Editor's Blog

I realize that it may be a little over the top to compare George Bush's War of Terror to local politics. In fact, comparing George Bush to any local Democratic candidate would be a ridiculous distortion.

Right?

Yet, that comparison is exactly what has arrived in the mailboxes of Democrats throughout District 20. As a coup de grace in her misinformation campaign, Ida Ruben has delivered a grinning George W. with his thumb up and a "Thanks, Jamie" balloon overhead. Inside, Democratic readers face outright lies about Raskin's positions on George W. Bush and abortion—two hot-button issues in this district.

This latest attack would be amusing if it were not so ruthlessly timed for the weekend before the election.

The master-stroke from the Karl Rove playbook is to attack your opponent on his strength. For example, John Kerry's greatest general appeal was his record as a Vietnam vet, something that George W. could not claim. So that is exactly where Rove and Bush took the game—calling that strength into question with insinuation and cherry-picked, distorted information.

In her series of mailings, Ruben has attacked Raskin where he is stongest. As a Constitutional lawyer, Raskin has a solid record of standing up for our rights as citizens. With a little insinuation, a little cherry-picking, and a lot of distortion, Ruben calls into question Raskin's progressive record—when upon closer examination, Raskin has clearly acted as a protector of the Constitution, putting its principles above politics. To attack him for that service and to lie about it is loathsome.

The Bush photo is the ironic icing on this foul cake. Ruben uses an unprincipled Rovian tactic to smear her opponent as a Bush supporter, when Raskin is easily the more progressive candidate in this race.

Although there are only three more days until the election, I think that this final mailing from Ida Ruben requires that her endorsers publicly withdraw their support. This mailing shows a disregard for basic rules of engagement.

At this point, I am forced to question what it is Ruben is fighting so hard for. If all is fair in politics, what is the prize? Is it the opportunity to make your community better? Is it the chance to serve constituents? Is it the prestige that comes with being a progressive leader?

Or is the prize no more than holding onto a seat of power?

Is that worth anyone's vote?

—Eric Bond, editor

Note: When I wrote my endorsements in the Voice, I carefully avoided addressing Ruben's smear campaign and reputation for scorched-earth politics. I thought it was more important to focus on the strengths that Raskin would bring to the Maryland Senate. After seeing this final mailing of Ruben's however, I felt that I needed to address Ruben's fitness for office. I can live with a moderate, establishment representative who keeps an eye out for ways to bring money to our district. I am less thrilled with a representative who will behave in an unpricipled manner in order to keep her seat.

I am a little sad to see Ruben's career end like this. She has been a reliable public servant, and deserves credit for leading the way for other women. Had Ruben not run this year, she would have surely been feted for her years as our senator. Even if Ruben wins this race, I think that her reputation will have suffered considerably as a result of her reaction to facing a challenger. And that is too bad.