We are in the midst of, without a doubt, the most negative campaign in the history of modern politics.

I say modern because there used to be some pretty significant mudslinging around the turn of the century. I thought we had outgrown that, but I guess not.

Both candidates have gone negative, but I see something happening in the campaign of Sen. John Kerry that is unsettling. It's his penchant to simply make stuff up. I realize that politicians on both sides of the aisle exaggerate, obfuscate and yeah, I'll say it, lie.

But Kerry's campaign has become extraordinarily disingenuous. He has taken to this end-justifies-the-means campaign style and he's employing some pretty overt scare tactics.

Example: He tells us that if W is re-elected our sons and daughters will be subjected to a military draft. This, of course, is abject nonsense. First, W and his administration have said repeatedly they have absolutely no plans of re-instituting a draft. And even if they did - and they don't - it would never pass Congress.

Kerry knows this. He knows what he's saying is untrue. But he says it anyway, hoping that it will turn voters against W.

Example: He says that W will destroy Social Security by completely privatizing it. What W really has done is suggest that he would allow younger wage earners to divert a small portion of their Social Security withholding into private investment accounts. This is not privatization of Social Security. Moreover, most thoughtful politicians and policy wonks on both sides of the aisle concede that some sort of privatization may be necessary to forestall the impending fiscal disaster that awaits Social Security as the baby boomers begin receiving benefits.

Again, Kerry knows this, yet he chooses to purposely mislead.

Example: Kerry is on record as saying that W will cut Social Security by 43 percent. This preposterous claim is calculated to scare old people into voting for him. The truth of the matter is that Social Security recipients just received a 2.7 increase, but why let the facts get in the way of an opportunity to snag a few senior citizens' votes.

Example: Kerry mischaraterizes W's tax cut as a sop to the rich, then says that he will raise taxes on people who make more than $200,000 to fund a plan to provide health care to all Americans who need it. Kerry knows that Americans making more than $200,000 already shoulder 63 percent of the income tax burden. He also knows that raising taxes on them likely will not increase revenue to the Treasury. He also knows that providing health care to every American who needs it is a budget-busting program that government simply can't afford.

Nonetheless, he tells us that is precisely what he would do if elected.

Example: Kerry tells us he would build an international coalition of countries like Germany, France and Russia to bring more foreign troops into Iraq. Kerry knows government officials in Germany, France and Russia are on record as saying they will not send troops to Iraq no matter who the president of the United States is. This, of course, does not matter to Kerry. He says what sounds good. He says what he thinks will get him elected.

Example: Kerry continually hammers on unemployment and job losses even though he knows unemployment, at 5.4 pecent and trending downward, is not particularly ominous. He continually paints a bleak picture of the economy, when he knows, by any objective, measurable standard, the economy is recovering quite nicely.

Kerry blames W for everthing from the lack of flu shots to the price of gasoline.

Apparently, in the world according to Kerry, getting elected is the only thing that matters. Things like truth, character and integrity are meaningless concepts to be tossed into the abysmal morass of politics.

It's one thing to be agressive and tough. I think a president needs to be agressive and tough. But Kerry, to me, at times, seems devoid of character.

And I think there is a price to be paid for that.

First of all, I'm afraid this won't bode very well for him if he's elected. If he does prevail over W, he will have burned so many bridges that Republicans will be unwilling to cooperate with him at best, and out to destroy him at worst. Frankly, that may not be a bad thing. I am a strong proponent of gridlock in government. I figure if they can't get anything done, they can't spend any more money.

And going into the final days of the election, given the current state of his campaign, I think Kerry risks undermining his own ability to lead in the minds of thoughtful American voters across the political spectrum. [[In-content Ad]]