It takes a village to talk to a liberal.
I don’t have time to write much today so instead, I will let you do it. I got this email last night from a reader:
I’m a former liberal who’s made a difficult transformation to a conservative…I’m hopeful that you’ll consider a post on how a conservative can deal with liberals, in the situation that the liberals are loving and caring family members. Any advice? On how to make a point while remaining civil, and un-excommunicated?
Oy. Frankly, I have a hard time keeping political discussions friendly because I just get so pissed off when the person who’s trying to “debate” me doesn’t even watch or read the news, which is the case with almost every liberal in my life. I always end up saying something snotty like, “Jesus Christ, if you don’t even know the facts, why are you arguing with someone who does? I will destroy you!” Maybe not that last part but it’s what I’m thinking.
When I do wish to keep it civil and productive, my technique is to just lay out the data I’m familiar with (such as when an anti-conceal-carry liberal needs to be informed of the actual facts about crime rates in conceal-carry areas), and know when to end the discussion when it starts going down the ugly road.
So, how about you? I know plenty of my conservative readers have liberal loved ones and there must be a wealth of experience on this subject amongst you.
I have actually found myself simply shaking my head in disgust at the religiously-fanatical way that many liberals will hold onto their “faith” that their candidate is right, no matter what the evidence says. I have been forced to walk away or simply laugh in their general direction. Every once in a while… VERY rarely… I can simply wait for them to run out of breath and then say the words “where do the numbers come from” or “prove it” and it throws them off into a tail-spin of spewing invectives about how I’ll never understand because I’m “closed-minded”.
Nicki, on the other hand, goes for the throat. It’s fun to watch…
August 1st, 2008 at 11:13 amESTI dunno, it depends on the liberal… some people consider themselves liberals because it gives them warm fuzzies and they don’t really think about it, when confronted with facts you can sometimes get them to change their mind.
On the other hand, there are people who are immune to logic and/or facts that don’t agree with the narrative, and there is basically no way to remain on civil social terms with them while being open about your conservative beliefs (most annoying of all, they will often frequently spout off on issues they have no clue on, but if you try to add in your side, they will become very offended). With these ones you basically have to choose between biting your tongue when you are around them, or give up socializing with them.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:16 amESTTry having a conversation with a liberal who’s been drinking and doesn’t even realize he’s a closet conservative.
Good times.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:27 amESTDepends on the liberal. If they’re reasonably polite and willing to deal with me like, y’know, the friend or loved one that I am, I settle for relentless and unending sourced reasonableness.
This has not so much changed my liberal friends’ minds about being liberal (though I AM proud to say I’ve gotten most of them to think twice when they see other liberals getting hysterical over something), so much as it’s changed their minds about how worthwhile trying to argue with ME is.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:30 amESTHere’s what I do. I keep my mouth shut. I let people know I’m conservative, but beyond that, nothing.
I help them when they need it, I do things for them when I can, and show them by example what a real conservative is.
About once or twice a year, I get people who will say to me “if all Conservatives were like you, I’d have no problem with them” to which I respond “They are”.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:32 amESTI find this amusing, albeit extremely condescending. Most of the people I work with are conservatives and they know that if they forward me some BS email, I’ll pull facts that disprove it and email it back.
So apparently I’m a liberal that can back up what I say.
But you all don’t seem to mind me too much. Then again, I did make sure to shower this morning.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:33 amESTMy soultion is easy. I don’t do it. They either come around themselves or they don’t. You can buy people all the books you want, but some are just going to insist on chewing on the covers.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:39 amESTI find that some of the more flamboyant liberals have a discussion technique where they snort and mutter contemptuously under their breath to indicate how unbelievable my ignorance is. This is usually in response to a statement I make that they can’t agree with as a point of their faith, as in “things are really working out in post-surge Iraq.” My technique for coping with this is to tell them point-blank “I don’t need your insulting and patronizing contempt; if you disagree with me, say it, and tell me why.” This usually shames them into entering a real discussion.
Also I’ve discovered that there are some issues or perspectives which are irreconcilable between liberals and conservatives. For example, liberals generally applaud high gas prices because “people will stop driving their cars more,” and they themselves are all self-righteous about living downtown where they can walk everywhere and ride their bike to work. When I explain that middle-class people with families often can’t afford housing in areas serviced by mass transit or can’t practically transport their families on a bike, and therefore really need a car and reasonable gas prices, we end up agreeing to disagree. And the first person who states that clearly–”well, I just can’t accept that these unreasonably high gas prices are good and it sounds like you can, so let’s just leave it at that”–usually comes off as the more reasonable.
Hope that helps!
August 1st, 2008 at 11:42 amESTI used to think I was a liberal until about eight years ago in my early thirties. I started seeing how liberalism is really just veiled socialism, then about six months after 9/11, I realized for good that it had nothing to offer and reevaluated my values. I’m not a hard core Bible thumping conservative, but a bit right of libertarian.
As far as talking to them, logic and facts don’t alway work and a lot of times they’ll try make an emotional argument out of the conversation to get you heated up and say something to contradict yourself. Remember, “Never argue with an idiot. They’ll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”
August 1st, 2008 at 11:42 amESTI had a chance earlier this year to join a symposium on race in America at St. John’s College in Santa Fe. While the liberal/conservative ratio was something like five-to-one, I found the discussions to be frank, open, and polite. But then you need to understand that the participants were all highly educated people, philosophically grounded, but not strictly ideological. Liberals tend to believe that government can and should provide solutions to our social problems. The conservative position was that government solutions rarely improve the situation, in fact, usually exacerbate them. Both sides expressed disagreement without being disagreeable.
Nevertheless, there is nothing to be gained by discussing issues with ignorant people. Absent a philosophical basis for discussion, all you get from the other side is opinion. Throw emotion into the mix and the discussion is reduced to rancor. How do you change how someone “feels” about an issue? You can’t. A mind is a difficult thing to change, but the heart impossible to change.
The only solution is to educate the young in reason and logic. I do it everyday in the classroom, but I’m a distict minority as teachers go. The NEA has forced an educational curriculum on this country that is emotional and therapeutic. But then, the NEA is a political wing of the Democratic Party. Their purpose is the pursuit of power. Conservatives distrust power, which is why we insist on limited government. This divide in our outlook partially explains why the Republican Party is smaller than the Democratic Party. Conservatives are more likely to distrust their own. It’s why today I am officially a mugwump.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:47 amESTI try hard to not be discouraged when talking to liberals (I am NOT a conservative.) I consider interaction with liberals a success if I can just plant a few seeds of doubt.
One of the most effective way of sowing doubt in a liberal is to point out how MEAN their policies are. No matter how well-intentioned any government program is, it is ultimately conducted with the use (or threat of) brute force. Someone somewhere will be forced to comply, or forced to pay for it, or usually both.
Another method is to point out what I call Liberal Conceit. I grant that most true liberals are generally smarter than most true conservatives. Liberals typically make better life choices, including becoming better educated. But there is a huge difference between making optimal choices in one’s own life, and making optimal choices for everyone else. Plus, they conveniently fail to consider the costs of enforcing their decisions in light of the perceived benefits.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:48 amESTGlad to know I have company here. It has become increasingly difficult to have political conversations with many of my liberal friends because none of them seems to be familiar with the issues. I try to be polite by avoiding political topics myself, but my liberal friends often interject really stupid pronouncements into casual conversations. (Why do so many liberals seem convinced that everybody shares their views?)
It definitely strains the relationships and the amount of time I wish to spend with these friends. I don’t force my ideas on others, and I can’t help feeling offended when they try to force their beliefs on me.
Thank heavens for blogs such as yours, Rachel, where there are intelligent and spirited discussions without too much rancor.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:51 amESTI have yet to debate a liberal that thought, or would admit, that they didn’t have facts on their side. “Concealed carry laws mean more gun violence! That’s common sense and every study proves it!” I’ll usually respond by saying “You send me your links and I’ll send you mine.” and leave it at that. I have buried people with links to all of the information that makes me skeptical of global warming. They go unread. My default setting is usually not to get drawn into the debate in the first place. It never seems worth it. If I “win” the debate, I’ve still pissed off a friend or relative. I tend to agree with og: just plant seeds, respond when asked, and lead by example.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:57 amESTI don’t bother trying to win the argument or even attempt to show them a different point of view. I just smile and say “it’s cute that you think that.”
August 1st, 2008 at 11:59 amESTWow. Liberals and conservatives have the same complaints about each other.
I sat with my conservative inlaws last months, and my SIL tried her whole “Barack Obama is going to take money from us and give it to all the poor”, you know, because her husband makes six-figures, she collects SSD fraudulently, and she still works doing consulting on musical instruments. Then when I commented on MI being truly up for grabs in the election, it could go red or blue, she said, “What do you mean, red or blue?”
