In Chicago, Rep. Jesse L. Jackson will be running for re-election against…Jesse L. Jackson, a political novice. Why is he–that is, Jesse #2—running? Obviously, he hopes to confuse enough voters to steal an election, and I do mean steal. When a candidate intentionally seeks to capitalize on voter apathy and ignorance, that is dishonest, unfair and cynical. The Chicago Congressional election is a blatant example, but not the only one, or even the most egregious. For in Massachusetts, the critical special election for the U.S. Senate seat left vacant by the death of Ted Kennedy may well be decided by a block of civic slackers and fools who think that Independent candidate Joseph Kennedy is from the same family that gave us Jack, Bobby, Ted, Abraham, Martin and John…wait a minute, I got carried away there. Just the first three.

This Kennedy is a software designer. That doesn’t mean he shouldn’t seek elected office, but he should probably aim a bit lower than the U.S. Senate first time out. He isn’t, because he sees an opportunity. Not to win…no state has that many idiots. But he thinks, with some justification, that he will attract enough attention to reap political and other benefits down the road. Already he has a recognizable face: Democratic candidate Martha Coakley insisted that he take part in the televised debate between her and surging Republican Scott Brown, so voters would know that he isn’t former Congressman Joe Kennedy, Robert’s oldest son, or Joe Kennedy Jr., Ted’s long-dead oldest brother, or Joseph P. Kennedy, Ted’s deceased father, or even Ted himself. (If you are so out of it you’ll vote for someone just because of his name, it’s likely that you haven’t been paying attention to the news or obituaries much, either.) Good luck with that tactic, Martha: voters who are so lazy and inattentive that they are fooled by Joe Kennedy weren’t going to watch a candidates debate when it was on TV at the same time as “When Animals Attack, 6” or “Midget Bowling.”

Random and shameless Kennedy namesakes have tried this stunt before over the last 40 years, and can reliably count on about 5% of the vote from dim-bulb, Kennedy-worshipping Massachusetts citizens who are a disgrace to democracy. This time, that unethical, ignorant 5%, who have an obligation to stay away from the polls if they can’t vote intelligently (we’re using a very low bar for “intelligently” here, as in “know who it is you are voting for”), may determine whether a Democrat or a Republican goes to Washington, with significant consequences to the nation for generations to come.

Jackson #2 and the Faux-Joe are the reductio ad absurdum of political cynicism. All politicians, unfortunately, sometime depend on public misconceptions and ignorance; indeed, the entire health care debate on both sides has been a textbook case of shameless obfuscation. That is bad, but this is infinitely worse. I am not sure who is more ethically revolting: the exploitive candidates who seek to be elected by the confused and lazy, or the pathetic voters who disrespect the gift of democracy by falling for their deception.

I would say they deserve each other, but in Massachusetts, the combination may prove tragic.