Dems’ Poster Child Abuse, and Other ‘Arguments’ That Effectively Concede Defeat

I could get all wound up about the Democrats’ incredibly misguided use of the Frost family as false fodder for flogging the President over his veto of the SCHIP legislation, but several folks have done the heavy lifting, so there’s no need for that.

For those who need to catch up, here goes:

• Michelle Malkin — “legislation-by-anecdote is a tricky thing, and should only be done when the anecdotes actually hold some water.” (FWIW, I disagree. Hard cases often make bad law. Replace “done” with “considered.”– Ed.)
  
• Mark Steyn (here and here) — “if this is the face of the “needy” in America, then no-one is not needy.”
• Dan Riehl — “I don’t see someone who needs my help in F Halsey Frost.”
• Rick Moran — “If the President had dared to be that dishonest, the press would have been all over him.” (and rightfully so — Ed.)

The next stage was sooooo predictable, but it amazes every time: Now that the Frosts’ health-insurance sob story has been blown to bits (and it has been), the hard-left’s anger has been turned loose on the above parties, the FReeper who first posted on the situation and others who had the nerve to do what Old Media wouldn’t do. That is, Malkin et al vetted the story, instead of copy-pasting a press release and calling it “journalism.” To the sore-loser left, it’s as if anyone who so much as Googled “Graeme Frost” is a stalker engaging in harassment.

Steyn responds, as only Steyn can:

Sorry, no sale. The Democrats chose to outsource their airtime to a Seventh Grader. If a political party is desperate enough to send a boy to do a man’s job, then the boy is fair game. As it is, the Dems do enough cynical and opportunist hiding behind biography and identity, and it’s incredibly tedious. And anytime I send my seven-year-old out to argue policy you’re welcome to clobber him, too. The alternative is a world in which genuine debate is ended …..

Given the circumstances, Michelle is, of course, right about this — “The children deserve much sympathy and compassion.” They also deserve to have health insurance purchased by parents who can clearly afford it.

Unfortunately, shoot-the-messenger is a time-honored tactic in Ohio Blogland by lefties who appear to be out of arguments, out of originality, and intellectually bankrupt. Examples:

• If you expose the bogus nature of the Food Stamp Challenge, you must “hate poor people.”
• If you point out that Old Media won’t cover a boycott influencing at least 10% of the country against a company with steeply declining sales that appears to be bent on ignoring it, even if doing so could jeopardize its very existence — a company where you happen to have a relative working (who you’d like to see keep his job), and another who is retired from there (who you’d like to see continue to receive his retirement check and retiree health care) — you, among other things, are “hate mongering,” have an “anti-gay agenda,” and (of course) harbor “hatred and bigotry.”
• If you wonder how why the hometown newspaper could have failed to look into a new imam’s possible history of promoting anti-Semitism from the pulpit and association with at least one proven terrorist, after the previous imam lost his position over the very same things, you have “hatred for ….. Middle Eastern’ers” — oh, and “repressed sexual tension” (nothing “personal” about that, eh?).

Zheesh. If that’s the best y’all can do, the respective debates must be over.

Cross-posted at Wide Open.