Arguing with a liberal *UPDATED*
Bookworm on Oct 12 2009 at 11:36 am | Filed under: Democrats
‘Cause we’re all reading of the same stuff, I suspect many of you are already familiar with the fact that, when journalist Phelim McAleer asked Al Gore an inconvenient question about climate change, his fellow journalists turned off his mic. After all, the best way to deal with inconvenient facts is to ignore them.
I got a dose of this myself this weekend when one of my facebook friends opened up a discussion about Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize. Even those who most strongly approved had to concede that he really hadn’t done anything yet. Nevertheless, they posted mountains of obfuscatory, polysyllabic words about his promise and his symbolism and his goodness and the intelligence of the American people in voting for him. They were also all adamant that the objections to Obama’s win “were political.”
I made two simple points. First, I said that the Nobel Peace has traditionally been given to people who have actually done something already, so that, even if people objected to the prize on “political” grounds, there could be no complaint about accomplishments. I politely suggested, therefore, that it made the award less meaningful to give it to someone who, as they themselves acknowledged, hadn’t done anything. I was resoundingly, almost aggressively ignored. Second, I pointed out that if it’s sufficient to get the Nobel Peace Prize just because one hopes for peace, we all should get one. Again, silence.
I found it interesting that no one even bothered to attack my points. I felt as if my mic was cut off. I was the snake in their little Garden of Eden, and if they covered their ears and their eyes, maybe I would just go away.
The flip side to ignoring substantive arguments, of course, is to engage in personal attacks. Even Politco has noticed how incredibly crude Obama’s supporters are. This doesn’t come as a surprise to us, of course. Already back in 2006, I did a post noting the Democrats’ vocal scatalogical obsessions. If you’re the Party of Poop, that’s what you’re going to fling when your back is against the wall. And, after only nine months in office, the Party of Poop is, almost impressively, squeezed tightly against the wall. The only thing left for a trapped rat is attack. Heck, even Kruschev knew this: When all us fails, pound the table. And when you’ve cut off the mic and ignored the facts, and people are still arrayed against you, it’s time for fecal material to fly.
UPDATE: Although sometimes, and rather amusingly, the obscenities come from the other side.
Email This Post To A Friend
21 Responses to “Arguing with a liberal *UPDATED*”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Bookworm –
I believe the reason there was such resounding silence in response to your posts is because the leftists know that any attempt to dispute your points would simply highlight the absurdity of their arguments.
Your points were straight-forward and accurate. They know it. They can’t refute it. So, as you say, they shut off the mics, refuse to respond, change the subject, and act as if your points were never made. They must move on to something else.
Deana
The vulgarity and crudeness of so many “progressives” is one of the factors that continues to make me think these people are psychologically closer to Fascism than to socialism/Marxism.
David Foster: Speaking of fascism, do you remember the professor who, during a sixties campus shutdown, read passages from the speeches of Mussolini to crowds of students who wildly cheered him until he told them who they were by? (Sorry I cannot remember the professor’s name.)
Bookie,
You are just angry because the President is black.
Book, regarding “If you’re the Party of Poop, that’s what you’re going to fling when your back is against the wall.” Given that poop throwing is a habit practiced by many ape species, such as orangutans and chimpanzees, is it correct to surmise that perhaps these intellectual giants on the Left simply climbed down from the trees a bit later than our own ancestors? Just askin’.
David Foster – communists and Marxists are not fascist?
The fact that they didn’t answer meant they didn’t have an answer–if you present something easily rebutted, they’ll go for it with tongs.
CDR Salamander (#4): Seraphic Secret has the perfect cartoon for your statement.
It’s bizarre. I always thought I was class-ist and values-ist. It’s come as quite a shock to me to learn that, all this time, I’ve been a racist. I can live with it, though. I’m strong.
Danny (#5): You may be on to something there, because there is something remarkably scatalogical about the Left’s way of thinking. Ironic, really, when one considers that they’re the most ardent of Darwinists.
Speaking as a racist, imagine how much more of one I’d be if Obama were totally black instead of half.
Bookie,
Oh, I’ll use that!
Danny…”communists and Marxists are not fascist?” I really need to do an extended post on the relationship/differences between these movements. While there is a great deal of overlap, there are also some real differences.
Basically, Marxism is a bastard child of the Enlightenment, whereas Fascism is counter-Enlightenment. Fascism is also more concerned with aesthetics than Marxism.
