Replies

[Margaret Thatcher quote]: People on all levels of income are better off than they were in 1979. The hon. Gentleman is saying that he would rather that the poor were poorer, provided that the rich were less rich. That way one will never create the wealth for better social services, as we have. What a policy. Yes, he would rather have the poor poorer, provided that the rich were less rich. That is the Liberal policy.

I have long said that the pivotal difference between liberals versus conservatives+libertarians on the issue of wealth is illustrated by this hypothetical example:
If next year, every citizen in the nation was to somehow become 5% richer than they are this year, the reactions would be:

Conservatives & Libertarians would consider this wonderful news, and rejoice that EVERY SINGLE person is wealthier!
But the Liberals would consider this an unmitigated disaster, because when they look at the exact same figures the others are looking at, all that they are able to see is that the gap in wealth between the very poorest and the very richest has just increased by 5%. Horrors!! How patently unfair.

I keep hoping that if they eventually come to see the truth in this example, they might have one of those "glass half full vs glass half empty" epiphany moments. But I've not had a lot of luck.

BTW, those of us who've spent 1000's of hours over the years debating liberal relatives/colleagues/eOpponents/etc, have not been able to escape hearing the exact same worn-out worthless cliched Lib talking points, and the exact same cutesy sarcastic "slams" against us, spouted over and over and over again. So it's handy, and even fun, to come up with some good rejoinders against these cliches, and be ready to go with them.

I'd appreciate hearing some good lines that you all have found to be useful retorts. I'll start off by posting a few I use:

LIB: Ghandi said, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind".
ME: Ghandi was wrong. It is "No Consequences For Eye-Gougers" that makes the world blind.

LIB: Strength Through Peace!
ME: You have it backwards! "Peace Through Strength!"

LIB: Jesus said, "Let they who are without sin cast the first stone" [to justify someone's sin]
ME: But do you know what the very next verse says? [blank expression on their face] He said to the adulteress, "Go, and sin no more!"

LIB: The definition of a [pick one: Puritan, Conservative, Religious Righter, etc] is someone who lays awake at night worrying that somewhere, somebody is having fun.
ME: Really? Well, did you know that a [pick one: Libertine, Liberal, Democrat, etc] is someone who lays awake at night worrying that somewhere, somehow, someone is living a life that is woefully under-regulated by the Federal Government.

One more: This retort isn't in the category of "Lib vs Con," and isn't one I made up, but I can't resist including it. (No, I've never had the guts / chutzpah to use this!):
FOUL-MOUTHED PERP: "F*CK YOU!!"
RETORT: "Oh, I wouldn't do that if I were you. You'd never be satisfied with your dog again".

Well anyway, I'd like to see others' useful retorts!

School is now in session ;)

“I keep hoping that if they eventually come to see the truth in this example, they might have one of those “glass half full vs glass half empty” epiphany moments. But I’ve not had a lot of luck. “

The question you ask in anything this situation is “Why do you revel in the poverty of others? Do not tall me how you dispise the so called rich. Tell me and the people here why you are happy about ‘winning’ at the expense of the less fortunate.”

One of the lessons I learned in debating libs (at some fairly high levels of influence) is that everything is a performance to them. They ‘play to the crowd’ in an effort to sway the opinion of the emotions of the crowd...and no one wants to be the only person IN that crowd to go against groupthink.

Fact: High School never ends. the majority of people who go to their reunions revert to the people they were on the day they graduated. Only the Alphas break the mold. And it’s likely they were Alphas the day they graduated.

Likewise, in groups of adults, the crowd dynamic is and always has been that the crowd defers to the person who can play them like a fiddle and give them a false sense of belonging.

The key is to humiliate that person before the crowd using his own words to do it.

The crowd then turns on him and follows the strong horse/new Alpha.

You do not have to BE an Alpha. Just play one on TV. And as a conservative plugged in to the factual reality of the world around you, you are pre-equipped to do it.

You just need to ‘do it’.