Per se:

Description of Straw Man

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person’s actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of “reasoning” has the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.
Examples of Straw Man

1. Prof. Jones: “The university just cut our yearly budget by $10,000.”
Prof. Smith: “What are we going to do?”
Prof. Brown: “I think we should eliminate one of the teaching assistant positions. That would take care of it.”
Prof. Jones: “We could reduce our scheduled raises instead.”
Prof. Brown: ” I can’t understand why you want to bleed us dry like that, Jones.”

How many times, just in the past year, have you heard some warmonger invoking “Churchill and Chamberlain”? Some wingnut says, types, scribbles, or shouts it every fifteen minutes. They seem to believe, pathetically, that there’s a real chance “The Terrorists” are going to literally conquer and take over Europe and North America.

Iraq didn’t attack us and they weren’t a threat.

Japan, of course, bombed the hell out of us and Germany and Italy declared war on us four days later.

Prager is just another fool too embarrassed to admit he fell for it and he’s grasping for strawmen.