A high profile West Virginia Congressional race is demonstrating how the Scoreboard's exhortation to vote against unethical candidates whatever their policy positions may be is harder in practice than in theory. Representative Allan Mollohan was forced to step down from his post on the House ethics committee after revelations that he steered federal funds to nonprofit groups directed by his family and political supporters. Using one's position in Congress to transfer taxpayer funds to one's family is not considered ethical, even in Washington D.C., so one would think that the "Vote Ethics" principle would dictate a ballot cast for Mollohan's GOP opposition, Chris Wakim.

Not so fast. Wakim's professional resume, posted on his website, included not one but two misrepresentations that cannot be dismissed as "mistakes."

Wakim's campaign website claimed that Wakim "earned his MA in Public Policy from Harvard University in 1991 graduating in the top 15% of his class." This is, simply put, not true. But a copy of his transcript that Wakim's campaign gave to The Hill shows that Wakim's degree is a master's of liberal arts, or A.L.M., in extension studies. An MA in Public Policy is a very specific degree that isn't offered by Harvard's Extension School, which is what Wakim attended. That degree is awarded by only by the Kennedy School of Public Policy, which has a more prestigious and selective program than the Extension School. Was this an intentional misrepresentation on behalf of Wakim?

Of course it was. People know what their degrees are. When they misstate them in ways that make them appear more impressive than they are, it is intentional. Oddly, one never hears about anyone misstating a degree in a way that makes it seem less impressive.

Then Wakim's biography describes him as a "Gulf War veteran."

What do you visualize when you read that description? Do you see Chris Wakim in the dessert, fighting Saddam's troops to liberate Iraq? That is certainly what Wakim wants you to see, but he was never in Iraq, or Kuwait, or operation Dessert Storm. He is what is known as a Gulf War era veteran. Wakim spent the war training soldiers in Massachusetts. He and his campaign are now bickering over the terminology, but it doesn't matter: Wakim knew how the words "Gulf War veteran" would be read, he knew that they would create a particular impression, and he knew that the impression was false.

Both of Wakim's attempts at resume padding are subtle, technical and clever, which arguably makes him less attractive than a ham-handed fraud who just makes credentials up. Wakim, you see, displays well-developed skills of deceit and misrepresentation, which either makes him perfect for Washington or disqualifies him from public service, depending on your priorities.

From the Scoreboard's vantage point, it has seen enough: Wakim can't be trusted. If he can fool the public, he will. It would confidently urge West Virginia voters to reject him, except that his opponent has shown that he is unworthy of trust as well.

Such is the state of American politics as the 2008 election approaches.