Down, down completely, with our opponents! They are a misguided, potentially corrupt lot, and in any case the chief obstacle to solving our collective problems, the only true solutions to which are proposed by our side alone. Its a black-and-white world we have here and well entertain no notion of compromise, brook no cooperation across the aisle.

Partisanship, already thriving like a tall stand of untreated noxious weeds, spreads most perniciously at election season, a time for shoot-from-the-hip accusations to motivate the partisan base.

Last week, when Knute Buehler, Oregon Republicans candidate for Secretary of State, visited Wallowa County, the occasion presented some modest opportunity for the candidate to better familiarize the politically interested public with his ideas for the state office, which is, after all, supposed to be a tool for serving the entire public, be the publics members Republican, Democrat, Independent, or affiliates of any other creed, cause, or chronic turn of mind.

The Secretary of State position, responsible as it is for assuring the fairness of Oregons elections processes, among other duties, is an area where citizens should rightly expect performance that rises above partisanship. Sometimes its not easy for us to tell, however, whether nonpartisanship is truly the course that is being steered.

It comes as little surprise, then, that Republican Buehler accuses the incumbent Secretary of State, Democrat Kate Brown, of pursuing partisanship in office on multiple fronts, most notably in her high-profile role in changing the signature-gathering rules that activists must play by to qualify any initiative for the Oregon ballot. In Buehlers estimation, those changes have shut out grass-roots movements entirely, preserving the landscape for left-leaning unions and manipulative corporations.

Brown, meanwhile, has taken aim at what she claims is Buehlers bent toward imposing such sterner registration requirements for would-be voters as are popping up in certain Republican-dominated states, most of them back East. These drives, launched under the guise of combating voter fraud, are egregiously suspicious for their disproportionate impact on low-income people and minorities, traditional Democratic constituencies.

The trouble with Browns attack, though, is this: Buehler apparently harbors little or no stomach for the vote-suppression schemes championed by other states GOP organizations. In direct answer to a charge trumpeted at Browns official campaign website, Buehler even signed Browns online petition that gathers symbolic support to block any attempt to bring extreme voter I.D. laws to Oregon.

In an interview with the Chieftain, Buehler confirmed that hes not a hard-liner on voter identification. Theres no reason to bring these divisive issues to Oregon, he said. He does, however, favor auditing Oregons vote-by-mail system to identify vulnerabilities.

To her partial credit, Brown and her campaign seem to have veered from the voter I.D. extremism charge after initially leveling it against Buehler. At least, you dont encounter repeated instances of it in later posts on her campaign website or in emailed statements on various campaign issues. Retracting or removing the original post would have been a more forthright step, but its late now in election season, and nobody expects admissions of inaccuracy or unfair treatment from candidates who have entered the frays most intense period of heat.

Its as if we citizens would rather reward strength than truth, and, truthfully, thats probably the case.