[Alamo-Girl]

In my mind, if that's what they are doing then it's a textbook example of "ad hominem" and "guilt by association".

Does this mean you also believe conservatives should not be concerned that so many of Obama's advisers throughout his life were Marxist, socialist or communist?

The old proverb "where there's smoke, there's fire" has probably saved a lot of lives and property.

[CottShop]

[[The old proverb “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” has probably saved a lot of lives and property.]]

I was smoking during a fire one time, dropped my pack of smokes, bent over to pick em up, bumped my head, fell backwards, through a 3’rd story window, and landed on a pile of bricks- if it hadn’t been for my smoking, I’d probably have died in the fire- so yup- where’s there’s a pack of smokes, there’s fire has saved lives too :)

[tacticalogic]

Does this mean you also believe conservatives should not be concerned that so many of Obama's advisers throughout his life were Marxist, socialist or communist?

No, because those people are acting in an official capacity as advisers and political philosophy is directly related to establishing public policy.

I think when those associations are made, you have to be able to show what makes those associations relevant.

The association being made about Darwin are being made to "fill in the blanks" to build evidence with the objective of applying it to a theory based on a misperception that it is relevant to that theory.

That does not strike me as being a particularly sound methodology.