Passage Summary: Politicians shouldn't insult each other's character because it's a distraction from the real issues and just questions the other person's right to speak.

Conclusion: Personal character attacks should be excluded from political debating.

Reasoning: These attacks fail to engage with the opponent's actual arguments and instead focus on whether the opponent has the moral standing to participate in the discussion.

Analysis: This argument moves from a descriptive observation about what character attacks do (distract and disqualify) to a normative conclusion about what should be done (avoid them). To justify this reasoning, we need a principle that links the lack of argumentative confrontation to the requirement of avoidance. Look for a bridge that states if a debating tactic fails to address the substance of an opponent's position, it is illegitimate or should be prohibited. We are essentially looking for a rule that makes the premises sufficient to prove the conclusion.