And sometimes they are, so what's your point?
If there is anything that is the hallmark of a liberal commentator, it's presenting a conclusion that subsumes their faulty premises rather than build an argument where any one of their premises can be scrutinized. Telling others not to suspect the usual suspects without noting why this time should be different is simply fatuous.
Thankfully, the whole "plausible deniability" rubric liberals have been hiding behind for years is starting to crumble as more and more conservatives learn to ignore the intellectual fellatio liberals are so adept at, and pay attention to what they do.