A label derived from the Latin meaning “to the man” or “to the person,” an ad hominem argument focuses on discrediting the arguer rather than the argument. In its illegitimate form, ad hominem responds to an argument with name calling instead of engagement with the matter at hand. Importantly, not all attacks on the person are problematic. It is possible to discredit the arguer in a way that effectively undercuts his argument. For example, one could challenge a speaker's credibility and case by showing that it is based on intentional deception (and the person “dishonest” or “a liar”). Those using this form of ad hominem need to assume the burden of showing how the attack both addresses and undermines the opponent's argument.

The ad hominem attacks we feature below inaccurately characterize the person being attacked and fail to justify rejection of the arguments or positions to which the attacker was objecting. Note that Limbaugh, Schultz and Thomas all apologized for the language used in their attack.