The next time you hear liberals complain about bullying or incivility, recall the following happening only in the last few weeks:

Sen. Harry Reid’s former aides have launched an ad campaign second to done in dishonesty. Its latest effort in Louisiana got another four Pinnochio’s from The Post’s Fact Checker, Glenn Kessler, for an ad falsely tying Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), a Senate candidate, to opposition to Sandy relief and the Kochs. (“Having noted that the Kochs opposed flood legislation — without mentioning that Cassidy was one of their chief opponents — Senate Majority PAC claims Cassidy would be in their pocket to do further damage to the flood victims of the state. This is nonsensical. It’s almost as if Senate Majority PAC claimed that 1 plus 1 equals 5.”) Kessler concludes, “This is the third time in a month that the Fact Checker has given Four Pinocchios to an ad sponsored by Senate Majority PAC. That’s a pretty dreadful track record, and does little for the organization’s credibility more than six months before the midterm elections.”

Then there are the current members of the Senate led by Reid to vilify not only the Koch brothers but also the Supreme Court (“Dems seek to demonize justices“). The Hill reports, “Senate Democrats and liberal groups are mounting a pressure campaign against the Supreme Court, hoping to influence future decisions by blasting conservative justices for alleged political bias. The effort from the left also portrays the high court as an instrument rigged to help the wealthy, and is intended to energize Democratic voters and increase turnout in the midterm elections. Some legal experts see the effort as akin to basketball or soccer players ‘working the ref’ in a high-stakes game.” Others might call it bullying or sowing contempt for the rule of law.

If that’s not enough, there is the phony war on women based on misleading statistics, which ignore that the infamous “77 cents on the dollar” claim about women’s wage gap is not the result of a “war on women.” Kessler explained (“Weekly wages is more of an apples-to-apples comparison, but as mentioned, it does not include as many income categories, The gap is even smaller when you look at hourly wages — it is 86 cents vs. 100 . . . but then not every wage earner is paid on an hourly basis, so that statistic excludes salaried workers. But, under this metric for people with a college degree, there is virtually no pay gap at all.”)

Senate Majority Leader Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) (L) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) talk during an event on Capitol Hill on April 3, 2014 in Washington, DC. Senate Democrats were joined by US Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez and others to support a minimum wage raise from $7.25 to $10.10 an hour. AFP PHOTO/Brendan SMIALOWSKIBRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty Images
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) (Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images)

To be specific, “The [Bureau of Labor Standards] reports that single women who have never married earned 96% of men’s earnings in 2012,” two conservative economists relate. (The Post’s Wonkblog comes up with 91 percent. ) Job selection, risk taking (“Nearly all the most dangerous occupations, such as loggers or iron workers, are majority male and 92% of work-related deaths in 2012 were to men. Dangerous jobs tend to pay higher salaries to attract workers”), the choice to work part-time and factors other than discrimination explain the differences:

While the BLS [Bureau of Labor Statistics] reports that full-time female workers earned 81% of full-time males, that is very different than saying that women earned 81% of what men earned for doing the same jobs, while working the same hours, with the same level of risk, with the same educational background and the same years of continuous, uninterrupted work experience, and assuming no gender differences in family roles like child care. In a more comprehensive study that controlled for most of these relevant variables simultaneously—such as that from economists June and Dave O’Neill for the American Enterprise Institute in 2012—nearly all of the 23% raw gender pay gap cited by Mr. Obama can be attributed to factors other than discrimination. The O’Neills conclude that, “labor market discrimination is unlikely to account for more than 5% but may not be present at all.”

The recognition that wage inequality is driven by women’s choices has led to the entire “lean in” campaign, which would be a cruel hoax if women’s choices didn’t matter and the system was inherently biased against women with the same hours, education and career choices as men. But in the political realm the left’s thirst for sowing resentment and convincing women they are victims of fellow Americans is unquenchable.

Looked at in their totality this is a disturbing scene. And yet the good government types, the pundits and the MSM shrug in the face of all of this. Content in their certainty that all bad things in the United States come from Republicans, they can’t be bothered to decry the onslaught of malicious tactics. It’s not their thing to go criticizing Dems. Other things to talk about. Keep walking. Some coo that the strategy is brilliant. In their eyes the facts must not really matter since it’s in service of the great cause of keeping Reid as majority leader.

Really, this is the best liberalism can generate? Frankly this onslaught of destructive malice is justification alone for dumping the Dems and the Senate majority leader conducting this symphony of distortion. If their tactics are rewarded, then we will set a new, even lower baseline for campaign tactics.

So next time a lefty blogger, MSNBC commentator, or liberal pol complains about the sorry state of U.S. politics or endorses one of the Democrats who’s benefiting from the dishonest ads and phony stats, he or she should look in the mirror. The rotten state of American politics won’t improve until the MSM treats the shenanigans on the left as harshly as it treats those on the right.

Jennifer Rubin writes the Right Turn blog for The Post, offering reported opinion from a conservative perspective.