Eric Zorn already covered this, but Rick Pearson suggest that the Senate Campaign suffers from candidates with low character. I couldn’t disagree more.
Oberweis’ character seems to be questionable. But let’s look at the others:
Obama. One of the finest public servants I’ve ever seen.
Hynes. Ditto
Hull. Perhaps a bit cocky to think he can jump into the Senate, but I don’t see any major character flaws. Some mistakes (as the two above have made), yes, but nothing other than human weaknesses.
Chico. Fine public servant.
Pappas. Again, a fantastic person.
Skinner. Nothing suggests she has low character.
Washington. Delusional perhaps, bad character no.
McKenna. Seems like a decent guy. Boring, but decent.
Rauschenberger–Pearson’s complaints appear to be that he said something stupid and he has ties to Chris Lauzen. Now, my feelings on Chris Lauzen are well known, but Rauschenberger is a decent guy.
Wright. Very decent. Perhaps too decent.
Kathuria. Self-promoter–does he go over the line? Maybe. I’m not sure it really matters at 1%.
Borling or Ryan. Well one of them has a problem and we don’t know which one it is. Borling is a special kind of bastard if he pushed this story and it isn’t true.
People’s warts should be shown in an election campaign, but putting them in perspective is critical. Few of us would want to be judged for our worst days in our lives. Most of these folks make up for it by being decent and honest most days. Playing politics within bounds isn’t some horrible character flaw. And this is a group that I have found to be especially inspiring with minor exceptions–and Jim Oberweis.
ArchPundit