Ad Hominem -- the favored attack of the right.

[merlinofchaos]

This one is so easy I don't need to actually say anything myself, except this: When you can't defend your position, attack those who think you are wrong.

"What a copout,'' Carlson said Monday. "On the one hand, he wants to play media critic and cultural critic, and on the other hand, if challenged, he retreats into 'I'm just a comedian' mode. I mean, that's pathetic.''

Attacking the Person
(argumentum ad hominem)
Definition:

      The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the
      argument itself. This takes many forms. For example, the
      person's character, nationality or religion may be attacked.
      Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to
      gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be
      attacked by association, or by the company he keeps.

      There are three major forms of Attacking the Person:
      (1) ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion,
      the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.
      (2) ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an
      assertion the author points to the relationship between the
      person making the assertion and the person's circumstances.
      (3) ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the
      person notes that a person does not practise what he
      preaches.

Comments

True, but...

[colubra.livejournal.com]

It's unfair to lay the blame on this one just at the feet of pundits of the right wing: may I present Fahrenheit 911 as an example of the shoe being on the other foot?

[morganc14.livejournal.com]

I think that while I agree with Stewart on most levels of what he was talking about, Carlson has every right to attack him rather than his concepts, because how you go about addressing the concepts is important. Steward did go 'you're comparing things to a comedy show' and then continue to spit at Crossfire, which was one of the things I didn't like about it. an ad hominem attack was the most appropriate response in my mind, because really, at some point you should point out that a person is undermining their beliefs through their behavior.

Ad hominem, Tucker?

[eyelessgame.livejournal.com]

Yah, it occurred to me that this was all Tucker could do. While I don't watch Crossfire other than this segment, I know the show by reputation -- and I'd bet the primary requirement for being on the show was that you'd memorized a nice long list of logical fallacies -- as a list of your debating tools, as opposed to things to avoid.