There are a couple of pieces up at the Washington Monthly that should be of interest to TDS readers who wrestle with how to respond to conservative calumny without losing one’s own balance.
First is my post on the suggestion that Democrats should just ignore “big lies” like the persistent belief the president is not who he says he is. Here’s an excerpt:
[A]t some point, you simply have to start challenging the lies, and trying to establish some common basis of facts on which liberals and conservatives can compete with their different opinions of what to do about those facts. If you don’t, then the lies become “opinions” and the lie-based “opinions” become facts (e.g., the non-existence of climate change) for vast numbers of people, and before you know it, you are having to argue with people over things like the religion of the president of the United States or his place of birth.
And then there is Paul Glastris’ dissection of a Richard Cohen column that appears initially to be about the pernicious influence of Sarah Palin, but then manages in the end to invent a whole new species of false equivalence by arguing that Democrats will eventually invent their own Palin.
Check these out for your own psychological well-being!