JD Hayworth caught in a lie, needs to apologize.

One of the most despicable things that politicians do on a regular basis is to distort the facts so as to smear their opponents. It is a practice which is fundamentally dishonest. And when politicians lack a certain amount of basic civility and integrity, they can easily get in the habit of making such dishonesty a recurring character trait. In fact, some become quite skilled at it, sadly.

J.D. Hayworth is often criticized for what is seen as his bombast, his pompousness and demagoguery. These traits in a politician are disruptive to reasoned discourse and destructive to our society, in my opinion. Alone, they would justify voting Hayworth out of office.

But unfortunately, Hayworth and his campaign seem to exhibit skill at outright defamatory lying, as well.

It appears that a recent debate between Hayworth and his opponent, the popular Harry Mitchell, had to be cancelled due to a scheduling conflict.

The Mitchell campaign explained the reason for the cancellation:

"Basically, Cox sent us a letter informing us that a CD 5 debate was scheduled for Oct. 5. We received the letter without Cox first asking if the campaign would agree to the debate or checking on Harry's availability for that day and time.

"We had a scheduling conflict and have been working with Cox to find a date that would work for everyone. We have many e-mails to prove this as well.

"Obviously, we welcome the opportunity for Harry and J.D. to have debates on the issues. We've already had two, and more are scheduled. It seems the more voters hear J.D. talk in person, the less likely they are to believe his rhetoric."

Indeed, the organizers of the debate, Cox Communications, agrees with the Mitchell campaign's explanation. From Cox comes this statement:

"Cox invited a number of candidates in several races to participate in the 2006 Cox 7 Political debates being produced this fall. Due to production schedules and a committed air date for the debate shows starting on October 16, Cox was unable to accommodate the busy schedules of all of the invited candidates. The scheduling challenge that resulted in Cox's decision to cancel the October 5 debate for Congressional District 5, was Cox's and not based on any candidate declining to participate."

Pretty clear, right?

So how did JD Hayworth's campaign represent this? With the following dishonest and defamatory press release:

Apparently shaken by his lackluster performance, outright inability to understand where he stands on issues, and a wavering financial base, Harry Mitchell has backed out of a scheduled debate this week due to "conflict issues."

Mitchell backed out on an event agreed to by both campaigns. The debate firmly scheduled for this Thursday was not postponed, but cancelled by the Mitchell campaign under the guise of "conflict issues" according the debate organizer.

It seems more likely he is saving himself from the public embarrassment he would surely face when confronted with his scandal plagued past and inability to understand the talking points supplied by the liberal fringe groups that support his campaign.

As evidenced by the debate organizers' own statement, it's clear that Hayworth's statement is an outright lie, and defamatory, to boot.

I'll say it again: the Hayworth campaign just lied about Harry Mitchell to completely misrepresent the events and defame a man who is recognized to be someone of great integrity in our community.

This is not just dirty politics, as far as I'm concerned. Bearing false witness against someone is a sin. It is a serious character flaw for someone to sanction that kind of behavior as acceptable. There is no excuse for this kind of thing.

The Hayworth campaign has blatantly lied in a slanderous way to defame Harry Mitchell, simply to score political points. Rather than addressing issues, Hayworth has lied about a man who is renowned for his integrity and honesty.

Hayworth needs to repent and apologize to Harry Mitchell and to the citizens of District 5 for this ungodly and uncivil behavior. If he does not, his dishonesty and slander should disqualify him for public service representing those of us who believe in honesty and principled behavior.