The Summer of the Poniard

What started out as an exercise in polite democracy has degenerated into a no-holds-barred free-for-all, where each candidate's supporters see their central figures through a lens of ethical superiority and political entitlement. Funny that, since their agendas fairly well reflect one another's. With some notable exceptions; notable for the fact that they've each strained to reach positions serving to redline the vulnerabilities of the other.

So sad: polite deference succumbing to partisan parries and offensive thrusts. Which is to say, really offensive. But then, one could say, isn't that business as usual, politics as it plays out to the bitter end, and the winner take all? Their positions as genial colleagues have gradually slipped into the slime-laden breaches of etiquette involving character assassination and discreet aspersions of suitability and possible lack of patriotism, toward outright slander.

Nothing to get excited about, it's the game of politics, worse has been done in the past, and worse will occur in the - near - future. The latest is to handily succumb to environmental amnesia, with the pledges from both John McCain and Hillary Clinton to ease off on American motorists, revoking a summer-time tax bite on gasoline. Clearly, Barack Obama sits on a morally elevated plain in calling this for what it is: a useless sop.

Interfering with the free enterprise system in America? Encouraging Americans who have been finger-wagged about their wasteful ways, and the need to preserve the environment, using less oil and gas and spewing fewer carbons into the atmosphere? Meaningless optics, throwing a bone of temporary financial relief to those who don't quite get the message of less oil dependence, more attention to the environment.

"At best, you get 30 cents a day (savings)" intervened Mr. Obama. "But more likely, the oil companies would jack up prices to match whatever the elimination of the gas tax was ... It is not an honest solution." Right, but honesty isn't the issue here, winning the Democratic race for the presidency is, and both sides are playing that game.

Except that Hillary Clinton's latest passes are making her rival look principled by comparison. She's labelling him, among other things, an elitist for his unfortunate, but clear-headed remarks. What does she represent other than the Washington elite? In comparison, he's clearly an outsider, a come-from-behind. More grass roots in fact, than she portrays herself to be in her humble common touch, quaffing ales with the common folk.

Ms. Clinton has, in her political wisdom, and her real-life concerns, seen fit to support tough gun-control measures in her political past. She's suddenly turned tack and become rather duplicitous on sending out the latest campaign mailer in Indiana, in advance of the polls, to denounce Mr. Obama's past support of a ban on handguns. Doesn't that utterly reek of hypocrisy? And isn't all fair in politics?

And what about her condemnation of Wall Street "money-grubbers", isn't that a dandy? While her daughter is employed by a Manhattan hedge fund, and New York's financial cadre have proven to be some of her biggest fundraisers. Oh, the pain of it all.