Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Who Had Better Grades? Bush or Kerry?
Freeper Question

Posted on 08/16/2004 8:30:12 PM PDT by Thickman

I think I heard Michael Medved mention that George W. Bush had better grades in college than John Kerry. Verification of this and proof would help me win an argument with and arogant liberal. Any information?


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Politics
KEYWORDS: bush; college; collegegrades; grades; kerry; presidentialrace

1 posted on 08/16/2004 8:30:13 PM PDT by Thickman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Thickman

Win an argument with a liberal? Well, as a teacher of Rhetoric I am well aware of the importants of facts, the art of persuasion, the beauty of masterful debate . . . but Democrats rely solely upon the ad hominem arguement delivered with highly emotional invective aimed at the personal destruction of their opponents. Trying to win any reasoned argument with them is folly. Reason is not in their lexicaon.


2 posted on 08/16/2004 8:38:02 PM PDT by MrChips (ARD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrChips

And you didn't even need to meet the fellow! He pulls the usual "say it louder and it must be true" routine. I decided not to argue with him and wait until I could produce some documentation.


3 posted on 08/16/2004 8:51:48 PM PDT by Thickman (Regis to Kerry: "Is that your final answer?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Thickman

If Bush had better grades, then the grades won't matter.

If Kerry had better grades, it is proof is innate superiority.


You just can't win an argument with a liberal with facts. You have to force them into defending an indefensible moral position.

The process is simple. You ask a few base questions, such as premature births. Babies born after 6 months have a pretty good chance of living normal lives, and every week after 6 months they spend in the womb the better their chances. Don't let on that you're leading into abortion. Now change up the line of questioning to that of moral relativism. Are there basic morals that define a minimum good to society? Violence against others, when is it allowable? Theft of goods, when is it allowable? Destruction of property, when is it allowable? The idea is for them to take a moral stand on all those issues, and if they equivocate on these, then they just sound stupid. Now hit them with late term abortion. If they extend their moral relativism to late term abortion, then their lack of logic comes to the fore, and listeners will have to consider that there really are moral absolutes out there. I wouldn't say there are a lot of them, but there are enough of them such that most people will recognize evil when they see it.

Make sure they describe to you the procedure of late term abortion, and do not let them draw you into the trap of disagreeing with abortion as a whole until they've made answered your questions.

If you are 100% against abortions, be careful about being baited into becoming irrational. The question isn't one of abortions, it is the inclusion of late term abortions as a woman's right to choose. As long as Roe vs Wade stands, the best that conservatives can achieve is a limitation and restriction on abortions that are morally indefensible to moderates. The reason is that in order to make policy changes at the highest levels, you have to court the moderates, and a properly educated moderate should be against late term abortions.

If we can win that battle, we can put the necessary restrictions on abortions between 3-6 months, such that the fetus is accorded protections, only preempted by the mother's right to her own life. But simultaneously, we must push for American support in cultural changes including sexual responsibility, be it abstinence or contraceptives, so that unwanted pregnancies do not occur, and the question of abortions is a moot issue.


4 posted on 08/16/2004 9:24:39 PM PDT by coconutt2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: coconutt2000; Thickman
If Bush had better grades, then the grades won't matter.

If Kerry had better grades, it is proof is innate superiority.

So why didn't Kerry get his law degree from Harvard instead of Boston College Law School?

5 posted on 08/16/2004 9:49:04 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

I was pointing out the lack of logic in the types of responses the original poster was going to run into.


6 posted on 08/16/2004 10:56:21 PM PDT by coconutt2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Thickman

Why bother?

No totalitarian censor can approach the implacability of the censor who controls the line of communication between the outer world and our consciousness. Nothing is allowed to reach us which might weaken our confidence and lower our morale. To most of us nothing is so invisible as an unpleasant truth. Though it is held before our eyes, pushed under our noses, rammed down our throats--we know it not.


7 posted on 08/18/2004 4:14:45 PM PDT by RunningJoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson