From the Front Pages of the Lefty Political Playbook

Here’s a little insight for the day … Recently, I posted at the Schaffer v Udall blog a response to the latest trumped-up faux controversy heaped against the Republican U.S. Senate candidate. Rossputin followed it up at Politics West with an even abler and more thorough refutation of the charges – using relevant facts and evidence.

I got a chuckle today when my friend pointed out to me the first comment added to Rossputin’s post:

when are you going to stop dodging my question about your work for the Heartland Institute?

“DeGrow points out a few subsequent articles which show the attack to be erroneous as well as discussing how two of the “big names” leading the attack, former high-level diplomats, are now Democratic activists and at least one works with the Obama campaign.”

Let me get this straight. You’re saying that because the attacks are coming from Democrats, it’s not valid? Nice argument. I now reject all your arguments as they come from a right-wing shill who formerly directed the Heartland Institute.

And speaking of Ben Degrow, isn’t he a right-wing partisan hack of the Independence Institute?

I posted the comment here not to give repute to the nameless commenter, but to highlight a series of tactics featured early and often in the Lefty political playbook:

• Ignore the relevant facts. Go back and read both my post and Rossputin’s post linked above. Notice the weight given to the “fact that the attacks are coming from Democrats” as an argument refuting the original charge. Yes, it’s a secondary point, at best, one that highlights the very duplicity of this commenter’s self-righteous attacks against partisanship.
• Distort other facts. The commenter totally misidentifies the nature of Rossputin’s former relationship with the Heartland Institute.
• Name-calling. The argument ad hominem is the last recourse of an empty argument. Never mind that the phrase “right-wing partisan hack” suffers from its own absurdly illogical construction.
• Guilt by association. The commenter too easily conflates my open and clearly stated political philosophy and leanings and the research and writing I do in my spare time with my employer. Apparently, this is supposed to detract from the substance of what I say. Okay….
• Hide in anonymity. Admittedly, this is a tactic used by some both on the Left and the Right. Note that it tends to encourage the other kinds of behavior listed here.

To the anonymous Lefty commenter, thanks for the instructive example. Oh, by the way, my name is spelled with a capital G, too.