No, I'm writing about scumbags who spread political slime -- at a time arguably more critical in the history of our always threatened democratic republic than the years leading to the Great Depression.

As someone who often writes about politics, I get e-mail from all sides of the haystack -- and some from inside it. Here's my considered observation. With very rare exception, the distortions and outright crap comes from the right.

Also, almost all, if not all of it comes from someone or someones who do not disclose their names and contact information. That should make recipients of such e-mail suspicious and skeptical. Unfortunately, judging from what is mindlessly forwarded my way, it doesn't.

Over the last many months, the target has been Barack Obama. Think about it. If the alarming claims were really true, do you not think the McCain campaign would be making them, and providing evidence of their accuracy?

A September e-mail claimed three of Obama's top advisers were connected to Fannie Mae. False. (Snopes debunked that.) An even more recent one insinuated that Obama's education was probably paid for by Muslim extremists. In fact, Obama got (gee, imagine this) scholarships and borrowed what he lacked. His two best-selling books got him out of debt. Ditto for Michelle.

Thankfully, there are websites whose primary focus is debunking crap. Bur there are three basic problems, two of them probably incurable. First, given the ease with which crap flies, it sometimes flies so fast the truth hasn't caught up before a new pile of crap hits the e-mail circuit. Also, in the human animal, emotion often trumps reason. Humans often follow their emotions, and then invent (or accept) whatever supports those emotions. The third problem could be greatly lessened.

Many otherwise decent e-mailers are woefully ignorant of how to use search engines. They should learn. My favorite is Google's Advanced Search -- google.com/advanced_search?hl=en

Dear Reader, if you're not up to it techwise, get your teenager, your grandkid, of even better, the local librarian -- to teach you the basics and give you some pointers.

When a suspicious e-mail claim comes my way that makes me skeptical, I place what looks to be a key phrase in 'this exact wording or phrase" slot, and in the "one or more of these words" slots, I use all three openings: "snopes" "false" "legend." Or the terms, "factcheck" or "misleading" or "truthorfiction." Truthorfiction is similar to Snopes. One more tip: don't buy into the sender's claim to have checked it all out, without giving you a source you can independently evaluate. Then do it.

For starters, look at truthorfiction.com and snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp.

Try also factcheck.org. It's sponsored by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, not so geared toward debunking internet e-mail baloney, but it keeps tabs on the accuracy of political rhetoric.

So, from where comes the persistent backdoor e-mail crap effort to "get" Barack Obama? For my money, a big part of it is motivated by racists, however camouflaged. Another part is energized by pseudo-Christian bigotry, arrogance and fear. Some part is surely under-the- radar corporate power scared of necessary government oversight and tax fairness.

I'm not a big Obama fan, but I'll be voting for him because McCain-McBush scares hell out of me. McCain is too impulsive, too militant, too anti-regulation, too opposed to social programs. In short, he's too much like George W. Bush. And Hockey Mom, Joe Six-pack, aw-shucks Palin is pretty and perky, but out of her league as a VP candidate a heartbeat from the Presidency. But, frankly, as much as anything, I find the backdoor crap campaign repulsive.

Feel free to forward this column to everybody in your address book. There's an e-link at everydaycitizen.com/bhooper