I was once told that a good argument involves the attack of the argument itself. The second one attacks the opponent on a personal basis is the very moment the argument is lost. This fallacy is known as Ad Hominem. To demonstrate this way of fallacy, this video should do justice. With that, I would like to present an example in political stature in which Barack Obama dismisses Sarah Palin's nuclear claim by attacking her instead of the ideas and argument she presents at hand. If you could, just recognize the fact that instead of responding to the nuclear administration, he responds "Last I checked, Sarah Palin's not much of an expert on nuclear issues." There are many ways way of going about an educated comeback, however, he decided to go with the attack of Palin herself. Looking back on the picture as a whole, this makes sense, and at first it makes one want to side with Obama, after then realizing he has no real argument, it is all just a fallacy. The main purpose behind this attack is, in my opinion a comical way of dealing with things. Among looking at the Obama-Palin debates, there are many "comical" reliefs presented on a number of occasions. The fact that he can say what he said and get away with it, proves that this kind of attack is allowed in politics; and if one were to think about it, this is one way Politicians manipulate the masses and their opponents.