ok, anyone else find the nicknames and deliberate misspellings ("Rmoney, Munster") just a

[BlueStreak]

64. We can take the high road and still evicerate them

I completely agree with your post, and I readily admit I have been guilty.

Name calling, pictorial distortions, and empty sloganeering are symptoms of a weak argument.

We can address Romney and Ryan with respect and at the same time shred their policies. For example, I believe there is a very good chance that Ryan committed felonies with insider trading during the financial meltdown. I see nothing wrong with making that accusation, as there is substantial evidence to support that. Likewise, there is plenty of evidence in Romney's background that her was personally involved with tax fraud schemes, and that this is a primary reason for maintaining obsessive secrecy with his tax returns. Those are not ad honinem attacks. They are observations and opinions based on facts that are not contested.

Likewise, I see no problem with short-and-sweet summations of their policies, such as "The Ryan plan is designed to kill Medicare and Social Security." It is true, even if they want to argue it isn't. We can support that headline with a very strong argument.

Hard-hitting is not the same thing as name calling.