difference.

Gordon Smith didn't run that stupid hot dog ad, yet I think we'd all like him to be held responsible for it. You can't have it both ways.

The ads Merkley has been running scream "status quo" so loud they drown out just about any other message.

"I suppose one could label a response ad an attack ad, but not in my book."

I guess it depends on what your definition if is is.

I know that voters don't differentiate between candidate ads and independent-expenditure ads, but the Oregonian could have done a much better job of explaining all that.

Obviously I agree with you there, unfortunately the people who are making their voting decisions based on 30-second TV commercials aren't going to be reached by a newspaper article about politics.

Fair or not, in the eyes of most voters Merkley owns each and every one of those negative ads attacking Smith, just as Smith owns all the ones attacking Merkley.

A candidate with an original idea would be looking for new ways to break through that haze rather than simply contributing to it.

"Fair or not, in the eyes of most voters Merkley owns each and every one of those negative ads attacking Smith, just as Smith owns all the ones attacking Merkley"

They also don't care if there is a disconnect (as Kari has told us that Jeff has no say in what the DSCC sends out on the ads). They make that connection (dems = merkley, reps = smith)and proceed forth because they really don't have the time or the stomach to listen to much more than they already have.

"They also don't care if there is a disconnect (as Kari has told us that Jeff has no say in what the DSCC sends out on the ads)."

The idea that Smith or Merkley have no control is a joke, Kari merely says that as a way to suggest that Merkley HIMSELF hasnt gone negative.Technicality IMHO.

It may be true that neither have a say as to the content. But it would be as simple as sending a press release saying he doesnt condone the ads, nor does he want them being negative, and the committee would have to cease with the ads.

Then again, Merkley cant do that, because without the DSCC, he isnt in this race.

"Merkley cant do that, because without the DSCC, he isnt in this race."

Yeppers...those puppet strings really come in handy right now, don't they?

Ok, it's official: It's hard to quickly come up with a single major accomplishment of Gordon Smith. According to his website, he touts 9 bipartisan efforts, only one of which he sponsored. Most of his list involves health care and stem cell research (a href=http://www.gordonsmith.com/news/Read.aspx?ID=88). One would expect something more after two terms.

The spin from who, Kevin?

It is Kari who tried to claim that Merkley didnt have anything to do with the ads. In the Oregonian story, MERKLEY IS QUOTED AND ATTRIBUTED TO ADMITING TO NEGATIVE ADS.

Then, he says the Oregonian doesnt do a good job of differentiating between the DSCC ads and Merkley's own ads, when you know both campaigns take the committee's ads into account when planning their own advertising.

As a matter of fact, it took the DSCC to convinve Merkley to run in the first place. So to suggest that they dont work closely together and that Merkley shouldnt be blamed for their ads, is in itself spin.

And finally, To suggest that the DSCC has been running ads because Smith started it is a joke. They were planning this approach from the beginning, when they recruited a candidate to run against Smith. Had they not assured Merkley that he would get their financial backing, there is no way Merkley runs....

So who is spinning?

To be clear, i have no problems with any of the decisions either campaign has made...I just get annoyed when people tied to the campaign, or the campaign itself, tries to act holier than thou. On the one hand, Kari is asking the Oregonian to better inform viewers, yet on the other he is suggesting that the DSCC ads dont factor into the Merkley campaign playbook...that in itsels is deceit.

I don't object to attack ads per se. Voters need to know why they should fire the old guy, not just why they should hire the new guy.

I would much rather see Candidate A say vote for me, this is what how I stand on issue A versus my opponent. What I hate to see is don't vote for candidate B because he shoves a whole hotdog in his mouth type ads.

BTW, I am voting Merkely just on the basis of that stupid Smith ad alone.

OK...While your waiting for that, Kari, maybe I can wait for someome to tell me, from either side, what anyone can do for the single person with no family. All I ever hear is "family" this and "family" that. What about those like me who are single, middle aged, with no wife and no kids? When it comes to Tax Breaks, I am ignored (for just an example). A lot of policy is 'family' oriented - from both sides - and people like me are just ignored. Sorry if this is way off topic, but it's really starting to gall me to no end...

Look, with the massive warchest that Gordo had amassed there was no way that whomever came out of the Dem primary was going to be able to go anything even remotely close to toe-to-toe with him on money basis. Whomever it emerged was going to need substantial help from the DSCC just to have a realistic chance of unseating Gordo.

So maybe the strategy in the primary shouldn't have been "Oh no, we're losing! Quick, just buy this race and we'll try to run an actual campaign in the fall!"

When running against that kind of warchest, it probably would have been an even better idea to let the better man win....

Beat Smith.

Right on Carla!

So "the better man" is the guy who got most of his votes in Mult. Co?

That's the way to win statewide--say Mult. is the only county that matters?

Carla/Kevin/LT: Sheesh. Focus. I thought this post was (in part) about the corporate media and their love affair with Gordo. At least, that was my impression. Smith is not only a very wealthy man, he also obviously has many supporters in that media. To offset this, and BTW to beat Smith, Merkley supporters are better served by focusing on Smith's incredibly arrogant concept of representating the voters of Oregon.

(Full disclosure: I openly supported the 'other guy' in the primary, but now, without public complaint, support Merkley. The primary is history. The GE is the future.)