The essence of dirty politics

The definition of “dirty politics” depends on who defines it. People who are not running for public office might construe the phrase to be a negative endeavor practiced by those who are pursuing and seeking to capture a seat in public office. Those individuals in political circles might look upon it as something to make their candidate get ahead in the polls or effectively demean other candidates.

Generally speaking, dirty politics is utilized as a mechanism to discredit individuals who are seeking public office and to take away their credibility and tarnish their image and reputation as individuals.

Politicians and/or their supporters who use practices that place others in a false light via a distortion or outright inaccurate proclamation of a candidate are clearly without scruples and desperate to do anything to get into office. These are the very people who do not belong in public office.

Looking at dirty politics from an objective standpoint, it can be described and construed as politics exercised by one of more individuals of a specific political party using exaggeration of the truth or an outright prevarication.

When the “truth” about a candidate for public office comes out, it may be categorized as dirty politics simply because it touches on sensitive and controversial issues that could negatively impinge upon the candidate running for office. As the cliché goes, “The truth always hurts”.

If a “non-truth” about a candidate running for public office is mentioned publicly, it is not easy for the electorate to discern whether or not it reflects the truth. The only way to dispel the legitimacy of the accusation and/or claim is to counter it with the actual truth regarding the issue. When this is done, then the negative impact backfires onto the person or group issuing the non-truth.

In the CNMI, “pocket meetings” are commonplace prior to an election. People participate in these activities and much is conveyed by both candidates and those people who represent the various parties running for office.

Oftentimes, the people for political parties will convey blatant and outright lies about individuals running against the candidate they are supporting. The voters who attend pocket meetings who hear about these lies are not always able to discern if what they are hearing reflects the truth. The only way to know that it is accurate and the truth is to ask for anything said to be substantiated.

If that cannot be done, then voters should look at whatever someone tries to convey to them about a specific candidate as nothing more than “poppycock.”

When accusations are made by people that are inaccurate to discredit candidates running for office, it reflects the essence of dirty politics. There are some people in the camps of political parties who deliberately try to discredit candidates with statements attacking their characters and/or personal lives. These defamatory statements should always be challenged by any voter who is presented with it. And if the individual or group is incapable of presenting anything substantial to support the defamatory statements issued, then it should always be discounted and looked upon as insubstantial.

The recent inaccurate listing of a Covenant candidate Juan Borja Tudela by the Republican Party in the CNMI reflects “dirty politics” because it was public knowledge that he is affiliated with and running for office under the Covenant banner.

If the Republican Party made an error in the listing of Tudela as a Democrat and not Covenant Party candidate, then an apology should be issued publicly. If an apology is not issued publicly to Mr. Tudela, then the question for the electorate to pose is: Did the GOP deliberately place Tudela’s name as a Democrat in lieu of a candidate with the Covenant Party and is it proper to say they played a role in practicing dirty politics?

Recently, Republican Party chair John S. Reyes told the media that the opposition party described a photo generated by the Covenant Party with Juan Babauta and Sedy Demesa as “an unacceptable act of desperation that is dirty.”

Interestingly, Demesa’s holds principal ownership of a Southern California based magazine, newspaper, and broadcast television show that have been active in terms of openly supporting the Babauta/Benavente tandem for the highest political office in the CNMI. Because the support from Demesa has been obvious and consistent since Babauta announced his candidacy to run for a second term, it is a logical assumption that there is some sort of relationship and/or affiliation with the incumbent governor in his quest to be re-elected.

In order to discount this claim, then it should be revealed to the public any and all information regarding Demesa, e.g., campaign contributions to the BB team. If any campaign contributions have been made—especially if they are large ones—then one would be naïve to think that a pictorial showing Babauta and Demesa shaking hands is inaccurate, unacceptable, as well as dirty.

In any democratic system, you will always see political activity that may be border line in terms of being fair play and ethical. If the political activity reflects “the truth,” then there will never be any infringement regarding ethics or practicing political fair play.

The politicians in the CNMI who are vying for the gubernatorial seat know what reflects the truth and what does not. The electorate has a right to know the truth and if any candidate is not able to step up to the plate and present it, then they should withdraw from trying to represent the island community in the highest political office in the Commonwealth.

Dr. Jesus D. Camacho
Delano, California