Whenever you are in a discussion or an informal debate with someone (or an argument for that matter) one the easiest retorts to your opponent citing an expert is to impugn the motives and history of the expert in question.  You have heard this before: Newt Gingrich makes some statement about the importance of traditional marriage and the easy come back is his many divorces.  Rush Limbaugh, drugs… you know.  Thomas Friedman’s multiple columns about the environment and his several thousand square foot house (throw in Al Gore for good measure).  While hypocrisy is worthy of derision, by relying on it solely as your response to a statement you do not agree with you actually are being  intellectually dishonest and lazy (two of my major pet peeves).  What bearing does Mr. Gingrich’s marital history have on the veracity of his statement about marriage.  The truth of the matter is that one can be a hypocrite and have a valid point.  It has been my experience that when one resorts to pointing out the shortcomings of the messenger it usually means a lack of knowledge of an issue and therefore nothing intelligent to say about the topic at hand.  They just “know” that they do not agree with the statement but have only the messenger to attack.

I am as guilty of this as anyone else.  I understand the allure of it.  It is low hanging fruit.  Ripe… fat… juicy.  But Americans have become an appallingly trivial people.  We want American Idol, not Firing Line.  We want reality TV not actual reality.  We want greed not sacrifice.  In short, we have become small and callow.  Developing ideas, gathering facts and synthesizing that into understanding and insight is hard, better to just attack the messenger.  Attacking the messenger is easy, quick, cheap and requires nothing from you and consequently adds nothing of substance.  So the next time you find yourself in a situation where someone presents something you do not agree with, take the issue head on.  Do not shuck it, dodge it or evade.  If you have not thought about, then say so.  If you have then present your case.  If at the end of your case, the allure of that fruit is just to much not to pick then feel free.  Just be sure that your argument stands without it, because if it cannot then that is the easiest way to know that you do not have an argument at all.