When politicians resort to personal attacks, many editorialists criticize these attacks but most voters pay them scant attention. Everyone knows such attacks will end after election day, and politicians can be excused for mudslinging. Political commentators, however, cannot be. Political commentators should be engaged in sustained and serious debate about ideas and policies. In such a context personal attacks on opponents serve not to beat those opponents but to cut off the debate.

Which of the following most accurately states the main point of the argument?

(A) Personal attacks on opponents serve a useful purpose for politicians.
(B) Political commentators should not resort to personal attacks on their opponents.
(C) Editorialists are right to criticize politicians who resort to personal attacks on their opponents.
(D) The purpose of serious debate about ideas and policies is to counteract the effect of personal attacks by politicians.
(E) Voters should be concerned about the personal attacks politicians make on each other.
[spoiler]
why is the answer B instead of D.

isnt right that B is so extream to conclude about?[/spoiler]