Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lib Convert Caller to Rush Limbaugh Show Sheds Light (Bush vs Clinton)
Rush Limbaugh Radio Program | self

Posted on 10/10/2002 11:41:05 AM PDT by thedugal

A caller to the Rush Limbaugh show who described himself as a lifetime partisan democrat has been turned from the darkside. During the course of the call, Rush grilled the guy, asking what made him change his mind. The caller first pointed out that Al Gore was committing fraud in Florida. Rush pushed him as to why this matters, he said the law. Rush then kept pressing him on Clinton. After all, if this guy is concerned about the law, certainly Clinton should have bothered him more than Gore.

At that point, the guy got very defensive. It was as if he was right back on the darkside as a useful idiot. He said he thought it was just politics. He thought the republicans were trying to shut down government. He thought the charges against Clinton were purely political. This shift from fresh new republican to die hard liberal democrat was instantaneous at the mention of Clinton's name. He made a few more excuses and basically evaded Rush's onslaught of questions until the conversation shifted.

At some point in the conversation, (Rush was really shooting questions at this guy so it shifted to and fro), the guy blurts out 911. Bush showed strong leadership after 911, to paraphrase, I believe the guy said "He became a president" (whatever the heck that means). At this point, it hit me like a baseball between the eyes. Proper analysis of this caller can get the republicans a few extra percentage points and start to take back our country.

Here's a few points:

OK, now a lot of this stuff may seem obvious, but there are never ending posts shouting about Clinton. Also conservatives rely too much on facts and logic. They don't work on democrats nearly as well as feelings. So, rather than saying "If Bill Clinton had accepted Sudan's offer to turn over OBL, 911 probably never would have happened." One might say something along the lines of, "Don't you feel that Bush's actions since 911 have made the country more safe."


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Free Republic; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; clinton; liberals; limbaugh; rush
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last
To: thedugal
Also conservatives rely too much on facts and logic. They don't work on democrats nearly as well as feelings.

I had a conversation with a dem 2 nights ago. She objected to the new bumper sticker I put on my car "Proud member of the vast right wing conspiracy." I explained Hilary Clinton came up with that phrase. She credited Clinton with welfare reform and cited the number of people she knew personally that had benefited from it. She's a former revenue specialist for FL, collecting payments from dads to single mothers.

I explained how Clinton had vetoed that same legislation over and over again, and that it came from the Republican Revolution. She did not beleive me. I told her we could not have a discussion until she read the passage in Newt's book published in 1995- "To Renew America" where he outlines everything she liked about the reform, that the Impeached Rapist did not sign 'til his second term.

She left my house in a snit. She feels that she is a very "intuitive" person, and she intuitively knows that I must be wrong. She told me Clinton had never been impeached. Not only that, but she doesn't want to have to try to keep up with current events- not that her admitted ignorance will keep her out of the voting booth. And that my use of facts to back up my argument robbed me of my "Joi de Vivre" (She has a B.A. from Vanderbilt). I was suddenly just another angry Republican to her.

You know, the McBride-Rossin debate was on tonight, and Rossin kept using the phrase- we must not be living in the same state...and it's true. I live in Florida and dems live in a state of denial...of reality.

I know Rush talks to these people to be provokative but truly- except for entertainment value "Only a fool argues with a fool."

41 posted on 10/10/2002 6:33:21 PM PDT by Dutchgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dutchgirl
I explained how Clinton had vetoed that same legislation (welfare reform) over and over again.

Clinton finally signed on to welfare reform only when the political windsock held by Carville and his ilk dictated that this was a popular position among the American people. When it was successful, of course he took all the credit for it. And his supporters gave him all the credit for it. I guess Hillary will get credit for a successful war effort in Iraq, now that she's signed on in favor of it (after ten million focus groups and polls told her which side of the question to be on.) Can democrats spell "core values." I didn't think so.

42 posted on 10/10/2002 6:44:51 PM PDT by TruthShallSetYouFree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: thedugal
...Hoorah! Rush is right! To hell with the issues, to hell with debate! Up the party, and the party line!

...?...

...pathognomonic...

43 posted on 10/10/2002 6:49:57 PM PDT by gargoyle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thedugal
thedugal ... you are hitting on to a great insight here.

People dont change their mind based on a few facts. rather they pick and choose and interpret facts based on what they already believe.

