A Question For McCain/Palin Supporters

McCain supporters: Let me ask you this... if McCain/Palin think you're so stupid that they can get away with lying, blatantly, to your faces to get elected, what do you think they'll do when they're in office?

Regarding Palin, what kind of a person gets on a stage and outright lies about her accomplishments and then accepts a stadium full of cheers for something she knows she never did? I would never do that... could never do that. She has repeated the bridge to nowhere line 26 times. She has let McCain talk about the plane she supposedly sold on eBay for a profit. There's a whole list of blatant lies. Am I supposed to identify with someone who would misrepresent herself that way? I hold myself in higher esteem than that. What kind of people think this is ok... that this is someone they would vote for?

Regarding McCain, what kind of a person builds a career on the honor of service to his country and then trashes it all with such dishonorable behavior at the end? He's not even pretending at this point... he is calculating exactly what he can get away with to get into the White House. He doesn't care that he's telling outright lies, he doesn't care that he's deepening the divide in this country, he doesn't care that he isn't contributing to any kind of substantive discussion on what's the best path for us.

I know I was talking about taking the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" path the other day out of anger and disgust and frustration, but I really can't see that happening. I can't see Obama doing that and I'd probably just feel dirty afterward if he did. I don't have a problem with the mockery and sneers but perhaps it says something important about his character that he chooses not to participate in the lies and smears.

Jonathan Martin at Politico has a bottom-line take on McCain's race to the bottom:

Blame can be shared between both campaigns. But thanks to the anchor of Bush, a devalued brand, the compelling stories of McCain and Palin and the cultural vulnerabilities of Obama, Republicans plainly have more to gain by making the race about character and identity.

So they've begun to engage in what is effectively a campaign of baiting and exploiting. And Tuesday, Obama played right into their hands.

On the first count, they've plainly made a decision with regard to their ads that the naysaying of impartial fact-checkers and reporters is far less important with under 60 days than the political benefit of driving their preferred (if factually-shaky) message and inviting Obama into a tit-for-tat on that same turf.

So, yes, they'll claim Palin killed the Bridge to Nowhere -- it only invites a discussion about spending and earmarks. And, yes, they'll accuse Obama of wanting to teach sex ed to Kindergartners -- it only invites a discussion on a topic Obama isn't likely to win and which, more important, shifts the campaign away from a debate about education policy, on which Democrats typically fare better.

Not wanting, quite understandably, to be tagged with the label of six-year-old sex indoctrinator, Obama's campaign responded with a howitzer blast.

In launching such an attack, McCain was losing his honor, suggested Obama spokesman Bill Burton.

The trap set, McCain's campaign moved right in and moved what started as a debate over education into their preferred sphere: McCain's untouchable biography.

"[I]f they want to question John McCain’s honor and record of service to this country, then that’s a debate we welcome," said Brian Rogers.