So again, it’s heartening to know there are asshats on both sides of the aisle.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:59 amESTI’ll tend to drop in the occasional question about basic principle: “If you really own that, can’t you do with it as you please?” “Are you doing a good deed by helping the poor, if you’re forced to do it at gunpoint?” “So if me and Johnny steal your money and give it to the homeless shelter, that’s OK?” “If it’s your body when you’re pregnant, how come it isn’t your body when you want to eat fries?” Just drop ‘em in; don’t belabor the point.
ALWAYS argue on principle. Facts are nice, and you should always have them, but a pragmatic argument is inherently weak.
Being normal, and one of many helps. I have a singer friend who was just AGHAST at guns. He got into a big debate with me about gun control, and went to whine to his other composer buddy about it. Unbeknown to either of us, this guy was 10x the gun nut I’d ever think to be (reloader, sporterized old Arisakas in his shop) and said the same stuff to him that I did. He had to at least consider it then.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:00 pmESTI’m with the previous poster who said it depends on the kind of liberal. With my fanatical college-student younger cousins, I don’t even try; just stick to “So long as everybody pays attention, we’ll all be just fine, even if we disagree”. Because there’s no use arguing with them, they’ll either come around or they won’t on their own.
With my hippie sister in law and old-blue dem mother in law, both of whom are hardcore lefties and both of whom have a pretty good idea what they’re talking about, I’ve found that we can usually come to a point of agreement. And I’ve found this, in individual conversations, with practically anybody I’ve talked to that is a reasonable, knowledgeable person: no matter who we’re voting for, we can usually reach a point of agreement. We may disagree on some of the details, but somewhere between Rush Limbaugh and Michael Moore there is a real center of reason that most thinking people, lacking media attention, can come to.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:04 pmESTYou can try it at (wizbangblue blog)
I’d love for Rachel and her brilliant fans to head over there and have a go.
[Sorry MH, I had to edit that because I don't want my site showing up on their referral tracker thus resulting in them infesting ME. It's like MightySam said, it's too much like what those atheists did to me a few months back. I don't want any interaction with that sort of situation ever again. Ugh. - Rachel
August 1st, 2008 at 12:05 pmESTOn a past OReilly Factor, Whoopi Goldberg spoke for ALL liberals when she rejected the use of facts in an argument. They(facts)have no purpose, she said as it’s all about how she FEELS. No shit.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:07 pmESTHopeChange
If you want to share and communicate with people who seek out political dialogue, the blogs are the best place. I express myself online, then am a sane person through the other parts of my day, i.e. I do not seek out political discussion with those who do not themselves seek it.
If you nevertheless enter discussion with a person of the left: keep the mutally agreed conversational focus on the mutual search for truth.
You will usually find the left-side person is premising their argument on “facts” which you do not believe to be facts at all. Reinforce, again and again, “let us both search for the truth of this matter”, then try to find underlying facts and premises you both can agree on. This will be a big job. Such conversation often will not move beyond discussion of what are the underlying facts and premises. This is proper, as the next level of conversation requires an actual foundation.
In our society, fact is up for grabs. The media/left believe in “facts” which you will generally consider to be lies(i.e. stolen election of 2000, Bush lied people died, Scooter Libby outed Valerie Plame). Focus on agreed upon fact. Only then move to opinion. The left person will usually view the conversation as a threatening (to their self-identity as a virtuous person) contest of virtue vs. evil. You redefine and re-inforce that the conversation is a mutual search for truth - which it is(!), which is a good thing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you get to opinion, repeatedly re-inforce that you hope the left side person will understand why you, and other rightys, hold the opinions you hold. Such understanding is valuable to the left person: understanding the right can only help them in the future.
Never have as a goal for a left person to suddenly, publicly agree with you. Merely give them something to think about, later, in privacy, to do with it as they wish.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Never discuss Iraq. Everyone’s view of Iraq is colored by their perception of the threat the U.S. faces from the Middle East. Everyone’s perception of that threat is different, and therefore everyone advocates strategy to meet the threat they personally perceive. The proper discussion is a sharing of views about what constitutes the threat our nation faces. I will say, however, of the maybe 20 times I’ve invited that conversation, either online or in person, maybe only 5 times has my conversational partner actually entertained the question. Most of the time, the thought we might face any threat whatsoever does not compute.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:08 pmESTThe key to debating a liberal is to sink to his level. All of their opinions start with “I feel” while most of ours begin with “I know”. When you are presenting your facts versus their “feelings”, just start making up absurd things and starting them with “I feel”. Pretty soon (and not nearly as soon as you’d think) they begin to realize that they are being made fun of and they ask you why you are doing that.
Just tell them that if they want to debate facts, we can debate facts–but if they insist on comparing feelings, then we can do that too.
They usually walk away but at least you spare yourself that condescending “we’ll have to agree to disagree” that liberals always use to end arguments that they’ve lost.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:08 pmESTBrooke: I have no issues with Liberals that can back up their arguements with facts and are logical and detailed. The ones that I want to punch in the heads are the ones that claim to be open minded then say crap like “All Conservatives/Republicans are evil, greedy and selfish.” Or the ones that don’t know your policial affilation and start spewing about how they want to kill the president, how stupid americans are and how they are against the war… because either they are looking for validation in their beliefs or they are trying to pick a fight. I have yet to run into a conservative like that at work. But I know that my experiences don’t encompass all.
My momma used to tell me that there were two subjects that people didn’t discuss in polite company - religion and politics. If only that were still true (if it really ever was…)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:10 pmESTI have the same problem that Wachel has expressed, and though I used to try civil, reasoned, logical progression of thought, over the decades I have found it (almost always) to be a waste of effort, and severely stressful to boot.
Liberalism is an emotion-driven *feeling*…It has ZILCH to do with anything resembling logic (except in the laborious twists of self-justification required to maintain that self-righteous frame of mind liberalism is) because the simple observation of its results, alone, everywhere/everytime it has been tried, is enough to convince rational being that it is DEEPLY flawed.
The people indoctrinated into the HUMANIST/Moral Equivalence philosophy behind liberalism require a heart-shift, some fundamental upheaval in the core of their souls(usually sparked by catastrophe, or some world-shaking occurrence) to open them to the alternative possibilities never considered in the seeming monolithic weight of opinion backing secular humanism in the culture.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:11 pmESTLiberals are a lot like religious fundamentalists - they believe what they believe on faith, and there are no “facts” that will sway them. This is not universal, but I find that even many educated libs are not well versed on current events, or even 20th century history. When presented with dimple, basic, right out of the encyclopedia facts that run counter to their world view, they tend to dismiss them as just opinion.
University-educated conservatives (especially in the liberal arts) are better at defending their prositions and also are better at dealing with facts and opinions that don’t suit their worldview. Since universities tend to be leftist, libs don’t have to defend their views or deal with a constant barrage of opposing views the way conservatives do. I think this makes conservatives more thick-skinned, as well as more skilled debaters - unfortunately, when one deploys thos skills, one can be accused of being “mean” or using the facts to bully, since the poor little lib just brought a rubber knife to a gun fight.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:12 pmESTFor the record, I do not believe all Conservatives/Republicans are “evil, greedy and selfish” - just my asshat of a sister-in-law, who runs her mouth when she shouldn’t.
Fair enough?
August 1st, 2008 at 12:15 pmESTI did the real age test advertised here again; I had done it a few months ago and it told me that I am 55 yrs old (I’m 28) and that I would die at 53. It was interesting to discover that I had been dead two years and didn’t even know it.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:16 pmESTMmmm I love the smell of fresh Mine Fields early in the morning. Well for us West Coasters anyway. My wife just IMed me, are you the reader who emailed Rachel that question? No dear. That is not me, because I would not classify myself as conservative either. But that is a all together different topic.
When talking to your liberal friends, there are three areas to focus on: 1) Logic, 2) End-to-End analytical thinking and 3) Morality. Forget the data arguments. Forget stats.
1 and 2 are peas in a pod. Take this conversation, for example:
“So you would kill someone who is trying to take your wallet and car keys?”
“Depending on the circumstances, I would shoot them in self-defense, yes.”
“You would kill someone just for some material goods that are insured?”
“No.”
“I don’t get it.”
“A man with a sinister, tweaked look in his eye holding a knife just demands your wallet, watch and car keys, so you hand them over. You decide to do this instead of attempting to draw your sidearm and refusing his request. But let’s take a look at what you are doing. You are handing someone your wallet, with your driver’s license, which has your address on it. You are handing him your car keys. Now he has your address and car. Sure, you call the police. They check out your house. They put a bulletin out for your car. But you’ve just given a felon your address. Pictures of your kids and wife. You are thinking that this violent felon is going to be happy with his goods and leave it at that and you feel better because you didn’t escalate the situation by drawing down on him and saying “No.” But this is not a normal person. You thought that because you pretended to be a the criminal and thought that’s where you would end it. You cannot attribute normal thinking to someone who is going to rob you at knife point. He’s already proven he’s not a normal person.
