When a politician runs for office, he (or she) has a range of choices. He can elevate his own credentials, degrade his opponent, or do both. The first choice is the only honorable choice. In addition, if that politician truly wants a mandate and the respect of the voters, the first choice is the only choice that will give him what he wants.

When a conservative candidate attacks his opponent personally, he also increases his own chance of losing. When a conservative attacks his opponent, he gives his opponent the opportunity to avoid discussing the issues. When liberal is attacked personally, he can toss logic out the window. All he has to do is prove that he cares more about the People and that his conservative opponent is a negative campaigning meanie.

I get what you’re saying. But the thing about satire is that it must have an element of truth, and this list certainly does.

Keep in mind that I am not against humor. After seeing your comment, it occurs to me that I ought to have given an example of a good political joke.

Steve Kelly, formerly of the San Diego Tribune, now in New Orleans, draws some of the funniest political cartoons, ever.

I agree entirely with the premise that we need more discussions about solutions and less slinging of insults.

I suppose we could have both humor and substantive discussions…

For an interesting read on this subject:

Political Humor by Charles E. Shutz (not Schultz)