Posted on 08/01/2002 9:59:00 AM PDT by NC Conservative
Does she vote?!
Not to be mean here, but "blissful ignorance" should not be empowered...and listening to C-Span in the a.m. makes me nuts sometimes! I've got to stop talking back to the TV, but honestly, when their facts are inaccurate or selective, and half of them call in on the wrong line, well, that's just my own opinion (?) and I hope they're happy, but I hope the misguided and the devious don't take over the country!!! (notice I didn't say these folks are stupid...!) /rant
Most Excellent!!!
That one will go in my bag for future use for sure!
I agree, but some people are lost causes, at least to verbal persuasion. The only hope is to SHOW them the way and hope their eyes are open enough to recognize it. I'd be wasting my time and breath to argue with her. She actually said that there's no such thing as good and evil, but that it's only as we define it. I asked her "So you're saying that Hitler was not necessarily evil?" and she responded "Only if some see him that way." While she has a point in an abstract sense, I cannot abide this thinking in practice. It sounds like an excuse to allow all kinds of behavior and not judge it at all. But it gives you an idea of how skewed her thinking is.
Incidentally, I once had a date with a woman who turned out to be a liberal. I asked her, quite calmly, why she supported Clinton, she responded "Women's issues." I retorted, "Does that include the right to be raped and cheated on?"
I didn't get a second date. Nor did I want one.
I quite agree.substitute "Parent" for "conservatism" and "Teenager" for "anticonservatism"
. . . and you have the explanation for my point on "sex education":
What teenagers really need to know about life isn't "sex," it'sHow their parents got to be the way they are, when they used to be pretty similar to what their children are now.
I often do something like that. I admit "the element of truth" in their argument, but then point out the falsity in it. Nobody believes a 100% lie; there is always a small element of truth in their arguments. When I honestly acknowledge that small element of truth, then they see that I am "objective" and "smart", and then they seem to be a little bit more open to when I proceed to point out the shortcomings of their argument (like 95% of it).
However, this approach only works on people who are somewhat open to hearing a rational presentation. It seems to me that most Libs just don't want to be confronted with the facts, no matter how tactfully they are presented. when I run into those type, then I don't waste my time or emotional energy. They are beyond hope.
Now, that's the right approach.
As numerous others have pointed out, it's useless to try to argue with a Lieberal, since they can't reason, and are entirely viscerally driven. But there are various tactics - some of which have already been suggested - which do work. The underlying premise in all cases, though, is to do something to throw the the Lieberal off balance - such as asking it an uncomfortable question per the example above.
In pointing out a Lieberal's inherently contradictory views - not by attempting to argue with it, which, again, is a waste of time since it cannot reason, but in a visceral manner, its world view can be disrupted - sometimes permanently. Bringing the (inevitably present) hypocrisy of its own behavior to its attention is always a good tactic. I heard of one story in which a woman who was passionately arguing for animal rights was literally thrown into a weeks-long episode of depression by the statement, "But you kill cockroaches in your kitchen, don't you?".
My favorite example I found on one of the firearms mailing lists long ago, to wit: When confronted with a Lieberal female arguing for gun control, just *agree* with her, in the following manner: "Really, I agree with you. I think all guns should be banned. If me and my buddies decide to have a little fun with some woman we find out alone at night, we sure as hell don't want her surprising us with a gun when we decide to grab her". (I've never had occasion to try this, but the effect is reportedly truly gratifying to behold).
Or... in the same vein, one can turn their rhetoric against them. Ask them if they believe homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to carry guns to defend themselves against "queer-bashers" - then, if they respond in the affirmative, accuse them of being opposed to "empowering minorities...". Posing such a dilemma for a Lieberal will usually cause the two brain cells of which the more gifted among them are possessed, to start bashing each other to death inside the vast, cavernous cranial vaults of their possessors, producing sounds which are music, music to my ears...
I asked him if he got a good deal on his motorcycle. He said he bought it new and he had. I asked him how much more he thinks that motorcycle would have cost if the company that sold it to him had to pay more taxes.
Of course, he still did not understand.
I told him, many things go into the cost of his motorcycle, labor, raw material, management salaries, and profit. They all add up to determine the sell price. And so does taxes.
You don't think, I said, that that bad company is just going to absorb the new taxes and not raise the price of your motorcycle do you? So, when you say you want more corporate taxes, what you are really saying is you want the price of your motorcycle to go up.
I don't think he ever figured it out but I could see he was quite perplexed as he put on his helmit, then scratched his head and rode off.
He might have added in Congress to that list.
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.