“So I say again. In some circumstances I would shoot them if they are threatening me after I say “No, you cannot have my wallet.” If you think your hypothetical situation to the possible conclusions, giving a sociopath a look into your life is an exceedingly dangerous situation for your family. Unless someone has the total drop on me because I am a dork and let them get that close, I am not going to give them a window into my life if I can help it. To do so would be an extreme dereliction of my duty as a husband and a father.”
“Oh.”
Liberal thinkers typically employ bad logic simply because no one is engaging them in a one-on-one debate at the very heart of their problematic outlook on life. You can use logic by examining a situation for start to finish for all sorts of topics: the role of government, bad math in schools, taxes, etc. Notice this conversation above did not use statistics or data. It was a exercise in logic, harsh reality and ethics. Most liberal arguments lacks basis in logic and ethics, and thus a conversation with a person you are trying to bring around should attempt to fill in these blanks.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:19 pmESTI need an interpreter to even talk to liberals. I work in advertising and my co-workers are confused by the fact that I am creative, and a conservative. WTF?
August 1st, 2008 at 12:20 pmESTJim Carson said:
?????
Most of the conservatives with whom I’m acquainted are intelligent, educated, responsible, and make good ‘life choices’ by being solvent and trying to live below their means. Just sayin’.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:21 pmESTI describe myself as a ‘classic liberal.’ Which means that I want to strengthen personal liberties, have a strong defense, a conservative economic policy, and believe that things in this country can be changed for the better. Then I discuss specific issues not parties. (I proudly display my political bumper sticker:)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:27 pmESTI like to distract them with something shiny and then whack them over the head with a copy of “Atlas Shrugged”. I’m hoping they’ll learn something by osmosis. So far it hasn’t worked, but I’m going to keep trying because it makes me feel good to be doing something and who knows? If I keep at it long enough maybe one day it will work…probably around the same time that liberalism does. ;o)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:28 pmESTg fresh: “Distract and whack w/Atlas Shrugged”. lol
My first comment was apparently eaten. A second try:
1. Discuss on blogs. Unlike persons in public, persons on blogs want to have the discussion.
2. The lefty’s underlying “facts”/premises usually will not be factual or logical. Rigorously check those “facts”/premises. In our current society, fact is up for grabs. Consider the “facts” underlying these assertions: stolen election of 2000; Bush lied people died; we can save the planet.
3. Conduct a mutual search for truth. Repeatedly reinforce, to the other person, that your mutual conversation is a mutual search for truth.
Remember most leftists conception of their own virtue is tied up with their progressive views. They don’t want to have their virtuous self-conception shaken up or disproven. Therefore, inside a conversation they will be defensive and combative.
Reshape the foundation of the conversation(and repeatedly re-inforce it): This is not me against you. This is two friends conducting a mutual search for truth.
4. Don’t let them get away with a sneering “That opinion is too stupid to merit a reply.” You retort: “Then it should be very easy for you to rebut.”
August 1st, 2008 at 12:30 pmESTAt some point after the Civil War, a former slave remarked: “Tell me where a man gets his corn pone, and I’ll tell you where he gets his opinions.”
Many (not all) liberals and “progressives” are in professions in which a change of political views would be very unhealthy for their future success. Perhaps this knowledge, even at the subconscious level, makes it difficult for them to reassess their opinions.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:30 pmESTI heard this story once, and a couple of years later had an opportunity to use (steal) it to send a young college student off on the short bus to, well, you know.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:38 pmESTI was standing in a circle of friends, including one friends college student daughter. She was in the middle of a liberal rant - probably learned at school - when I interrupted her to ask how things were going acedemically. She said: “Great!, I then asked what her GPA was, she said: “It’s a 3.9. I asked if she had a roomate and how her GPA was, she said: “Oh, all she does is party, party, party! her GPA is barely a 2. So, I suggested she take her roomy, their latest transcripts, and make an appointment with the Dean. I then suggested she tell the Dean she wants to give 1.0 GPA points off hers and give it to her roomy. She freaked out and got all pissed and said it was STUPID! “Why should I? I work my ass off, study hard, work a full time job! And all she does is party and get drunk all the time! I said:”But it would be fair, you’d both come out equal, GPA wise! She said:”That’s stupid! Why should she benefit from my hard work?”
I said: “Welcome to the Republican Party!” I held my hand out to shake hers, she didn’t take my hand. She just kind of stared at me with that “deer in the headlights look”. I got her another beverage(soda), and when I came back with it , she was just standing there, kind of staring off into space. I could almost see her brain working up a sweat. Did it have a permanent effect? I have no idea, haven’t seen her or her Dad since.
First, proximity. Being close to the person you’re arguing with (not TOO close mind you, sitting next to each other is probably enough) will discourage yelling, which will help keep you calm. Arguing from across the room will encourage you to raise your voice and raised voices is the first step to a shouting match. As an added benefit, this tactic also has the same effect on your opponent.
Second, make small concessions. This isn’t the Battle of Thermopylae. You don’t have to stubbornly hold onto every stupid little point. Making small concessions (the key word is small, don’t concede your whole argument) will show your opponent that you’re a reasonable guy. One of the primary reasons why conservatives and liberals disagree so vehemently is that we tend to view the other side as totally unreasonable. Saying things like “I see what you’re saying, but…” or “granted, that is a fair point, but…” tells your opponent that while you disagree with what he says, you are capable of putting yourself in their shoes and understanding their point of view. The more open-minded you appear, the more receptive your opponent will be to your arguments.
Of course as Ryan points out, it really depends on what kind of “liberals” your family members are. Sometimes people just call themselves liberals because they’ve been raised to believe that conservatism is eeeevil, others are just plain ol’ nutter-butters. The former can be made to see reason, the latter are beyond help.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:38 pmESTmy ex-sister-in-law was a die hard liberal, and it got to the point that I just avoided any political discussions whatsoever. I would get entirely too frustrated, and then I realized that it was a complete waste of time and energy. It would be one thing if the other side at least listened and thought about it, but that has not been my experience. They just try to ram their sound bites down my throat, with nothing to back it up.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:38 pmESTHow to have an intelligent conversation with a lib? There is a reason that impossible is in the dictionary. You may as well argue with the tide or that wall over there.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:42 pmESTI’m more of a pragmatist than anything. I don’t care if the cat is black or white, does it catch mice? Whenever I have a discussion with someone about some national policy I do it from that standpoint. Recently I had a conversation with a friend about alternative energy. She brought up how it would fix this that and the other.
I replied, “I agree with you that it would be a good thing, but it’s unfortunate that it just doesn’t exist yet.” I then went on to explain in a non-condescending way why it currently doesn’t work.
This is the key IMO. The premise may be agreed to i.e. energy sufficiency, but often the method at arriving at that spot is really the sticking point.
If the person goes on to say something like “you don’t care about x because you don’t want to fix it,” their way I might add. I simply drop it and walk away, the conversation is never going to go anywhere.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:44 pmESTDiscussing politics (or more properly policy) with a relative is sometimes worth it but a lot of times it’s just not. When I wind up in these types of discussions and can’t keep it to myself, I usually try the tact of “let’s try a thought experiment”. (It’s the physicist in me.) For example:
Democrat: “Minimum wage is too low. We should make it a living wage so people who work shouldn’t have to be on food stamps.”
Me: “If a minimum wage is all it takes to raise people out of poverty, think about whether a $10/hr minimum wage for Mexico (or all of Africa) would change the poverty situation there.”
The real problem is that if you’re dealing with people that have no knowledge of business or economics, it doesn’t work.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:45 pmESTI’ve actually been thinking about blogging about this subject, sort of..a friend of mine who is a liberal, decided to eviscerate my politics.
I’m not actually a conservative, but I’m not a liberal. I’m more of a libertarian with some conservative wisdom sprinkled in. Said friend blamed the Conservatives for the usual crap AND Political Correctness. At this point I laughed my ass off. I was going to debate him, but I couldn’t after that statement. I told him he had smoked way too much dope and needed to chill. He got pissed off and we decided not to talk politics. Ever Again. (his decision)
All this because I made the joke that I better get my smoking (cigarettes, not the illegal stuff) in before Obama is elected and we have socialized medicine enforced, in which he will ban cigarette smoking. *tee hee*
August 1st, 2008 at 12:47 pmESTWho are these “true liberals” and “true conservatives” you’re talking about?
August 1st, 2008 at 12:47 pmESTConversation with my brother last week…
He, “If you vote Republican, we will be in a war soon with Iran over them getting nukes.”
Me, “Obama has said he will unilaterally go into an already nuclear Pakistan without their permission. What kind of war will this start?”
He, “Republicans are worse.”
Sometimes you can’t talk to them.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:49 pmESTSorry, Haverwilde, but I think I am with you. Sums me up very well.
I’ll add that I am extremely grateful for my birthright as an American Citizen and I am extremely proud of our country. The U.S.A. is the greatest country on the face of the earth. Period.
