Once upon a long time ago, I wrote a primer on how to argue with a wanker, during which I predicted that part of that sort of dialogue would include the following phase:
Eventually, if your [wanker] opponent is sufficiently persistent [in pressing their claim], you may decide to invest the time and effort to marshall all the facts at your disposal, put together an absolutely devastating, irrefutable rebuttal and utterly destroy said wanker. At which point, be not at all surprised to hear:
W[anker]: "Man, chill out. It's not that big a deal. So I was wrong. You're getting way too obsessive over this. Get a life."
Y[ou]: "What the f...???"
This is, in fact, a fairly clever wanker tactic. Having previously embraced their position like a Rottweiler all over a raw flank steak and dragging you into the discussion, they suddenly appear to totally lose interest.
Not only does it downplay their defeat, but they now paint you as somehow so consumed with anti-conservative bias that you would invest this much time in the discussion. At this point, you are now the overly-excitable, closed-minded left-wing fanatic with no sense of proportion. The fact that your wanker opponent only minutes before was equally as fanatical is conveniently forgotten.
Welcome to Michelle Malkin's world.
Recall, if you will, how TPM's Greg Sargent totally and utterly disemboweled the bogus "lonely John Kerry" myth, invented out of thin air by the citizens of Lower Wankerville. Note carefully how Sargent didn't just explain it away, but how his piece is a powerful example of careful investigation and rigour, shutting down every possible counter-argument before they have a chance to even get off the ground. And how does Michelle Malkin respond?
Predictably, of course (emphasis added):
After TPM Muckraker wrongly accused milbloggers and conservative bloggers of faking the photo, TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent published a heavy-breathing investigative report on the context of the photo:
From Michelle's perspective, then, Sargent's article is not so much a thorough thrashing of the John Kerry right-wing talking point as it is ... what? An over-the-top, hyper-ventilating screed by someone who is just way too obsessed with such trivialities. Sound familiar? Of course it does.
It's tempting to feel just a bit smug about how accurately I called this but, truth be told, Malkin's behaviour is so depressingly predictable, you really can't take any credit for predicting something so painfully obvious.
I believe the proper phrase in this situation is "no-brainer."