“Character assassination is at once easier and surer than physical assault; and it involves far less risk for the assassin. It leaves him free to commit the same deed over and over again, and may, indeed, win him the honors of a hero in the country of his victims.”

Brilliant describes whats happened to alot of politictians

Very eloquent description of a very common practice...Unfortunately, this quote doesn't apply esclusively to politics... Character assassination in small and large scale is rampant in our society...

Lots of this going on with folk calling Obama the Kenyan, the birthers, and terms like Obamaunists etcetera. None of these attempts further public discussion of issues and policies. But heck we know all is fair in love and war and further that elective politics is a form of war, war of opinions but still war.

How often some will elevate themselves simply by lowering those around them.

Waff, when reading your disjointed sentences one needs an interpreter. Sober up before commenting, please.

Sometimes cute little nicknames, like, Mr. Obamunist Goodwrench the assassin are not character assassination but rather, accurate depictions and reminders of the person's acts. Character assassination is more like what is happening with Sarah Palin (-: I mean beyond the neo-con fascist tax the oil companies to give stolen plunder to the people and, diversion of the tea party movement thaang(s) ;-) or, all the libelous, with out merit or any substantive related stories, printed and otherwise broadcast misinformation about Rand Paul. To assassinate the character instead of addressing the issues has become so prevalent that true freedom and liberty have been reduced, in most part, to a state of obscurity.

Calling someone a racist or anti-semite is like, "Hey, Senator, are you still beating your wife?" A political trick designed to embarrass someone and try to appeal to people's prejudices instead of principles. In practice it does appear that the Democrats use this tactic the most in order to defame any opposition to clearly socialistic (and unconstitutional) policies. I think when we start labeling policies as 'liberal' or 'leftist' we are making a poor argument. We ought to break down more specifically what policies in particular are ultimately destructive to the common man, his liberty, his property, his family, etc. and make them plain for all to see. We haven't had a president that wasn't a tool for the globalist cabal for a LONG time -- and their tactics are to divide and conquer, and nothing is simpler than labelling folks 'liberals' and 'conservatives' -- generic terms that do not spell out either's principles. Identifying with any party is a form of prejudice, and as soon as a Democrat finds out you are a Republican, he will have already written you off (and vice versa). I don't see how anyone can take their own party seriously -- I would prefer to debate the issues instead of the politicians.