I am sick and tired of all the negativity being blasted globally by our fellow American citizens. Especially a certain Presidential candidate. Wait, he is a “Citizen of the World”, isn’t he? At any rate, it is practically treason. He took a fucking oath.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:55 pmESTYou can’t talk to liberals most of the time because they refuse to even look at the perspective that a conservative or libertarian (aka fascists) are coming from. They cannot even imagination how someone can, for example, believe that homosexuality is an abomination, yet not support restricting the life, liberty and property of homosexuals because of their homosexuality. Yet this sort of thing is quite easy for most reasonable conservatives to understand.
I think one of the key problems that conservatives and many libertarians have with talking to liberals is that modern liberalism is a literally totalitarian ideology. Totalitarianism is not the same thing as authoritarianism; it just means that nothing is outside of politics. Everything is fair game to liberals if they don’t like it or think it should be done some particular way.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:57 pmESTWhen I said “true liberals” and “true conservatives” I was talking about the very few people who are philosophically grounded in liberalism, like Brooke.
To be perfectly honest, I was trying to hide my disdain for religion, which is too much a part of the philosophy of true conservatives. I should have just kept my mouth shut altogether.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:06 pmESTI just don’t bring it up. Makes me want to scream.
My middle daughter and her husband are die-hard liberals (Obama sticker on the back of the car, yadda, yadda, yadda). She asked me last night who I would be voting for, “Not the old man, are you?”
I told her I was neither Republican or Democrat, and would be voting for the man who would, in my opinion, address the issues. What really pissed me off next was her next comment: “You’re not voting for Obama? Are you racist?”
Considering she’s half Arab (dad left when she was 13 months old, looonnngg story) and my second ex-husband is half Puerto-Rican, I just looked at her with a “WTF” look on my face until she finally realized what she said. I told her that Obama was half-white, and I could care less if a candidate was purple with yellow polka dots; if I didn’t agree with his positions, I would not vote for him. And oh, by the way, I’ve listened to Obama, and three words keep running through my mind: James Earl Carter.
She dropped the subject quickly. Sheesh.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:13 pmESTI’d love to help liberals out on the road to recovery, but I’m a destroyer, not a nurturer. I eat little liberal children for breakfast and keep their mothers as sex slaves in my personal dungeon.
Don’t worry though, every now and then I throw my slaves a bone and let them watch CNN once in a while.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:21 pmESTOnce I identify this, or this or perhaps this
I do this (let this one run for a second)
I take a deep breath and remember this
Why, you ask? Because of … this
Oh, and look! Libtardlings for lincoln’s lunch!
Libtard arguing: why bother?
Oh for the love of god, why?!?
August 1st, 2008 at 1:27 pmESTdear dear liberal Brooke … I have only one question for you. How do you define “facts”.
I work with a great many scientists, some of who are amazingly enough (to me) quite liberal. Whereas when it pertains to “work”, only validated, and dounle-validated, and blind-tested, facts will do … when it comes to politics and soc iety in general … facts are completely irrelevant becuase … well, it isn’t FAIR … or RIGHT … or whatever. They KNOW the facts, but it’s just WRONG, don;t you see …
Maybe it is the FACT that their work, which may or may not be valuable now or in the future (they’re researchers) is paid for by the government (taxpayers) and wouldn’t generally be funded by for profit industry …. taht gives them a worldview that doesn’t encompass “pay for performance.”
One final thought … usually, I just wait for Liberals to grow up, remembering what Churchill said — “if you’re not a liberal when you’re young, you have no heart. If you don’t become conservative as you age, you have no brain”
Anyway … in answer to Rachl’s question … I must echo most others … don’t bother arguing witha liberal … it’s like teaching a pig to sing Carmen … it hurts your ears and annoys the pig.
Damn, 14K … that was friggin’ HILARIOUS! I think I’ll have to add some of those STFU’s to my blog, LOL
August 1st, 2008 at 1:30 pmESTMy brother was a Catholic conservative future engineer when he left for college. When he finished he had a worthless anthropology degree and he was an athiest liberal. Somewhere, somehow, the lefties got to him. He’s a teacher now and has a lovely wife and beautiful kids, but he’s so liberal that he’s just horribly boring. Everything is prismed through his liberalism. Movies, books, the weather, education, everything. I can’t talk to him. It’s like talking to someone in a cult.
So I stick to small talk. Until liberals realize for themselves that they are in the grip of a weird religion, there’s no point in trying to discuss real issues with them.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:36 pmESTI usually don’t waste my time unless they’re a fence sitter. Arguing with a full-blown leftie is pointless. It’s like getting down on all fours and barking back at at dog; it just makes the dog bark louder, and makes you tired.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:38 pmESTHow to argue like a liberal
1. Make an untrue statement, preferably on the subject of something about which you know nothing.
2. Express astonishment that your source could possibly be inaccurate.
3. Demand what motivation your source would have to lie.
4. Assert that the other party’s inability to articulate this motivation is tantamount to proof that your source is not lying.
5. Question the motivation of the contrary source.
6. Argue that all sources are equal and that therefore the contrary source is irrelevant.
7. Change the subject.
Alternatively …
1. Make an untrue statement.
2. Deny that you said what you said.
3. Deny that the other party understood what you said.
4. Deny that the words you used mean what the other party claims they mean.
5. Redefine your definition and hope the other person forgets the previous one. Repeat as needed.
6. Assert that since definitions are irrelevant and subjective, the other person is mean-spirited, racist, sexist, intolerant and obsessive.
7. Change the subject.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:38 pmESTI think a great way to win over liberals is to forget about anything that identifies as “liberal” or “conservative.” Or, as “democrat” or “republican.”
As soon as you do that, liberals go into attack mode, and start talking about how evil republicans and evil conservatives want to blah blah blah while wonderful liberal democrats will yadda yadda yadda.
Instead, begin with results and work backwards to causes. Then stop there. Let it sink in. Then take the causes back a step further. Then stop there. Continue until, eventually, you have established root causes. Get the liberal thinking about cause and effect. THEN, start slipping in the “and Reagan did…” or the “Obama will…”
Example:
Everyone wants to help the poor. Don’t talk about how McCain will cut taxes and spending. Talk about how the poor would be so much better off if only the economy was strong enough for them to find better jobs. Then stop there. Once that sinks in, start saying we can build a stronger economy. Talk about how the stronger economy could be achieved by strengthening the dollar. Stop there. Go from stronger dollar to lowering the deficit. Stop there. Go from lower deficit to lower taxes and Laffer curves. Give this one a LOT of time to sink in. Then start talking about the problems with “taxing the rich.”
AT NO TIME IN THIS PROCESS DO YOU TALK ABOUT LIBERALS OR CONSERVATIVES OR DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS OR OBAMA OR MCCAIN!
The moment you inject partisan politics into this discussion, you lose everything. You need to get the person to completely embrace the idea of lowering taxes and cutting spending to strengthen the dollar and strengthen the economy, which will then provide opportunities for better employment for the poor.
Only when the liberal has fully embraced this do you then start talking about how Obama wants to tax the rich and increase spending.
Repeat this process with every other issue.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:41 pmESTeh, I’m no help. I only have a couple of living relatives anyway, and they’re more conservative than I am.
As for dealing with non family members, well I’m still not a good person to ask. It usually all ends in tears & sirens, and everyone’s all “put down that crowbar” this and “Call for backup” that.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:46 pmESTActually Churchill likely never said that. I looked up the quote and it seems to be an urban legend, unfortunately. I tend to research these things of course to keep liberals from mocking my ignorance and making me want to choke them even more.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:46 pmESTI usually have a loud conversation with another conservative coworker (or an arguement with a liberal coworker), bemoaning the lack of logic behind most liberal positions and how I can’t believe some of the idiocy I’m hearing from most of them (not all, certainly, but most). It’s worked so far, as my boss (who most certainly overhears these) hasn’t had the stones to strike up another political conversation with me…
August 1st, 2008 at 1:51 pmESTI’ve got a daughter who, somehow, turned out very liberal. We do not discuss politics much. She was a Hilary supporter, I’m praying she’s a PUMA now.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:55 pmESTJim Carson, are you saying that since I’m very religious and conservative, I should give back my accounting degree to the University? And should my religious, conservative husband not be an engineer and graduate of one of the top engineering schools?
August 1st, 2008 at 1:57 pmESTMain Entry: fact
Pronunciation: \ˈfakt\
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin factum, from neuter of factus, past participle of facere
Date: 15th century
1: a thing done: as aobsolete : feat b: crime carchaic : action
2archaic : performance, doing
3: the quality of being actual : actuality
4 a: something that has actual existence b: an actual occurrence
5: a piece of information presented as having objective reality
— in fact : in truth
How do you define fact?
August 1st, 2008 at 1:59 pmESTLincoln, It may be a legend that Churchill said it, but I believe he did. And it doesn’t really matter it has been around for awhile, and is quoted in the halls of Congress regularly.
Notice any similarity with this quote:
August 1st, 2008 at 2:05 pmESTsarahk, I am saying religion stifles and/or clouds rational thought.