Aldous Huxley:
“In the field of politics the equivalent of a theorem is a perfectly disciplined army; of a sonnet or picture, a police state under a dictatorship. The Marxist calls himself scientific and to this claim the Fascist adds another: he is the poet–the scientific poet–of a new mythology. Both are justified in their pretensions; for each applies to human situations the procedures which have proved effective in the laboratory and the ivory tower. They simplify, they abstract, they eliminate all that, for their purposes, is irrelevant and ignore whatever they choose to regard an inessential; they impose a style, they compel the facts to verify a favorite hypothesis, they consign to the waste paper basket all that, to their mind, falls short of perfection…the dream of Order begets tyranny, the dream of Beauty, monsters and violence.”
The Nobel Peace Prize is in itself a political award given out by carefully selected individuals chosen by the Swedish political set.
If they think the NPP is some divine inheritance title of sanctity, they need to understand that their religion is not immune to sacrilege or heresy. And that their natural reaction of the Inquisition does not make them superior to Christianity’s history, in their eyes.
Correction, Norwegian rather than Swedish.
Book — The picture you link to in your update is PERFECT! I’m sending it to all my friends — especially the liberals.
Like you, whenever I’ve tried to engage liberals in a discussion about any of the issues we are dealing with these days, I get either silence or ad hominem, some of it vulgar and vicious, but never a reasoned response.
My sainted grandmother always said, “Consider the source,” which got me thinking: What is the source of poop? Well, it ain’t the chewing end, so I guess these people have identified themselves as the other end of the digestive track.
The discussion reminded me of going into a dress shop once upon a time.
I must have tried on a half dozen, not really liking any of them and realizing none looked well on me either. The owner, anxious to make a sale, insisted the last two looked really fabulous on me and that I should make a decision, since they were on sale and they probably wouldn’t be in the shop the next time.
I left the store, I knew b.s. and a sales pitch to satisfy their cash register when I heard it.
I think your friends bought the dress on sale with a NO RETURN POLICY.
highlander
“Consider the source”
I use one very close to your sainted grandmother -
Consider the *tsoris!
*trouble
What I find amazing is how often the libs will regularly denounce us as racist (even though I’m Chinese, as if only the blacks are discriminated against) and against the poor and against the dispossessed… and yet, they also regularly show off incredible amounts of anti-Israel hatred.
It really gets my goat that of all the countries of the world, the Left can justify the existence of…
-the former USSR, ruled by Commies and KGB strongment-
-Cuba, ruled by a murderous and dying-or-dead autocrat-
-Iran, undergoing the throes of a nascent political revolution and repugnantly repressive towards non-Muslims, gays and women-
-Venezuela, which is headed straight for the crapper due to Chavez being an autocratic moron-
-North Korea, where freedom of *anything* is a joke-
-Red China, which has killed more people than all of WW1+WW2 put together-
and yet they froth at the mouth at the thought of an independent Israel safeguarding its borders.
gkong3
It’s called a liberal menu and only ‘they’ get to pick and choose where the bad guys live.
They were muted during the genocide in Rwanda as well as before, during and after the days of Papa Doc Duvalier. You have to be black, but you have to be American, too. There are rules, you know and Mao is a watch to be worn – it’s cool, so retro.
Why bother with history when you can use hysteria as a tactic. Remember, these are the people who sail the Good Ship Lollipop when they travel. I doubt any of them have experienced anything more challenging than waiting for a table at the Cheesecake Factory.
Speaking of the Cheesecake Factory, our local version actually serves up a decent, generously portioned Cobb salad. The crab cakes aren’t too bad, either.
Some more Leftist stuff
I hope there are some good surprises in there for entertainment value, at least.
It’s a collation post about how the Left argues. And why I often say that it doesn’t matter if you agree with me on the particulars, if your epistemology is not compatible with my own.
I’m not arguing with a fake liberals nor even trying to, except in instances where pseudo liberals can be good sources of information via communication protocols.
I got another post scheduled to be written concerning something i got off FR.
>>What I find amazing is how often the libs will regularly denounce us as racist…>>
Here’s how it works: (sort of. If there’s _any_ rationale, that is)
http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2009/10/victimhood-heirarchy-or-leftist-food.html
If you wish to see a particular example of the Left’s food chain, check out my link above.
Never forget that at the bottom of all this, it has to do with power.If power was conferred in this nation based upon who your parents were or how pure your skin color was, the Left would utilize that as the basis for their food chain. As it is, they use numbers because we have votes.