I, too, say enough of the false equivalency.
Then there are those who care more about decorum than empiricism who insist to persist and maintain that both sides are loud and boorish. I suppose they are the kind who don’t want to ruffle feathers and be invited to next week’s cocktail party. Say we both know who is peddling propaganda and calling it news; neither of us watch it, but one of worries if a third person absorbs the propaganda uncritically, takes the misinformation as the third’s own opinion and acts on it. And that makes me the Chicken Little of the two of us. But I don’t stop there, I use The F Word of politics; thus I become less credible in your eyes — my assertions no longer merit contemplation by rational people nor investigation of their veracity. That’s over the top, that’s crazy, he’s nuts, he’s an extremist you say. O.K. I got it - no sense in trying to argue with a wall.
I hope I’m wrong, and I hope I never have to tell you “I told you” if your cocktail party is ever interrupted by the misinformed and bigoted amongst us who can and do vote. Olbermann, Maddow, I and others have all given you fair warning.
P.S: this comment to the Gawker piece is pretty good, too.