A few members of my own family choose to believe that the earth is 6000 years old. Others give considerable sums to lowlife thieves disguised as ministers. It infuriates and embarrasses me.
August 1st, 2008 at 2:06 pmESTRachel,
This post should have ended with the quote;
Because you’re going to get one on this topic!
August 1st, 2008 at 2:13 pmESTI have to agree with the others who recommend focusing on principles and results. It’s critically important to establish that you’re arguing in good faith, and that you share a desire to see people’s lives improving. I’ve scored a lot of points with two key phrases:
1. “I agree that this is a good outcome, but I don’t think that your proposal is the best way to make it happen. Here’s why…”
2. “I agree that this is a good outcome, but I’m not sure it’s enough to outweigh the costs (in money, liberty, opportunity, etc.) that would be required.”
It helps that I’m usually able to acknowledge the costs and drawbacks of my preferred policies. I try to stress that imperfect as they are, I feel they are better than the alternatives. This leads to a discussion of these alternatives, giving us a chance to examine hidden costs that haven’t occured to my debate partner.
Above all, I try not to argue when I’m tired or pissed-off. Being short-tempered, condescending, and/or sarcastic hasn’t won me an argument yet.
(My favorite discussion ever was talking to a college pothead about legalizing marijuana. I agreed with him that prohibition was stupid, but I asked him whether his favorite head shop would last more than a year after the local corner shops started carrying Camel Blunts and Marlboro Spliffs. Then I asked him where he’d be able to smoke these things, since his side had already outlawed smoking pretty much anywhere. Poor kid’s head nearly exploded.)
August 1st, 2008 at 2:13 pmESTDid anyone take the Humper of Monkeys up on his offer? (Personally, I get enough feces-flinging from leftists in the comment sections of righty and gunny blogs; why one of them would think I’d volunteer to climb into their tree is just beyond me.)
It’s probably for the best. We don’t waste our time and they get to jump up and down, screeching about what chickens we are for not playing their game by their rules on their field.
Heh.
August 1st, 2008 at 2:22 pmESTbigotry, n.
intolerance to those who hold different opinions from oneself
This has been a message from your Friendly Neighborhood Dictionary. Have a nice day.
August 1st, 2008 at 2:24 pmESTReligion stifled and clouded my thought for many years. It did real, verifiable harm to my life.
Disdain ≠ Intolerance
–Your friendly neighborhood bigot
August 1st, 2008 at 2:30 pmESTLast election cycle, I spend a lot of time trying to convince my liberal friends that they were wrong. Now, I simply don’t discuss politics. As my wife says, it’s like arguing with morons. The facts are ignored and any rebuttal is reduced to a bumper sticker (and one that is usually factually incorrect to boot). So, I’ve made sure that we’re stocked up on food, water and ammunition. And, when someone tries to bring up a political discussion, my standard answer is: Don’t try to take my guns. Don’t try to take my money. Don’t tell me how to raise my kids… and we’ll get along just fine.
August 1st, 2008 at 2:34 pmESTTalking to a liberal is like slamming your head into a wall.
It feels so good when you stop.
August 1st, 2008 at 2:41 pmESTI didn’t say that disdain is the same as intolerance or bigotry. I said your argument (”religion stifles and/or clouds rational thought”) is intolerant and bigoted. Which it is.
But you’re right on one point. A better synonym for “disdain” would be “arrogant”, “contemptuous”, “condescending”, or “hateful”.
Which is…better…I guess.
August 1st, 2008 at 2:41 pmESTMightySam and I have fought this battle before, with similar results. Sorry Rachel.
</threadjack>
August 1st, 2008 at 2:50 pmESTHi rocinante.
Bummer. They banned me. I was hoping someone would clobber them. Again, bummer.
I dunno why I go there. Curiosity? A Jerry Springer kind of thing wherin it makes me grateful that I am “not that guy”? It is hard left hateful anti American crap. I stumbled on it and thought, hell, maybe I can talk sense into these weirdos. I failed miserably, and figured y’all could do a hell of a lot better than me.
Ironically, it was the reference to the lefty “it takes a village” crap that made me ask for y’all to go over to Blue in the first place. I just can’t stand that one fucker in particular and the way he blasts America every fucking day.
Again, bummer. There is some bat shit crazy grabage being written over there. It is stupefying.
I guess I’d like to see someone verbally punch that fucker in the nose, and there are sooo many people here that could do it.
August 1st, 2008 at 2:53 pmESTSoooooooo how ’bout them Yankees?
August 1st, 2008 at 2:53 pmEST“14 Karat Says:
Soooooooo how ’bout them Yankees?”
I HATE the Yankees. Being from Philly and all.
The day my oldest child was born, October 1981, Yankees VS Dodgers world series on the TV, one of the first things I said to him was “Can you say I hate the Yankees?”
True story.
The nurse thought I was nuts.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:01 pmEST14K: Love it.
On arguing with liberals…I had such fun the last election cycle with a couple of liberal friends. They would spout off about what a wonderful film Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11, and how awful the Swiftboat veterans were…so I would gleefully send links. And links. And more links. And ask them to pretty please send me links to facts that backed up their opinions/statements.
To my knowledge I only “converted” one, but that was the only person to actually follow the links and read the information. And, after doing some research, he realized that he did not have the facts on his side.
*grins*
Most of my family is of the “liberal” persuasion, a bunch of yellow-dog Democrats and Union members who don’t really think about their positions so much as have faith in the party line. They get confused when you ask for facts supporting their position. To be fair, they are Southern Democrats, which is quite a different animal than the NorthWest/Coastal Democrat.
Basically, keep your sense of humor. Recognize that modern-day liberalism is more of a religious belief than anything else. And be gentle with them, they know not what they are doing.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:08 pmESTDamn Yankees!
DAMN Yankees!
DAMN YANKEES!!!!
August 1st, 2008 at 3:10 pmESTSome liberals, especially those over 65 think that the Democratic party is the same party it was when JFK was in office. These”older Americans” live conservative lifestyles and really think like conservatives. They are angry over the many useless, self-deprecating social programs they are paying for with their taxes, they hate abortion as birth control, and want stronger borders. The issue is, they are union men and women and think unions cannot support a conservative candidate. They do not respond to anyone who tries to tell them they are voting for the wrong party-once a democrat, always a democrat.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:11 pmESTSometimes you don’t get argument, you get a restating of cliches. A few years ago I had this chat about gun control with a coworker at a volunteer agency:
SHE: We’ve got to do something about these guns.
ME (sitting there with a pistol in my pocket, savoring the irony): Actually, guns are used defensively much more often than offensively. Gary Kleck’s study, etc.
SHE: We’ve got to do something about these guns.
It’s just not worth trying sometimes.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:11 pmESTExtrapolate what you want — the gun discussion made me think of this REALLY old gem.
Here’s a funny version.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:12 pmEST“Rooting for the Yankees is like cheering for the dealer at a casino” - Doug Stanhope
August 1st, 2008 at 3:13 pmESTI considered it, but it probably wouldn’t have been worth it.
The chances that I would’ve actually convinced anyone are about slim and none so I figured “why piss into the wind?” And they probably would’ve banned me within a few minutes and all that work would be gone.
Plus, going onto someone else’s site totally uninvited just to cause a big ruckus is a little too close to trolling for my tastes. It wasn’t all that long ago that we were all bitching about the militant atheist trolls who were invading Rachel’s blog to whine about how “offended” they were that she dared to have an opinion different from theirs, and I wasn’t about to turn myself into a hypocrite by going over to Wizbang and messing with people.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:18 pmESTLatest ad hitting Barack Obama . . . ewwww!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nVQaHpOnO8
August 1st, 2008 at 3:28 pmESTWait, WHAT? You TALK to them? No way. You get the villagers together, hand out torches, pitchforks and other hand-farming implements and chase liberals to the windmill, which you then burn to the ground.
(Okay, okay…I’ll go take my pill now)
August 1st, 2008 at 3:33 pmESTmightysamurai
Yeah, good points. I guess it could be looked at as trolling.
Thanks for setting me straight there.
I wonder why I have this urge to argue with them. I think I feel a little shame. Please disregard and forget I brought it up.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:36 pmESTIt’s kind of like a super gory bload soaked car wreck. You want to burn out your retinas it’s so disgusting, but you just can’t look away.
The entire rap-music industry is based on that concept, I suspect.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:39 pmESTThat sums it up nicely 14 K. And part of me wants to try to fix it. But I ain’t no paramedic. Figured some of y’all kinda were, so to speak. Glad wiser thought prevailed. It was a bad idea. Sorry bout that.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:43 pmESTBrooke, apologies for not being clear … how do YOU define “fact” (I can read dictionaries as well)
I define fact as a provable and definable occurance, as opposed to an opinion - which is someone’s view of an event. Facts are what the media used to report, whereas now it’s all opinion.
Global Warming, for example, is easily proved to be an uninformed opinion, because the data used to defend it is consistently proved to be incorrect. Al Gore being a hypocrite is a fact, demonstrated by his huge carbon footprint.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:44 pmESTSorry Rachel.
