It is interesting to me that she lost this battle shortly after she lost control of herself, her emotions, and her logic during her AWB hearing recently. That hearing may have been her downfall.
I find that in confronting libs in general, it is not important to convince the lib. It is not important to try to convert them, and you probably won’t. What is important is what everyone else sees in the conversation.
What is crucially important is that you don’t lose control, that you don’t go over the top, that you don’t start slinging insults and extreme or unreal statements; Let the libs do that, and NOBODY will want to follow them, and the voice of reason will ring true to everyone who is watching.
This is a counter to The Rules For Radicals employed by the left, and it isolates them when they are allowed, or encouraged, to “go over the top”.
Let them lose it!
Like Reagan has been known to say in confronting libs, “There you go again”. At the time I heard him say it, to me it seemed way too mild, but in hindsight it cannot be countered by the left. It was a knockout. I really think there is something to this.
I find that in confronting libs in general, it is not important to convince the lib. It is not important to try to convert them, and you probably wont. What is important is what everyone else sees in the conversation.
I'll try to bear that in mind, Wildbill22. Thanks, eh?
I agree in general, especially in print. But I'm not sure if a dispassionate appeal to logic and reason plays well in this age of out-of-context soundbite videos. Cruz, Paul, Rubio, and Gingrich sound very good when debating, but someone like McLame, Romney, or Boehner fall flat and it's hard to hear their message with their deadpan, moderate sounding approach.