Subject: Re: Julian Epstein...
"The Money Honey on Fox as a meaningful source for discussion???

TV has rotted your brain."

reading comprehension is not your strong suit. These were Epstein's thoughts..Run along now little boy.

And there's the Poisoning the Well fallacy in action.

To poison the well is to commit a pre-emptive ad hominem strike against an argumentative opponent. As with regular ad hominems, the well may be poisoned in either an abusive or circumstantial way. For instance:

"Only an ignoramus would disagree with fluoridating water." (Abusive)
"My opponent is a dentist, so of course he will oppose the fluoridating of water, since he will lose business." (Circumstantial)
Anyone bold enough to enter a debate which begins with a well-poisoning either steps into an insult, or an attack upon one's personal integrity. As with standard ad hominems, the debate is likely to cease to be about its nominal topic and become a debate about the arguer. However, what sets Poisoning the Well apart from the standard Ad Hominem is the fact that the poisoning is done before the opponent has a chance to make a case.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/po...

One could argue that the stupidity routinely flung about when it comes to sources is merely another form of an ad hominem attack and that's a fine thing to point out. The exact name of the attack isn't really relevant; it's the behavior - and resulting lack of intellectual beef of any kind - that is.