I am a dumbass sometimes.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:45 pmESTNo, it was fucking hilarious and could have been thought provoking (cuz, mighty, you KNOW we’d NEVER troll), but after spending 15 minutes reading the posts over there I realized someone would stalk me with my worst fear. And this would happen.
Killer bunnies make 14K cower and cry!
RUN AWAYYYYY!!!11!!!1!
August 1st, 2008 at 3:47 pmESTBoss, “That Bill Moyer and PBS tells the truth on how Bush is destroying the country. Did you happen to see Fahrenheit 9/11 and how Bush is only in the war to build oil pipelines?”
Me, “PBS Frontline had a program discussing the pipelines and they are Russian used to transport natural gas. They were questioning the environmental impact since the Russians have few safeguards.”
Boss, “Who cares what PBS says.”
August 1st, 2008 at 3:48 pmEST14 Karat:
Your link to the Damn Yankees video makes me want to squeal in glee over UNCLE TED!!
All hail the greatness of Uncle Ted!!
August 1st, 2008 at 3:51 pmESTHere’s a handy site that translates a few terms from English into Liberalese. Might come in handy when you don’t have a translator readily available.
baxtrice: I hart u!
Terrible Ted, the Nuge, Motor City Madman …
He used to have a wild game company called “You Can’t Beat My Meat” back in the ’90s. He doesn’t drink, smoke, take drugs; he does support the NRA, DARE and MADD.
And the liberals FUCKING HATE him.
And the liberal media (oxymoron, anyone) FUCKING HATE him and his political views.
[I think I just tedgasmed.]
August 1st, 2008 at 4:01 pmEST14 Karat sez:
I am soooo stealing that!! Aww I got hart’d on! I feel lurv’d. Meanwhile, where in the world do you find all your crazy sh*t? (and where do you find the time? LOL)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:14 pmESTI most certainly do not hate Ted Nugent. And I’m not some aberration of the liberal world.
From his music (I’m a MI native, so I was raised on the Nuge), to his anti-drug stance, to his “I eat what I kill” stance, I’m a fan.
Sure, Ted and I disagree on some things, but hi!, I don’t agree with everybody on everything.
August 1st, 2008 at 4:15 pmESTHmmm… What does it mean when you’re pro-NRA, anti-DARE and anti-MADD?
August 1st, 2008 at 4:16 pmESTPete, I get what you’re saying. I do look at facts - in the example you’ve provided, I would say that science is constantly updating facts on global warming. As to the Al Gore cite, I call that an opinion too, as the facts of that situation are changing as well.
August 1st, 2008 at 4:21 pmESTJim Carson - I would say that you really know how to party.
August 1st, 2008 at 4:22 pmESTBrooke, it’s been said before and I’ll say it again. You are not a liberal.
They hate him, believe me. Here’s one small sample I remember.
August 1st, 2008 at 4:23 pmESTI’m liberal to a point, and conservative to a point. I don’t believe people are all one or the other.
The Better Half wants to vote for Obama, I want to vote for the ghost of Ronald Reagan. (Actually, I want to vote for the ghost of Teddy Roosevelt, but he’s probably too old by now.) Politics is something I don’t discuss at home at all. Religion is something I discuss only when someone tells me that Catholics aren’t Christians.
August 1st, 2008 at 4:27 pmESTThen define liberal. I assure you, on many issues, I fall mainly on the liberal side.
And seriously, I’d love to see someone try to take Ted Nugent out. The amount of smack Ted would put on that person would make great entertainment.
August 1st, 2008 at 4:29 pmESTI work in an office environment that is 90% both female and liberal. Most employees are union members, in one of the biggest unions in the US, and politics is one of those subjects that is quite literally impossible to get away from in even casual conversation.
I’m white, male, under 40, and conservative, AND a union steward in said union. (Figure that one out.) During the ‘04 election, one of my very ultra-liberal coworkers expressed offense at the BUSH 04 bumper sticker I had pinned to the wall of my cubicle under a shelf where you’d have to be sitting at my desk to really see it. I pointed out that I’d be willing to take it down, sure…if she would be willing to take down the poster-sized framed (signed) photo of Kerry and the other people in the office would be willing to take down their posters of Kerry/Edwards 04. She quite literally had nothing to say to that - it hadn’t even entered into her mind that expressing support for her candidate was political in nature. Therein lies the essence of the more unhinged members of the Left.
One of my coworkers is a dyed-in-the-wool liberal who is about the best example of all that is good about liberals in general. He genuinely has an open mind and on occasion, over lunch, I’ve actually managed to debate him. Between him and some of the more way-out there liberal people I work with, I’ve found a couple of things to be true, nearly every time.
1) If you stay calm and simply refute everything they say with actual documented facts, refuse to allow tangential or strawmen arguements, it drives them totally crazy.
2) Others have said this, but it bears repeating - logically arguing causality and consequences to their logical end result is something that very liberal mindsets short-circuit. I haven’t yet met somebody that self-identified themselves as very liberal that was able to overcome this.
3) Mildly liberal, truly open-minded people actually do have a point. If you can concede that they have a point, agree with their points that have merit, and treat them with some respect you’ll get much further.
4) By the same token, treating a barking-mad moonbat’s arguements as anything other than silly nonsense simply encourages them, because they don’t want to listen to anything you have to say. To them, arguing with a conservative is pointless, because we’re simply wrong. A person like this is not capable of treating you with respect - give, get, QED.
August 1st, 2008 at 4:37 pmESTbaxtrice:
Most of the stuff I post I make myself. I can do almost anything, and do it at the speed of light, in Photoshop. People also tell me I have mad research skills. Which is true.
I’m sort of on sabbatical right now. I mean, I am *working* but a lot of it is travel and weekend seminars to incoming pre-health sciences freshmen and then follow-up advising. I’ll get really busy again in the fall.
August 1st, 2008 at 4:53 pmESTBrooke, go take the World’s Smallest Political Quiz, and let us know your score so we can affix labels to you.
(I completely agree with 9 of the ten statements. I said ‘Maybe’ on the draft question.)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:57 pmESTHey now, Jim, Brooke affixed her own label, I did not!
OMG. centrist/libertarian.
Did someone just divide by zero? ; )
August 1st, 2008 at 4:58 pmESTI like to ask them lots of questions. Eventually, you will find they have asserted a position that will make life worse for everyone at which point it’s fun to say, “So you hate poor people?” and then you have to get all Socratic with them and demonstrate that they do hate poor people because everything they want to do makes life more expensive and/or difficult for everyone. Come to think of it, just use the Socratic method and lead them by the nose.
August 1st, 2008 at 5:07 pmESTSurvey Says:
Liberal
Dead smack in the middle at that. So yes, I’m a liberal. I’m a liberal who believes in a lot of the same things you believe in. Hmmm…maybe you’re not as conservative as you think.
August 1st, 2008 at 5:11 pmESTTo whom was this addressed? I said on this thread that I’m not a conservative.
August 1st, 2008 at 5:17 pmESTOh - my bad. I apologize.
But I still think that being pro NRA, anti DARE, anti MADD, you probably know how to party.
August 1st, 2008 at 5:21 pmEST“Brooke Says:
Then define liberal.
August 1st, 2008 at 4:29 pm”
“Liberal” in today’s parlance is a reactionary leftist statolitor, aka a fascist.
How to talk to one?
Talk slowly.
Use small words.
Flashcards help.
August 1st, 2008 at 5:37 pmESTUse small words? Why? Is that all you know?
I’ll make a deal with you - I’ll temper my “I feel” statements that seem so rooted to the Liberal movement, if you stop implying that Liberals are stupid.
August 1st, 2008 at 5:44 pmESTSome of them aren’t, like the power hungry thugs who lead the cattle to slaughter.
August 1st, 2008 at 5:51 pmESTOK, so, somebody needs to go and do us a (completely uncontrolled, poorly randomized, ill conceived) social experiment by asking this exact same question on popular liberal forms. We can compare responses and then laugh and laugh.
August 1st, 2008 at 5:54 pmESTPelosi, in typical fascist methodology, cut off debate in the House today.
Via Cold Fury & Hot Air:
“This is the people’s House,” Rep, Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.) said. “This is not Pelosi’s politiburo.”
Another great quote:
Rep. Tom Cole (Okla.), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said the dimly lit chamber is a “vision of the future by the Democrat Party: The lights are out, there’s no power, and the air conditioning is gonna go off soon.”
These are your people, Brooke.
Deal.
August 1st, 2008 at 6:01 pmESTRight. Because there’s never any shenanigans by the GOP. Again, liberal does not equate to “stupid”
I’ll tell you what - you accept that you’re stuck with your own brand of politician you hate to think represent you, and I’ll accept mine.
August 1st, 2008 at 6:37 pmESTThere’s a difference between “shenanigans” and fascist thuggery.
Deal.
August 1st, 2008 at 6:45 pmESTI don’t consider a vote that close to be fascist thuggery. Obviously, you feel differently.