It takes a BIG SHOCK to change mind sets and beliefs.

what you are saying here is that 911 was that shock. The "clinton mind-set" goes all the way back to 1992: "it's the economy stupid", as long as clinton kept the prosperity, we'd ignore his personal and political ransgressions (at least the case for non-freeper). Nothing GOP could do to shake that. But 9-11 has changed how people think about politics now.

The Clinton era is now HISTORY ... 9-11 was an exclamation point to the late 90s bubble and era of Complacency. You are correct to assert that minds wont be changed about that era. people who lived through made up their minds along the way. So let's focus on now and the future. We have a great advantage with Bush and his good leadership and high poll ratings.

44 posted on 10/10/2002 7:01:21 PM PDT by WOSG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gargoyle
...Hoorah! Rush is right! To hell with the issues, to hell with debate! Up the party, and the party line!

If you are stupid enough to think that is what he said then you are dumber then a box of hammers. You're wrong. So wrong.

If you were any further in left field you would be in the bleachers. Heck, you would not even be in the same state as the ball park.

a.cricket

45 posted on 10/10/2002 7:16:53 PM PDT by another cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Dutchgirl
Sound bites. I think most liberals and a huge chunk of the general population, including your dem friend respond to sound bites. It matters not if these slogans are created by the media or the James Carville's of the left. The Dems who form policy know this, which explains their use of "talking points" for all who go before the media. To ask more of them would have them choose listening to the President rather than watching the Fear Factor. One is easy and requires no intellectual or moral discernment. If the sound bite resonants with them, they need no facts or logic to back up their "feeling". In fact, a lot of liberals just get angrier and louder when you try to discuss facts and logic with them. Clinton and his enablers were and are the masters of the sound bite. Conservatives are not very well adept at using them but I think we could get a lot better at it, even though it would be difficult because we do not have control of the mainstream media.
46 posted on 10/10/2002 7:42:42 PM PDT by Kangaroo Court
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC
"People who need people like Barbra Streisand are the unluckiest people in the world".

LOL!!! Thanks, I love a good show tune!!!

47 posted on 10/10/2002 7:52:51 PM PDT by dittomom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: another cricket
If you are stupid enough to think that is what he said then you are dumber then a box of hammers. You're wrong. So wrong. If you were any further in left field you would be in the bleachers. Heck, you would not even be in the same state as the ball park.

Yeah! You'd be in the left field bleachers in a ballpark in a whole different state - stupidly using your teeth to pull the nails out of the wrong side of a box of stupid hammers.

a.wiseguy

48 posted on 10/10/2002 7:54:49 PM PDT by SteelTrap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: =Intervention=
Did Thomas Paine use logic or emotion? How about Washington? C'mon y'all...the whole point is to fuse both into an unstoppable argument.

You'll note I never said lie to dems. I never said, be illogical. I never said only use emotion void of anything else. What I said is that logic doesn't work to change the minds of people who base their fundamentals on feelings.

This is why an example like "Don't you feel Bush's actions since 911 have made the country more safe" works. It is founded on fact. You can back it up with facts, logic and reason, but it is the initial impact of the emotion which will give the opening for the rest of the argument. Until you get a democrat off the "yeah but republicans are mean" modus operandi, any discussion with them will be fruitless (although often fruity).

49 posted on 10/10/2002 8:09:36 PM PDT by thedugal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay
The KNEE JERK defense of Clinton by liberals is pure and simple human nature... they were wrong, they know they were wrong, he scammed them, he played them like cheap fiddles. No one wants to admit, particularly on a matter so near to them as who they believe in politically, that they were wrong and duped, its just human nature. More often than not when a major mistake is made by a person, they are far more apt to defend that mistake, than simply admit they were wrong, because generally they just can't face the fact that all those around them telling them so were right... could they have possibly blown it so bad?... its hard to admit it, and most people will go out of their way than face reality of being so abjectively wrong.

Absolutely on target.

Here's one of my favorite "great quotes" which makes the same point:

"I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives."
- Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy (1828-1910)

50 posted on 10/10/2002 10:46:08 PM PDT by Dan Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dark_lord

Hey Democrats, I got your feelings right here.........................


51 posted on 10/11/2002 6:31:06 AM PDT by Lockbox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: narby
Along the same lines as what you are saying (emotion AND logic), perhaps an old sales trick could help. When confronted with an objection (to anything really), it is a proven successful tactic that if the person making the "sale" says, "I understand how you feel, I (or other people) felt the same way once, but let me show you what I (or they, i.e. the other people) found. Then follow with a logical argument.

feel,felt, found (easy to remember). Kind of transitions emotion (feel, felt) into logic (found). Try it, it seems to work.

