Here's the discussion that got me thinking about that:
He: (triggering a long comment chain): "The Coffee Party is about sound, reasoned political deliberation and demanding a smart government that works for the people. We are not anti-tea party, but we are against obstructionism and discourse of hatred."
Me: Huh. Go figure.
He: I worked in Indiana to get out the vote for Obama. Does that disqualify me from future activity?
Me: Nope. She's fully entitled to her opinions, and her community organizing and activism.
But I am pointing out that she is lying about not being "anti-tea party", and is almost certainly not non-partisan, and is no less "hateful™" than she believes the tea partiers are. She is purposely misrepresenting her positions to attract followers she would otherwise not attract -- to seem perfectly reasonable while projecting exactly the behavior she pretends to abhor.
Progressives invented "astroturfing", and they know they are purposefully misleading -- which is why they're so reflexive about calling any movement they are opposed to "astroturf". I think it's projection of guilt.
The handbook for this is Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals". This is why ACORN passes out boxes of the book and other progressive leaning associations recommend the book.
Saul was the original "Community Organizer". Dishonesty never bothered the man. Results were all that mattered.