Jim VandeHei, a writer for POLITICO, wrote today, "OK, let’s just get this over with: Yes, in the closing weeks of this election, John McCain and Sarah Palin are getting hosed in the press, and at Politico."
You may consider this a step forward in self-reflection and honesty, yet the VandeHei qualifies the hosing of McCain as the right thing to do. As he says, "So what." The writer goes on to say that McCain should be shown in a bad light because that is the way that the election is going. Hopefully, as I did, you just said "What?" to yourself. How does doing poorly in a campaign cycle have anything to do with bias against moderately sexist attacks against Sarah Palin? How does the election qualify age discrimination against McCain?
VandeHei does not try to specifically qualify the attacks about age discrimintion or sexism, but these cannot be simply swept under the rug by saying it's okay to attack people because thier party, or their campaign, is doing poorly. If Sen. Obama were losing, it would not be okay to attack him personally because of his race or his sex. It would be an insult to Obama, and the nation's morality, to impune Obama for the attributes he was born with, winning or losing.
So I ask you, why should it ever be okay to portray others in a negative light concerning their age, thier race, their sex? Winning or losing is nothing. It shouldn't even enter the conversation. It is an insult to any intelligent person, liberal, conservative, moderate, Democrat, Republican, or Independent, that someone should say winning or losing opens the door to attacks.