One of the surest way to spot a professional Dittohead is when somebody writes about Rush Limbaugh under the guise of explaining what he really stands for, the Dittohead goes out of his/her way to not explain what Limbaugh stands for. In other words, playing dumb about Limbaugh on a epic scale, mostly because the truth is too embarrassing and unpleasant to acknowledge. And the truth actually reveals the unvarnished hate that Limbaugh traffics in on an hourly basis.

And c'mon, where's the redeeming value in that?

So Dittoheads, like Limbaugh mash note writer Zev Chafets, play dumb and pretend Limbaugh is actually thoughtful and deep and OMG, bright. For instance, in his book-length valentine to mighty Rush, Chafets writes this about the controversial and widely condemned photos of American soldiers and Iraqi prisoners that emerged from Abu Ghraib,

Rush dismissed them as examples of high-spirited bad behavior akin to hazing at a college frat house.

Um, whatever you say Zev.

But in the real world of recorded radio shows and transcripts, what Limbaugh actually said about the Abu Ghraib photos was that they were “brilliant,” and that the U.S. guards in question were simply “having a good time.” Limbaugh announced that the graphic pictures featuring naked, beaten bodies reminded him of “good old American porn,” that the photos simply captured images that you would see at a Britney Spears concert or in a Sex in the City movie, and that the outraged expressed over them represented the “feminization” of America. Limbaugh also suggested the naked torture photos depicted what Sen Ted Kennedy is “doing at home” and that the senator was no stranger to “forced nakedness.”

See the trick? When confronted with the inane ramblings of a mad man, Chafets, performing his best butler duties, cleans up Limbaugh's mess and pretends the droppings don't smell so bad.

Which brings us to Chafets' appearance on Hot Air radio yesterday, hosted by conservative blogger Ed Morrissey. Doing his usual butler routine, Chafets stressed how educational Limbaugh's show can be (in Chavets' eyes Limbaugh's an associate prof on tenure track.) And as an example of how thoughtful and important Limbaugh's musing are to the larger debate, Limbaugh's No. 1 fan pointed to the talker's rhetoric about climate change and how Limbaugh's insistence that the question of global warming “is not settled science,” has had a real impact on the larger debate.

So according to Chafets, Limbaugh's thoughtful, educated talking point has merely been that climate change is “not settled science.”

Um, whatever you say Zev.

But again, in the real world of recorded radio shows and transcripts, what Limbaugh has actually been saying about climate change is this:

Limbaugh pushes falsehoods to claim climate change is a “hoax” that is “about advancing socialism, Marxism”

Limbaugh: Global warming advocates have “done more damage than even Bill Ayers wanted to”

Limbaugh: “Global warming hoax” is “political, criminal corruption”

Bizarre Limbaugh climate change rant: “why don't you man-made global warming” folks “go out and shovel everybody's driveway and sidewalks for free”

Limbaugh finds it “fitting” that climate change summit starts on Pearl Harbor day: “We're being attacked again”

Limbaugh calls climate change consensus “terrorism” and “environmental jihadism”

Limbaugh claims that signing on to climate change treaty equates to "[t]urning over [U.S.] sovereignty to" UN

Limbaugh: Climate change meeting seeks “worldwide government that has control over every aspect of every person's life”

In other words, Limbaugh's insights into climate change match his loony panting over Abu Ghraib. But fear not Rush. In the hands of Dittohead Chafets, you've simply been intoning that global warming “is not settled science.”

Meanwhile, note also this week that Chafets, or at least his publicist, pretty much chickened out of a previously scheduled interview with Media Matters' Joe Strupp. No surprise there since that's another defining Dittohead trait--an inability to face your critics with facts, and instead preferring to wallow in the protective world of Dittoheads.

And lastly, on his Hot Air appearance yesterday Chafets whined about Media Matters and how we're such an awful, corrupt organization. Specifically, he alleged that Media Matters constantly takes Limbaugh's words out of context, which in turn creates a false impression for the mainstream media. (Busted! It's all part of our master misinformation campaign.)

So here's the deal. Since Chafets just got done 'researching' his Limbaugh bio, I'm sure he must have a long list of bullet-proof examples of when Media Matters ripped Limbaugh's words out of context in order to manufacture nasty gotcha hit. Well, this would be the perfect time for Chafets to lay out his proof. So why doesn't he pick the Dittohead forum of his choice this week to detail, say, three times that Media Matters has clearly, and without question, done Limbaugh wrong and taken his words out of context.

I'll wait, but honestly I doubt Chafets will take up the challenge. And that's really the most telling Dittohead trait of all; a completely inability to back up their claims with facts.