Once again I am flabergasted by the lack of credibility and support for a thesis such as your own: That liberals are using below the belt tactics against Repbulicans.
1) Joe the Plumber embraced his media spotlight, going so far as to hire a publicist. Thus he knew full well the sort of attention he was about to recieve.
2) Sarah Palin, rather unfortunate how she was scrutinized relentlessly, also invited her own problems by making poor choice in word (“I like all newspapers,” said the journalism major….). Since then it has not been liberal media machine but the paparazi media machine that has been stoking the fires of her daugheters relationship issues.
3) You claim that conservative speakers are shouted down at school campus, yet provide no links to actual, reported events of that happening. Further more, the accusation that these publicly funded schools are promoting and encouraging such behavoir is unfounnded. Students pay money to attend such schools and thus recieve the education they want. If it happens to be of a more liberal bent, your out of luck. The schools would not even invite the speakers, let alone provide security to allow them to speak, if they school wanted to promote an only liberal agenda.
4) Your claim that former President Bush wanted to promote a new tone, yet again provide no examples. Seems rather hard when he was promoting wedge issues like a national ban on same-sex marraige, coming up with extremely weak justifications for torture and using executive orders more than all other Presidents in history combined.
Overall, I give your arguement a 4/10. With cited evidence and a little less speculation you could have something really substansive on your hands.