August 1st, 2008 at 6:51 pmESTIsn’t it funny how some conservative knuckle-draggers sound precisely like liberal snobs? Fascinating. The only thing I can compare this to is the diversity between a Gremlin and a Mogwai.
Edit: and no, Brooke, I wasn’t talking to you.
August 1st, 2008 at 6:52 pmESTWhat vote? Botox Nancy wouldn’t allow a vote.
I’m talking about the Democrats turning off the lights, the air conditioning and the TV cameras.
And here I thought “liberals” opposed censorship.
August 1st, 2008 at 6:56 pmESTYou guys are soo funny. Poking at Brooke for a cheap laugh. That’s mean.
*snark snark*
August 1st, 2008 at 7:27 pmESTI just got here and haven’t read through the comments, so I apologize if my points have already been made.
I likewise am an ex-liberal. Nowadays I consider myself more a libertarian than a conservative, but I still feel closer to conservatives than liberals. This is especially true regarding issues like limited government and free-market capitalism. Not as much with social issues.
One of my favorite blogs, Neo-Neocon, is run by a woman who has likewise experienced a political evolution. Her archives are chock full of articles discussing her change of mind.
August 1st, 2008 at 8:30 pmESTSo I gets up in the mornin’ and get my daily dose of Rakelukas, and had nothing to contribute to the thread cuz the libtards where I live are not the types you can reason with.
Then the wife says her mother and brother are visiting one of her sisters and she wants to go over. OK.
Her brother gets a bit sloshed and starts mouthing extreme MoveON.org talking points. Did I mention he’s mildly retarded and still living with his mother at 50.
I don’t try to reason with libtards…especially the ones that are actually ‘tarded. To calm him down I agreed that the oil companies make 97 billion a minute, Bush lied, People died, Obama will save the planet, and Chaney remotely piloted a jet into the North Tower.
Not a fun afternoon…and he’s not quite retarded enough to fail the voter eligibility standard.
August 1st, 2008 at 8:46 pmESTHey all — Internet Explorer 7 — is anyone using it, or are you all on Firefox, because I had to download Firefox to make this site work on all three of my computers and I don’t want to bother RCHL about it unless it’s from her end.
Anybody? If you wouldn’t mind leaving a comment about what browser you are using I’ll let her know. Thanks!
August 1st, 2008 at 9:04 pmEST14 Karat -
Yeah - all of a sudden, I’m not able to log onto this blog and several other blogs using Internet Explorer. Had to go to Firefox.
August 1st, 2008 at 9:55 pmESTAbsolutely - and I don’t like her either. She’s very obviously part of the problem.
Also, I don’t think all liberals are stinky pot smoking welfare trash hippies - just one of my “friends” with an overwhelming sense of entitlement who makes more than I do and does nothing all day at work. He too is an asshat.
I have no issues with Brooke.
August 1st, 2008 at 10:28 pmESTI’m a Libertarian. No big surprise there for me.
August 1st, 2008 at 10:35 pmEST14 Karat, I use Firefox. Only touch IE7 when I have to go to Microsoft.
August 1st, 2008 at 10:38 pmESTNaleta,
August 1st, 2008 at 10:55 pmESTThank you for your response. Apparently this is a huge internet problem tonight. Check RCHL’s most recent dog post to see the response from Tully for the fix and the reaction.
Again, thank you. This is why we ride the short bus — to help each other as line leader. : )
14 Karat:
It could very well be Sitemeter causing the issue. If Rachel’s using it to track visitors, that is.
August 2nd, 2008 at 12:05 amESTLGF is also reporting the same type of problem with a lot of other blogs, and that the cause seems to be Sitemeter.
Once again, that’s if Rachel uses Sitemeter to track her visitors.
August 2nd, 2008 at 12:17 amESTThank you, Tom Blogical. You are a gentleman and a scholar!
August 2nd, 2008 at 9:07 amESTI believe that the modern “liberal” mindset is dangerous in that it opens the door for a dynamic speaker to sugarcoat hope love and change in a package rooted in an outright impossibility (utopia/socialism that works) and become a false “messiah”.
Yes, I drink Hal Lindsey’s kool-aid every week.
There is nothing wrong with liking the ideas behind socialism. It is a noble, kindhearted thing for the most part. But the realities of what socialism can accomplish are Earth’s worst nightmares. It seems that most of history’s recent murderous tyrants got their power from the sugar coated lie that people so willingly believe. As if Stalin, Pol Pot, Ceausescu, Hitler etc etc actually LOVE people. Look at who Obama has associated with and considers his mentors. Some pretty hateful freaks, really. Be honest. Not that that clown is the hateful son of a bitch that so many people believe is on the way, but that the roadmap for his coming to power and the mass brainwashing necessary to enable that rise to power is being tested and demonstrated right before our eyes. Globally.
I get worked up about it because it is a real threat to American lives, liberties and collective persuits of happiness.
August 2nd, 2008 at 10:44 amESTVery late to the party– sorry, yesterday was my last day at work, and I spent most of the day training the new guy. But I digress.
Talking to a liberal– well, it helps if both you and they are willing to accept each other as human beings before the discussion starts.
After the 2004 election, at a New Years party, I accidentally let slip that I’d voted for Bush. The party came to a halt as my liberal host put down his beer (we’d all had a few by then) and asked me why. I gave him a specific example. He mulled it over for a second and said, “OK, I can accept that.” And the party continued.
August 2nd, 2008 at 10:44 amESTUnfortunately for most of you,
“Americans under the age of 30 have come of age politically during the George W. Bush presidency.”
[in recent The New Republic]
That’s how you create liberals. It’s your own fault.
August 2nd, 2008 at 10:58 amESTAs long as you don’t preface your arguments with an offhand remark about how “liberalism is inherently evil” — oops!
Personal: 90%
Economic: 100%
For a result of slightly right-leaning Libertarian.
And I’m a Christian.
Go figure!
August 2nd, 2008 at 11:08 amESTI haven’t read all the comments yet, but scanning down I didn’t see any mention of it, so I’ll add this here, since this is a political thread:
Over at Tully’s site is a link to a new McCain ad, and I think it ROCKS! You can really see how the Obamessiah sounds like a Televangelist in some of his speeches.
On discussing politics with Liberals: I try to feel out the person first, and get an idea how reasonable they are, before engaging in that kind of discussion, because I know too many who will escalate to angry, raised-voice arguments no matter how reasonable you try to be.
Update: I also went and took the politcal quiz, and I scored way the hell up in the Libertarian field, but it doesn’t score properly, because it only asked about Government and Laws. I’m sorry, but Conservatives don’t want Government involved in most of the things on that quiz, so they’re going to score high on the Libertarian quadrant. Conservatives are about Life Choices much more than Laws.
August 2nd, 2008 at 12:17 pmESTYes, a heavily left-biased media that is constantly working to undermine everything a Republican President does or says with blatant propaganda and lies is an excellent way to create more liberals. Thank you.
August 2nd, 2008 at 12:21 pmESTI’ve made the decision to keep my opinions to myself in my personal social circles. I follow the age old advice of never discussing religion or politics at work (OK, at school now that I’m a stay-at-home Dad). I’ve also applied that to family whenever our ideologies differ. If someone who disagrees with me insists on talking about it, I consistently and politely start changing the subject. If that doesn’t work, I pretend to be taking a call on my cell phone and walk away. (I make sure it’s on vibrate when I come back.)
August 2nd, 2008 at 1:13 pmESTOn the internet problem: I just went in and put sitemeter on my restricted list and that cured the problem. I was able to go to all of the previously blocked/problem sites.
August 2nd, 2008 at 1:51 pmESTOn the political test, I scored way, WAY up in the Libertarian corner, even though I’ve never considered myself a strict “Libertarian” but more of a Constitutionalist. I just want the smallest, least intrusive, least expensive government that we can get along with. Americans used to be able to solve their own problems. What happened?
These are a few more on-line tests that seem a little less Libertarian inclined.
http://www.politicalbrew.com/politest.cgi
http://www.moral-politics.com/
August 2nd, 2008 at 6:53 pmESTThat’s more or less what I expected.
August 2nd, 2008 at 7:02 pmESTThis is more like it (whew)!
August 2nd, 2008 at 7:16 pmESTYour PERSONAL issues Score is 100%.
Your ECONOMIC issues Score is 100%.
Libertarian.
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Centrist (57).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Strong Conservative (93).
0 on Moral Order and -5 on Moral Rules (this quiz pigeonholed me a bit re: my thoughts, multiple choice has limits).
My self asessment would be social/moral liberal & fiscal conservative. I guess these things are pretty acurate.
August 2nd, 2008 at 7:47 pmESTI don’t talk to liberals. Life is too short to be wasted.
August 2nd, 2008 at 7:51 pmESTMy Non-Fiscal score of 51 is Non-Sensical. I’m much more liberal on non-fiscal issues than most people. I presume it considers art funding and other minor matters as non-fiscal, but I don’t.
