Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
DevilsTower, with whom I had the pleasure of being on a science blogger's panel at Netroots Nation, has a post at DailyKos that plays off the speech I gave there. My speech compared the rhetoric of the ID movement to John Baez' crackpot index, showing that ID advocates behave just like scientific cranks when espousing and defending their claims. DevilsTower has created a new version of the Baez index: the wingnut index.
It works the same way, by assigning point values to the rhetorical claims of conservatives to determine whether they should be taken seriously or whether they are simply wingnuts mindlessly repeating the talking points (and one could do the same thing on the other side, of course). A few examples:
5 points
Each use of "Democrat Party."
Each use of "liberal elite."
Each declaration that kos readers should "leave America." ...20 points
Each use of "DemocRAT Party."
Each time the writer wishes the recipient would burn in hell.
Asserting the recipient belongs in Gitmo.
Each physical threat to the recipient's family & pets.
Each use of the term "Darwinism."
Each use of the term "algore."
He's got a good start, but there are many more possibilities. There should be a special section just for Ann Coulter, like 10,000 points for each book you write accusing liberals of being insulting while calling them traitors, terrorist sympathizers and lunatics. Or perhaps a section just for Bill O'Reilly, like 5000 points every time you claim to have won an award that you didn't win (and an extra 20,000 points for lying and saying you never claimed to have won that award when there are multiple videotapes of you doing exactly that on national television).
Politics
Comments
They forgot "libtard" and just plain old "lib/libs"
Posted by: matt | July 28, 2008 10:14 AM
Can we also get some points in there for instances of using "liberal media", "Hollywood elite" and "activist judges"?
Posted by: Bill | July 28, 2008 10:24 AM
Ah, the big one should be when you find "they should burn in hell" and "pray for them" in the same article (100 points), paragraph (400 points, for a 500 total) and sentence (500, for a 1000 point total).
personally, I'd rather it be a drinking game, myself... :)
Posted by: Joe Shelby | July 28, 2008 10:56 AM
What, no special point values for each occurrence of "liberalism is a mental illness"???
Posted by: Adrienne | July 28, 2008 11:00 AM
Each use of "liberal elite."
More like each use of "liberal" as a pejorative.
Each declaration that kos readers should "leave America." ...
More like each declaration that anyone with whom the wingnut disagrees should "leave America".
I'd like to post this to the diary in question, but it will likely go unread and unanswered; Daily Kos diaries that don't make the Recommended list have a shelf life of about six hours.
Posted by: Ray C. | July 28, 2008 11:01 AM
There's also no entry for each use of "moonbat".
Posted by: Ray C. | July 28, 2008 11:03 AM
Triple word score for the use of the phrase "barking moonbat."
Posted by: Pieter B | July 28, 2008 11:16 AM
How many points does the grasping-for-straws "Barack Hussein[!] Obama" ploy get?
Posted by: namowal | July 28, 2008 11:18 AM
Don't forget points for a general inability to spell, handle English grammar (particularly the accusative/nominative cases and participles), and an inability to form complete sentences. Not to mention points for writing in eccentric/all caps, and a complete inability to parse any kind of logic. I mean those have to worth points, right? - DJ
PS And total confusion over apostrophes, possessive pronouns and ending sentences with conjunctions have got to be worth points, don't they?
Posted by: DingoJack | July 28, 2008 11:34 AM
I'd add a double word modifier when you string combos together.
It's 5 points every time you mention the word "liberal"
It should be 10 more every time you mention the "liberal left" or "socialist liberals" and or any other perjorative combination asserting that all democrats are communists in disguise.
Keep the 20 points for denying global warming or evolution, but double it if the mention is a snide reference implying that Global Warming or Evolution itself is a conspiracy to further someones ends.
Posted by: Ben | July 28, 2008 1:13 PM
oooh fun!
there should be mucho points for:
"gay agenda"
"tree-hugger"
"America is a Christian nation"
to be fair though, there should be some on there for wingnuttery from the left also (i'm just having a hard time coming up with examples off the top of my head)
Posted by: simmi | July 28, 2008 1:46 PM
Of course, you realize that if there were a Liberal Index (or Commie Pinko Fascist Index), you would get 20 points for using the word "wingnut."
I lean liberal, but there's plenty of woo and nonsense in the liberal camp, too. One good example is the reflexive paranoia over GM food.
If you read DailyKos, you can find plenty of absurd and biased claims about conservatives and John McCain. Groupthink is bad for you. They should read Overcoming Bias instead of DailyKos and Huffington Post.
Posted by: Neural T | July 28, 2008 1:47 PM
10 points for bitching about "activist judges" who uphold 'liberal/secular' laws that are not mentioned in the 4-corners of the constitution.
20 points for praising judges who "uphold Christianity/family values" by upholding laws that are not mentioned in the constitution's literal text.
1000 points for doing both at once.
Posted by: Royale | July 28, 2008 1:51 PM
Add these from O'Reilly: San Francisco Values, Secular-Progressive, Far Left.
Posted by: soboco | July 28, 2008 2:05 PM
How should we score accusations of hating humans, gaia worship and other such attacks on conservation?
Posted by: Suricou Raven | July 28, 2008 3:48 PM
Ok, but to be fair we need to subtract 20 points every time someone on DailyKos uses the word "rethuglican", which according to Google would start the score at around -35,000.
Posted by: jpf | July 28, 2008 3:52 PM
You need to be careful while defining complex scoring for this. There are so many potential combinations that you can quickly get more complex than the scoring of a game of M.I.T. Diminishing Bridge, where if you did not bring your own slide rule to the game you will have to get someone else to score for you...
Posted by: Chris Anderson | July 28, 2008 3:54 PM
How many points should one get for each use of the phrase "Bush derangement syndrome (BDS)?"
Posted by: Raging Bee | July 28, 2008 4:01 PM
... 'fag' 20 points, 'feminazi' 20,'bitch' 20, 'dyke' 20,'hag' 20, 'cunt' 50 (Thanks Mr. McCain!) Of course, if you dare 'post while black' there's a whole 'nother list...
I suppose the epithets you garner are related to the issues you blog about, but often we're talking about the same things from inside a different skin. Sadly this list seems to bridge political orientation.
I suppose 'libtard' is what you get called when the other shit talk is not available?
Posted by: CityzenJane | July 28, 2008 7:46 PM
"Ah, the big one should be when you find "they should burn in hell" and "pray for them" in the same article"
You mean it's a contradiction? I don't see why. The guy may very well be praying that his opponent burns in hell...
Posted by: Christophe Thill | July 29, 2008 5:15 AM
Read the letters to PZ and elsewhere - they "pray for you" that "you will open your heart to Jesus and maybe be saved" even though they've already stated "you should [or will] burn in hell for all eternity".
This includes, if I recall, the original death threat letter that god the writer's wife fired from 1800Flowers.
Posted by: Joe Shelby | July 29, 2008 9:43 AM