It's time to elevate Senate rhetoric

When are the two major-party Senate candidates going to realize that they are in a race for the United States Senate?

Congress' upper chamber may have more than its share of moral, ethical and behavioral skeletons spilling out of its closets, but surely the most prestigious halls of American government deserve more respect than what Democrat Alexi Giannoulias and Republican Mark Kirk have shown so far in the Senate campaign of 2010.

In the beginning, this was a race of great promise - pitting an energetic and creative, if not yet fully proven, young state treasurer in Giannoulias against an intelligent and independent, if somewhat opportunistic, experienced congressman in Kirk. Evaluating how these two forces would approach issues like immigration and health reform or the war in the Mideast appeared to offer a stimulating, substantive choice.

But the campaign so far has provided nothing of the sort. Instead, it has become a daily litany from both sides of stinging catchphrases focused not on social philosophy or government policy but on naked character assassination.

In virtually every news release, Kirk's camp finds some way to pin the title of "mob banker" onto Giannoulias, and Giannoulias' camp is equally relentless in its efforts to drive home the message of Kirk as "serial embellisher." To be sure, Giannoulias deserves scrutiny about what he knew and when he knew it regarding questionable loans by his family's bank. Likewise, Kirk must be held accountable for mistakes or enhancements in his statements to the public about the facts of his background. But there is more to both campaigns than these controversies, and the time has long since passed for the two men to raise the quality of their rhetoric.

We could almost excuse their childish sniping as early-campaign street theater if it hadn't continued so long. But here we are just weeks away from the traditional Labor Day start of the November campaign season and we know almost no more about either candidate than his ability to fling hyperbolic insults about his opponent's veracity and to simultaneously dodge questions about his own.

Really, it is time for the candidates to end such silliness. It is time for them to differentiate themselves on the question of how long young American soldiers will continue to toil and die in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is time for them to describe their ideas for dealing with the federal deficit and high unemployment rate. It is time for them to detail their positions on immigration reform, education, social security, gay marriage, don't ask don't tell and other issues that affect Americans every day. Until they do, until they raise the level of their discourse to the respect and honor befitting the nation's highest legislative body, they leave open the question of whether either candidate is worthy of the office.