52 posted on 10/11/2002 7:43:39 AM PDT by cmak9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: thedugal
Your observation regarding logic is correct. Unfortunately we tend to think that if we make a sound logical argument we will win. However most people simply do not make decisions based on logic.

To win we need to combine the logic of our ideas with emotional appeals.

53 posted on 10/11/2002 11:05:05 AM PDT by Check_Your_Premises
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cmak9
Along the same lines as what you are saying (emotion AND logic), perhaps an old sales trick could help. When confronted with an objection (to anything really), it is a proven successful tactic that if the person making the "sale" says, "I understand how you feel, I (or other people) felt the same way once, but let me show you what I (or they, i.e. the other people) found. Then follow with a logical argument.

This is better than trying to bash them on the head, but there's another way that works even better still: rather than arguing about the past or present, argue about what you think a person is likely to do in future. Tell the sheeple than you think XX is likely to do some despicable act YY. They'll argue that he wouldn't possibly do such a thing. At that point, don't argue with them. Just say "Who knows, maybe he won't." Wait while they watch the person they just said wouldn't do something heinous do that exact thing. Once that happens, don't rub it in, but be prepared to make future 'predictions'.

This approach has two big benefits: (1) Since they're expecting their 'hero' to do the right thing, they're unprepared for him not to. Indeed, the more certain they are that he'll do the right thing, the greater the shock when he betrays them. Tne shock, however, is inflicted by their hero, not by you. (2) If you can make predictions about their hero's actions better than they can, they may decide that you know more about their "hero" than they do. This may lead them to start to trust your judgements of their "hero", though you need to tread carefully here to avoid having them put up their defenses again.

54 posted on 10/11/2002 6:02:01 PM PDT by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: thedugal
Probably a good point about Clowntoon. As much as I love to hammer on him (he deserves it), many Democrats really want to believe that he stands for something they care about (Not sure what), so, since he's more or less history, it's probably best not to dwell on his impeachment when talking to doubting Lefties, because they've been conditioned by the media and the WH Rapist to think bad things about Republicans when you do. Many Lefties seem more willing to discuss his dishonesty, hypocrisy and other weaknesses, IAC.
55 posted on 10/11/2002 10:21:57 PM PDT by Post Toasties
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rhombus
This "I think" vs. "I feel" distinction is critical.

Bill Clinton's one trademark, other than his ability to lie and evade the laws of this land, is his ability to emote. With a certain percentage of the people, he is able to maintain a stranglehold on that part of the brain which can, when massaged at the right speed, turn every neuron in the reasoning sector of the brain to a jiggling bowl of jello.

It could best be described as 'mental assault'.

56 posted on 10/12/2002 8:48:32 AM PDT by Slyfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dark_lord
All people, from childhood, start out as "feeling-based" thinkers. We cry when we feel bad and we giggle when we feel good. At infancy we are all liberals in this sense. We base our decisions on the way we feel about our environment. But soon enough we are educated (if we have parents who care to do their jobs) to understand that there is reasoning beyond self and emotions. With proper schooling we become more reflective and less reflexive. If we gain wisdom through experiance and heed wise council. We shed our feelings-based thinking and adopt a more intelect-based opinion making process into our lives. Only those who refuse to so grow up remain in their infantile liberal state beyond their formative years.
57 posted on 10/12/2002 3:12:28 PM PDT by cartoonistx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: thedugal
Thanks for the post I too heard this caller. Rush handled it well.

I'm with you...liberals, dems, or converts have a blind side when it comes to Clinton. They just don't get it..probably never will. It was the perjury, stupid! I'm sorry...some old habits die hard. So..keep the focus on Bush and what the administration is successfully doing.

Go Bush

Red

58 posted on 10/12/2002 3:21:28 PM PDT by Conservative4Ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thedugal
You are so right about the emotional vs. logic difference between conservatives and liberals. My ultra-liberal, gay SIL loved everything about Clinton, but after 9-11, she practically swooned over the way Bush handled the crisis. It was 100% emotion on her part. I'm not fooled, though. Bring up any other topic (abortion, homeschooling, etc.) and she jumps right back on that tired old liberal wagon. Oh well. I married her brother who is 100x brighter than she'll ever be. (They're fraternal twins -- go figure.)
59 posted on 10/12/2002 11:53:47 PM PDT by ChocChipCookie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC
LOL - good one!
60 posted on 10/13/2002 1:37:46 AM PDT by NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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