August 2nd, 2008 at 7:55 pmESTI scare me. Perhaps I ought to have consumed chocolate before taking these examinations, so as to have generated a more temperate outcome. . . ?
Nah!
I will now go back out into the heat to perform arduous tasks the fruit of which will benefit only me and my heirs — so there!
Edit: Actually, we’re sprucing up for an appraisal so we’ll be able to purchase the acreage of our elderly neighbor who will retain “life rights” in the deed, thereby allowing him to pay off some awkward debts and be freed from real estate taxes, yet not have to move until he’s good and ready, if ever. Basically, we’ll be adopting an Uncle
— mean, mean conservatives!
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:17 amESTAfter spending over a decade in Seattle being buried under gigantic piles of strawmen when attempting to talk to liberals, I gave up.
Now when I hear, “It’s all Bush’s fault!” for everything under the sun, (and this is usually shouted in the first 30 seconds of a conversation), I get up and walk away.
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:02 pmESTWay to “cheat” the government, felicity.
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:02 pmESTIt’s all Bush’s fault that you’re a naughty little conservative.
I find it more than a little interesting that this morning, this blog is running right below an advert for Al “The Imbicilic Moron” Gore and his “We” group.
It takes a village to talk to a Liberal, and tell him to sit down and SHUT UP!
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:28 pmESTTim In Phoenix: If you read this, I may assume you got that story from Gut Rumbles. That’s where I got it from, many years ago and I also used it on a liberal who was in college at the time. Same result, made her stop talking and think. After awhile, she muttered something about how that wouldn’t be fair at all and I said same as you, “That’s why I’m not a liberal.”
I hope, pray, rather, that she spread that around to all her little liberal friends that were gathered at this particular house warming party…especially to the one who loudly shouted to me that Republicans were a dying breed. Man I wish I could have seen her face when Bush won again.
August 3rd, 2008 at 2:13 pmESTFirst of all, I think the labels “liberal” and “conservative” are so broad and vague that they don’t communicate very much information about the person they are slapped onto. In my opinion, they are not useful.
Second, I avoid talking about politics in social settings, and when others bring up political topics, I either try to steer the conversation to something else or just find an excuse to leave the room for a while.
Most people are not open to persuasion on political topics; they identify with a particular party or faction in an emotional way that resembles devotion to a religion or loyalty to a professional sports team. You cannot convince someone to abandon that kind of attachment, and you will only upset and anger them by trying.
Virtually all of my friends have religious and/or political affiliations that differ from mine. But they are also nice people whose company I enjoy. As long as they don’t get in my face about politics or religion, why should I get in theirs? Life is too short to waste any of it on pointless arguments. I’d rather be playing Apples to Apples or gathering around a piano to sing show tunes.
That goes double for family. If political bickering ruins a friendship, the other person and I can at least end the misery by going our separate ways and never talking again. But my relatives and I will have to face each other across the dinner table at family gatherings in the future. I would prefer to stay on cordial terms with them.
I think it’s a mistake to use political labels as an excuse to dismiss people as not worth talking to — unless you never talk about anything except politics. If so, you are an obsessive bore, and I don’t want you to talk to me.
Most people are more multifaceted and interesting than that. I don’t describe myself as a liberal, so does that mean that I should refuse to talk to Brooke if I encounter her at a party? Of course not. We may not see eye to eye on politics, but her comments here indicate that she is intelligent, rational (basing her arguments on facts), has a good sense of humor, and refuses to be provoked by people who are condescending and rude to her. I find that admirable, and I would love to spend an hour chatting with her at that party. Forget politics — I’d be interested in what she does for a living, her favorite movies, whether she has any pets, and whether she agrees with my view that the messages inside most fortune cookies are not actually fortunes.
If she did choose to talk about politics, I would listen, because she probably knows things I don’t, and I might learn something. I suspect she would listen to my point of view, too.
I like people who have enough emotional security to not be threatened by opinions that differ from their own. And because I like people of that sort, I strive to be one. I don’t think I’m there yet, but I’ll keep trying.
August 3rd, 2008 at 4:20 pmEST0 on Moral Order and -4 on Moral Rules.
Non-Fiscal Centrist at 42 and strongly conservative on Fiscal issues at 82.
Not surprisingly, most of us who come here have similar scores. DOH! lol
August 3rd, 2008 at 9:07 pmESTBahahaha! 14K, that’s one of my alltime favourite photos. I posted that one on my blog over a year ago under the heading of “Most pointless photo of the year”
Because it is much like a cult, in the sense that, as MikeT said, liberalism is mostly totalitarian in its viewpoint these days.
August 3rd, 2008 at 9:28 pmESTAs I expected.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:58 amESTAnd back onto the “how to talk to a liberal” topic … basically, I find it very easy. I don’t.
I live in a part of Michigan that is TOTALLY a Democrap bloc, and very heavily union. My wife and I actually are getting tired of discussing the corrupt politics reported in the papers daily. Since I have nothing in common with loser UNEMPLOYED union clowns, or with corrupt liberal politicians, we don’t do the “social” thing. Our sole “mixing” with others is with other members of a motorcycle club we founded, and we talk bikes, rides, and weather … no politics (usually) … but anytime it does come up, it appears we’re all mostly conservative.
Pat Berry, you are too kind.
For the record:
Legal minion
“The Godfather”
I am a cat owner to six(!?)
I don’t think of them as fortunes, but rather insights.
And I’ll play Apples to Apples with you ANYDAY! It’s one of my favorite games.
I think Pat is right - liberal and conservative are too broad of terms. I’m liberal in my stances on many social politics - but in gun control, I fall squarely on the conservative side.
I come to this website because I like to be challenged - oh sure, I like the Huffington Post from time to time, am a fan of Crooks and Liars, occasionally browse mediamatters - but that doesn’t teach me anything about what people who don’t agree with me think. I love hearing about why people disagree with me do so. Sometimes they have extremely good reasons to disagree with me, and it’s common sense that I hear what others have to say.
And that’s just my way of saying thank you to those here who make me welcome.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:42 amESTBrooke, would you believe I have never seen The Godfather? But I’ve been hearing people praise it (and its first sequel) for many years, so perhaps it’s time I added it to my Netflix queue.
Six cats? You won’t hear the faintest snicker from me. My family currently has four pet rats (one of whom we are fostering for the Raleigh Rodent Rescue until we can find someone to adopt her).
“Insights” is certainly a more accurate description, but if you ask for “insight cookies”, will anyone at the Chinese restaurant know what you mean?
Well, this is why I think you’re a breath of fresh air. Most of the people arguing politics online seem to believe that their opinions are objective facts, and that anyone who disagrees with them must, therefore, be a liar or an idiot. That pretty much brings meaningful discussion to a halt.
So it’s nice to meet someone who doesn’t share that attitude.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:20 amEST1. Always argue with libs in front of an audience/witnesses because libs inevitably switch topics, evade, lie, etc. Your goal is exposing their lame ideas and influencing the listeners.
2. Ask them if they’ve ever changed their mind about a personally held belief. (Not just rejecting what mommy and daddy taught them.) Most haven’t. Again, demonstrate to your audience that your opponent is resistant to facts and reason.
3. Ask if any of their cures for society don’t include spending money. Hint: None of their ideas do. All their ideas need money sent to an expanding government. It makes their ideas seem small and materialistic.
August 5th, 2008 at 4:45 pmESTUnfortunately you can’t talk reasonably with a liberal for the reasons you already mentioned.
1. They never read the actual facts. They just believe what so and so said that he heard from friend of a friend of another liberal friend who heard it from some dopehead standing on the corner with a carboard sign that he or she uses to pass on their message, beg for money and sleep in all at the same time.
2. If they have actually read the facts, they blatantly ignore them. You can actually shove a liberals nose into a pile of fresh, steaming dogshit that you both watched the dog just drop and that liberal will swear to you that it not only smells good, it is not actually dogshit.
3. When you start bringing up the true facts that are backed by valid scientific studies, liberals get all pissed off and start attacking you personally instead of calmly presenting their own facts to counter what you have shown them to be true.
4. Last but not least, liberals are not interested in the facts. They are only interested in making you believe what they say and forcing you to follow their agenda no matter what the cost.
I have some folks that are very near and dear to me that are hard left elitists. I tell them plain and simple that in my house if we discuss any issues, it will be a calm, respectful debate without any name calling or character questioning. We will discuss only the facts that either of us can show concrete proof of. If it goes any other way then we will either (a) Stop the conversation and move on to something else or (b) If they insist on being sanctimonious then I will ask them to leave. If they don’t leave after being asked politely them I will throw them out on their ass and that will be the end of it.
The liberals in my family rarely want to discuss any issues when they are at my house. I’m not sure why.
They probably think I’m an asshole. So fuck’em. I still love them no matter what. I can love someone and still disagree with them. I can treat them with respect and still disagree with them. I’m not so sure they can return the favor.
Joe
August 5th, 2008 at 7:33 pmEST