Alan Grayson’s biggest enemies may not be the GOP, but rather the Village Media. The liberal blogosphere likes Alan Grayson because he is bluntly, unapologetically outspoken regarding many of the issues we care about. And importantly, many of those views are strongly supported by a majority of the American public–his championing of health care reform and the importance of the Public Option being an example.

But that same blunt, outspoken behavior has caused the village media to put a bullseye on his back. The weapon of choice is a kind of false equivalency. In a phrase, the village media are portraying Grayson as the liberal equivalent of a conservative wingnut. For example, here is a piece by David Herszenhorn of the NYT that appeared this weekend:

Mr. Grayson could be the latest incarnation of what in the American political idiom is known as a wing nut — a loud darling of cable television and talk radio whose remarks are outrageous but often serious enough not to be dismissed entirely. Mr. Grayson is the more notable because he hurls his nuts from the left in a winger world long associated with the right.

That might just be the point. House Democratic leaders publicly frown on his behavior and have urged him to tone it down, saying he contributes to an atmosphere of incivility. But the incivility is no accident; nor is the bluster. Such antics are often quickly rewarded in the media-crazed wrestling pit of American politics. One talked-about TV appearance leads to three more; every quotable outburst is a potential pitch, spread instantly by YouTube and blogs to an eager audience that can cheer by way of campaign donations made with the click of a mouse.

Howard Kurtz, the Washington Post media critic, also did a particularly gossipy piece on Grayson for his CNN show "Reliable Sources", using the false equivalency attack. He advertized the piece on twitter thus:

HowardKurtz Must see TV: World-famous TV buffoon to be interviewed on Reliable Sources, this morning at 10 eastern. Has great voice but full of himself.

Here’s the piece Kurtz was advertising:

The village conventional wisdom is already solidifying around Grayson–he’s Michelle Bachmann with pants. He is Joe Wilson with a Harvard Law degree. In other words, he is crazy, marginal, and therefore not worth serious concern.

A Time article by Michael Scherer and Jay Newton-Small echoes the same line:

Step 1: Find Your Niche

This isn’t hard in our hyperpartisan age. But it is especially easy for Grayson and Bachmann. Elected in 2008, he came into politics as a litigator of war profiteers in Iraq who affixed a bush lied/people died bumper sticker to his car. She came up through grass-roots Republican politics as a culture warrior, working to ban gay marriage, expand the teaching of intelligent design and restrict abortion. In another era, strident politicians on the ideological edges found themselves marginalized once they got to Washington, where power accrues to longevity–and longevity tends to mellow. But Grayson and Bachmann found a back door.

I highly recommend that entire Time article on Grayson. It is a blueprint of how the establishment media will try to neutralize him, and indirectly, the issues he is carrying.