The counter argument I've heard is that the Clinton's aren't doing anything worse than the others. But as we saw in the debate tonight, that's just provably not true.

I don't know that I buy the argument that we have to support our eventual nominee anymore. I don't want Republicans in office any more than anyone else. But I also don't want a DINO - Democrat in Name Only - in the White House. I'm not suggesting the Clintons are DINOS. I don't believe they are. But they are JUST AS BAD as if they were when they resort to dirty tricks.

These are the things that keep our party from growing and expanding. I don't want to win at any cost. I want to win for the right reasons, because when we win for the wrong ones, we don't really win.

What happened the last time the Clintons got into office? We lost the House. It turned Republican.

What happened after some eight years of the Clinton's? We lost the house AND the Senate, and nearly drove our country off a cliff.

There is a backlash to certain actions, and we can't be blind to that. When you conduct dirty campaigns, you turn off the next generation of voters. We can't afford to do that now.

When you lie about your opponents, you deprive the country of a true choice between candidates. That's unacceptable, to me.

And when President Clinton campaigns not just vocally but viciously for his wife, he's reminding the right of why they hated him in the first place. How would nominating those two (because let's face it, we all know it's a package deal) help us win the White House?

I think Hillary is smart. I would love to see a woman in the White House. But I want to see a woman who has made it on her own, not one who swung on the coattails of her husband and called it experience. I want one who plays fair with her opponents. I want one who doesn't say one thing and do another.

I understand that some people don't like Obama. I understand that some see Obama as Edwards' spoiler and support Hillary in retaliation (although I think that's an immature response).

What I don't understand is how people can support the tactics used, to not speak out and decry them.

As a precinct captain for Obama, I've been calling neighbors. One of them called me back today to tell me why he wasn't supporting Obama. He railed about the Reagan comment. I told him, in all honesty, I had trouble making calls for Obama for the next few days after that because it bothered me too. I knew what Obama meant. But it didn't sit right with me, and I am not blind to my candidate's faults. I won't lie for him, and I won't pretend to feel something I don't. But I also told the person at the other end why I felt Clinton was the only person who could truly lose us the White House in November. He listened, thoughtfully, because I had been the first to admit fault with my candidate.

I think it's important we try to be the change we want to see. If we want our leaders to be more honest, WE have to be honest with each other, even if it makes us unpopular. That's what integrity is. And not a lot of people, in my experience, have it. I think integrity is definitely overrepresented at BT, relative to the population at large, which is why I love it here.

But we do need to speak out when one candidate lies about another. It's not cool. It's not "just politics as usual." It's wrong. And we should say that loudly.

"If you look for the social economic motive, you will not have to wait for history to tell you what was propaganda and what was truth." - George Seldes