“By the time they’re exposed, this kind of dirty-trickster thinking goes, the election is over.”

Gee, I wonder why? Could it possibly be, because the D&C isn’t doing its job? In other words, your admitting to giving these folks a free pass. At least your honest, sort of.

“While it’s reassuring that independent panels such as the Fair Election Practices Committee are prepared to accept complaints through Monday, it’s voters who can do the most to discourage this kind of despicable behavior.”

I guess the D&C has no role to play in clarifying whats going on, so the voters are fully informed come Tuesday?

“They should remember candidates who play loose with the facts and make a mockery of campaign fairness.”

And they can thank the D&C for not informing them of what candidates are playing loose with the facts. I guess it would take a lot of editorial space to list out every Republican that is up for election this year. Or you could just be honest with our community and point out that this was a mailer put together by Minarik (who put together almost the exact same visual for the entire state Party last year), which is now being used by the Republican Party as a whole.

“…the message is fair”

Wait a minute! “They should remember candidates who play loose with the facts and make a mockery of campaign fairness.” So which is it? Are you totally incapable of forming an opinion? Or did you consciously choose to say two different things in less than five sentences.

Apparently, the D&C has adopted Maggie’s definition of fair. Let’s look at the facts, since the D&C tries to avoid this kind of thing.

“The county legislature Democrats want to make illegal immigrants legal by giving them a driver’s license that looks exactly like your’s and mine.”

This claims is not true for four different reasons. Wow, four lies in one sentence, and the D&C didn’t catch any of them.

1. When did the county democrats say they wanted to make illegal immigrants legal? Never.

2. When did the county democrats say they wanted to give illegal immigrants licenses? Never. This is Spitzer’s plan.

3. Having a license does not make you a legal resident.

4. Their license will not look like yours and mine. I think other news outlets have made this pretty clear. Perhaps, you might want to pick up the paper (that would be the New York Times or Washington Post).

“Now illegals could even get welfare benefits costing taxpayers millions of dollars!”

I didn’t realize that I could get welfare benefits by having a drivers license. Pretty cool. Let me go check… Two hours later, the Republicans lied to me! They weren’t going to give me welfare benefits unless I was willing to undergo extensive means testing, which I would fail. But I’m sure all those illegal immigrants are going to be willing to expose their private illegal life to obtain welfare benefits (which they wouldn’t receive, because they are illegal).

“Worse yet! Democrats are making our county more vulnerable to terrorist attacks by weakening the security of our driver’s licenses.”

Hmmm… Chertoff seems to disagree. Let me see, who do I believe more? Steve Minarik or Michael Chertoff. Well, since I don’t work for the D&C, I’d have to say Chertoff, otherwise, I’d believe both.

Ok, so where does this leave us? Is there a single fact in the piece that is true. No, but of course the message is fair, at least according to Maggie and the D&C.

Yo, D&C editors… when you look back at what you’ve written, don’t you feel ill sometimes? I know I do. Why waste editorial space, if you don’t have any point to make? I wish I could do this when I try to get published. Would make my life so much easier. Actually, I’d just feel nauseous that I would be willing to do such a thing.

I’ll have more to add later.

Anyone know if Morelle is putting in a call to FEPC?