These two partygoers were agreed that McCain, naturally, is a warmongering maniac who will absolutely invade Iran the first chance he gets. While they both agreed that Obama was far too aggressive in general, one was on the border of not wanting to vote for him due to the fear that he would engage in a war with Iran.

Normally, I give people the benefit of the doubt. I think people are smart, and generally reasonable. And given, this was at a "house party," in which people are not going to be, generally, in the most aware state of mind. But you would have to be insane to actually think these things.

How does one even draw from any campaign rhetoric, published materials, press conferences, debates, etc., this kind of extremism? Is it just a reflection of the terrified worldview of the progressive Left? Is it a pretended affirmation of what they actually believe? Do they think that taking a tough-talk stance with state sponsors of terrorism is equated to a desire to invade said states? Perhaps they are setting their goals so low and believing them to be a real possibility (invading Iran) that they'll be pleased when those goals are met. After all, I could genuinely believe that the Constitution will be tossed into the fire if Barack Obama is elected, and when he doesn't literally do that, I'll be pleased.

[Note: I certainly don't believe this.]

My most reliably left-leaning friend expounded upon his genuine belief that McCain's economic plans are extremist right-wing. While I myself may be considered an extremist when it comes to laissez-faire, this is just attempting to justify one's own hatred. McCain's economic plan is basically center-right, as Barack's is center-left. (Note: I'm counting purely economic measures, not un-economic measures intended to help other areas of life, like healthcare and the environment).

As I’ve said before: Perhaps I’m naïve in not wanting to label Barack Obama an out-and-out communist, but I certainly will defend anyone from the charge of extremism.

Mere association with lobbyists is enough to taint a politician in the eyes of some of the hardest lefties. Obsessed with cleansing politics of the stench of money, progressives see lobbying as an activity only a half-step removed from bribery.

The utter cynicism that the Left looks upon the lobbying profession with is frightening. If you’re a registered lobbyist, in their eyes, you’re an evil, destructive force in politics.

Lobbying, in its basest form, is an attempt to influence the votes of legislators by informing them about various interests and ins and outs of a bill. What could be any more American than being able to participate in the democracy laid out in the Constitution?

The Left must jog their memories back to Graeme Frost, a 12-year-old boy who appeared on Capitol Hill in order to speak out in favor of the proposed expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). This twelve-year-old boy was... speaking to Congressmen, appealing to them on an emotional level to vote in favor of the legislation. He was a lobbyist.

Obviously, this is only technically true. Professional lobbyists who work for corporations and are allowed to monetarily contribute to politicians have to be registered and regulated. Lobbyists also come from all different kinds of backgrounds: companies, trade associations, unions, membership organizations, the list goes on. Based on ideology, progressives probably have no problem with lobbyists from the AARP or SEIU, but do have a problem with lobbyists from Lockheed Martin.

In truth, we now have incredibly stringent lobbying laws. No lobbyist is allowed to give any gifts or meals to Congressmen any more (it used to be up to a $50 limit, as if that’s enough to sway a Congressman). They are bound to the same rules that individuals are for campaign donations (as are the companies they represent). And they must disclose almost all of their activities.

The hysteria that has engulfed the Left when scrutinizing their candidates with regard to lobbyists is ridiculous. “Ties to lobbyists” is progressive kryptonite. To wit, the Daily Kos is breathless to ridicule an L.A. Times Op-Ed regarding both McCain and Obama’s lobbyist relations.

The Left’s bloviations on this subject have been such exaggerations that a response is necessary. McCain has been, to the chagrin of conservatives, one of the foremost campaigners to get money out of politics. Distorting his record is necessary in order to turn him, in every way, into the other.