What the moment highlights for me is Palin's incuriosity. Handed this text, wouldn't the ordinary high school graduate ask what the project studied? Much of the seminal research in genetics was done in Drosophila melanogaster models. The press has been all over Palin

because some of the latest findings in the neurobiology of autism - via investigations at the University of North Carolina - has involved fruit flies, although it turns out that the "Paris, France" earmark was probably for studies by American scientists at an American research facility (in France) dedicated to the study of pests that harm olive trees, such as those grown by California farmers.

Never mind. The problem is the ignorance. In the age of the genome project, who thinks it's odd to study fruit flies? And then, there's the deception. John McCain has repeatedly voted against full Federal funding for IDEA. And more big-picture deception because earmarks make up such a small part of the Federal budget and contribute so little to the deficit: tens of millions of dollars when we're approving rescue packages in the hundreds of billions. Then, too, Alaskans enjoy the highest per-capita benefit from earmarks, based in part on Palin's requests to Senator Ted Stevens. And of course the subtext of the fund-IDEA speech is a big shout-out to the anti-abortion, anti-science, fundamentalist conservative base. Really, Palin's engaged in the big lie, highlighting homey humor (Paris, France!) in the service of know-nothing ideology.

In the waning weeks of the campaign, McCain and Palin have focused on calling Obama a socialist, based on his "spread the wealth" answer to "Joe the Plumber." As the press has pointed out, Alaska taxes oil companies to give yearly personal checks of over three thousand dollars to each citizen; Palin's explanation of this policy was, literally, that "we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs." And of course, McCain has said of progressive taxation, "Here's what I really believe: That when you reach a certain level of comfort, there's nothing wrong with paying somewhat more." And then there's that bailout package. On the campaign trail, there are plenty of anti-socialists - but as they say of atheists, none in the foxholes.

Having read political reporting avidly over the past months, I come to a simple conclusion. It's the Republicans who are knee-jerk . . . what's the apt label? The problem is that we don't have a one-word derogatory term for their position. Conservative (or reactionary) doesn't have the bite of liberal, in our time, and nothing matches socialist. But the truth is that the naïve pursuit of free markets has cost the country much more - damaged the economy more severely - than any high-tax disincentive to capitalism ever did. The Republicans, who prided themselves on

being the party of ideas, have become the party of dangerous, scary, failed ideology. As I say, all we lack is the says-it-all name.

That name would need to embrace hostility to science, civil liberties, government regulation, diplomacy, and even military intelligence. Ordinary curiosity, too. That's the quality George W. Bush lacked from the start; it's the legacy (incuriosity) that John McCain, whatever his prior stances, has embraced. Obama has his flaws - I have said as much from the earliest political posts on this blog. But a vote for Obama is a vote for the fruit fly, which is to say for a move away from know-nothing primitivism toward a resumption of normal ties with the modern world.