That's right.
Voters should pay attention to that reluctance to transparency and civil oversight.

What I find interesting are the blatant lies Palin and McCain keep telling:

Palin claims: "No thank you to bridge to nowhere".

False. Palin was for the bridge before she was against it. According to FactCheck.org: Palin may have said “Thanks, but no thanks” on the Bridge to Nowhere, though not until Congress had pretty much killed it already. But that was a sharp turnaround from the position she took during her gubernatorial campaign, and the town where she was mayor received lots of earmarks during her tenure. In fact, in year 2006, Palin said Alaska’s congressional delegation worked hard to obtain funding for the bridge as part of a package deal and that she "would not stand in the way of the progress toward that bridge".

McCain and Palin claim: "Obama is going to raise your income taxes".

False. The Tax Policy Center Tax did a comparison of Obama's and McCain's tax plans.
The bottom line is that Tax Policy Center the Obama tax plan would make the tax system significantly less regressive by providing large tax breaks to those at the bottom of the income scale and raising taxes significantly on upper-income earners.
McCain's tax plan would make the tax system more regressive than it already is, even compared with a system in which the 2001–2006 tax cuts are made permanent. It would do so by providing relatively little tax relief to those at the bottom of the income scale while providing huge tax cuts to households at the very top of the income distribution. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center says:
• (a) Obama's proposals would indeed increase taxes for small businesses, seniors and families, but only if their income was more than $250,000. Most small businesses, seniors and families would get tax cuts under the Obama plan.


• (b) McCain's tax plan offers the biggest breaks to high-income families and businesses, while Obama focuses on those earning less than $250,000.
  Two-thirds of Obama's tax cuts would go to families with incomes of $65,000 or less, according to the Tax Policy Center. Only 6 percent of McCain's tax cuts would benefit those families.
  The Tax Policy Center estimates that both plans would raise the deficit - McCain's by $4.2 trillion over 10 years and Obama's by $2.8 trillion over the same period.

It is a very effective lie.
The irony of it is that MOST voters who fall for the "Obama is going to raise your taxes" lie is that most of those voters (except the wealthy making more than $250,000 per year) will get a tax system that is more regressive and unfair than it already is.

Perhaps that is what those voters deserve.

Perhaps enough voters will be less apathetic, complacent, and blindly partisan when enough of the voters are deep in debt , jobless , homeless , and hungry ?

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , . . . , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

David not only does Palin decide to not cooperate with the investigation the repubs have sent in as many as 13 lawyers to make sure transperancy and justice are not served, at least until after the election. Even if she is innoncent who would believe her now?

• David wrote: These are the same voters who elected and reelected GW Bush. They are apparently incapable of learning from their own mistakes, even after admitting their action was a mistake.

I did not vote for Bush in 2000, but I did in 2004 (reluctantly), because I loathed Kerry.

However, in retrospect, I can admit my mistake, and am unlikely to repeat it.

It is hard to see how anyone could have done a worse job than Bush (43). The war in Iraq started in March 2003, and by 2004, I thought (hoped) weapons of mass destruction might still be found somewhere. When not even a trace of WMD were ever found, it was all too clear that the claims of WMD were false. And later, after reviewing the data, news, and reports over and over, it became clear that it was most likely all intentional lies.

Yes, I admit to making a very bad choice by voting once for Bush in 2004.
However, I am trying to make up for it.

As penance, I've been trying to help provide educational information so that others don't make the same mistake.

The root causes of many of our problems can only be solved via the application of fundamental principles.
The first step is more Education, because Education is probably the only thing that can compensate for a lack of Virtue.

Responsibility = Power + Virtue + Education + Transparency + Accountability
Corruption = Power - Virtue - Education - Transparency - Accountability

And we are going to get our Education one way or another.
We merely have to decide if it is going to be the smart, responsible way, or the hard and painful way (again).

By the way, we are also all culpable.
There's plenty of blame to go around for today's economic problems.
Voters are culpable too, because giving Congress 9% approval ratings, but repeatedly rewarding Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates is not voting responsibly.