I think you need to update your list a little. This one might be getting a little frayed aground the the edges. This assumes that you have anything else.
You're right. Moen's opinion is his alone (and he fails to make any valid arguments because he doesn't address the issues, but instead attacks the people he's talking about), but to deny that there has been OWS-related violence generated by OWS protestors is utterly ridiculous. In any crowd of any size with that degree of stress surrounding it, there is going to be violence within. Regardless, there was an attempt to paint Sarah Palin as being violent in order to defend the OWS protestors. Besides holding Palin responsible for something she did not do (correlation does not imply causation), it was also an attempt to defend the OWS by attacking Palin. If you can't defend an argument based on the argument's merits, then you have no valid argument.
So If I went on national TV with a rifle and few pics of say Romney, Cain, Perry, and Bachman... all with a dripping red "X" across their mugs and said "Take 'em out!"... and chambered my gun... that would be cool? And if one of them happened to get shot in the face by someone shortly afterwards, it had nothing to do with me so I could just blame the radical far-right element, or the media, and then go fishing? Hypothetically speaking... I don't own a gun and they won't let me on TV for some reason anyway...
True... that was part of the point... I don't expect most of the point to be understood, or accepted, by closed-minded people.