Liberals - Practice Conservative Argument Techniques

I really do have to go, it I want to catch the tour. But that was a sweet thought to take with me as I go. Kiss

Well, Lola, you certainly do have the mean-spiritedness that you project onto conservatives down.

Keep singing, Lola. I'm sure you can get that revolution started. Keep on singin.

Lola gets an A+

1. for controlling the argument.

2. for making the other side only respond to what she said this morning without a single change in topic from them.

What are the rest of us going to do here when Lola graduates?

I was just thinking she did a good job of avoiding the subject which I posted about. I guess a duck jive discussion is also part of the Dem tatic!

Oh Baldi, you just don't get it yet. She's practicing conservative argument techniques (observe the name of the thread).

That's where you are wrong, if she were using Conservative techniques she would have thrown in more about Clinton and BJ's!

Good point!

thank you parados. I had fun today. Practice, that's what we're doing here. And our conservative friends are soooooo helpful, giving us stuff to respond to.

(But you know, some people still don't get it.) giggle

And I don't plan to graduate. It's a life time of learning, that's what I say.

Duck jive discussion, that will be #57. See, Baldimo, if you take an I-can-learn attitude, you can get better and better positioning yourseslf.....selling your "values" and hood winking the public. Didn't you hear Vigerie today, it's all opinion anyway...........laugh. Yeah sure.

You can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant.

I'm going to explain this one more time. Here goes:

It's the technique we're practicing. The content is idiosyncratic. But the technique is what we have to learn how to practice. Practice and practice. Then we can each use it to sell our own message, whatever that may be.

We'll be out there hawking our wares, just like Rove. We'll be one of the big guys and we can say intelligent things like, "it's all opinion." or whatever. Geez, is it really THAT hard to figure this out? Come on Baldimo, you can do it. I just know you can.

And now, I leave you with this happy thought for the night:

Count your blessings, count them one by one. Count your blessings see what you have done. Count your blessings, count them one by one by one......... (accelerando) count your many blessings, see what you have done. (Glowing face and happy smile at the end.)

She's a lovely little cutie and no mistake.

Nice song, spendius. It is a song lyric, isn't it?

I see her problem. She's got the lyrics wrong.

Count your blessings...(overstated pause), count them one by one. Count your blessings--see what GOD has done.

You guys have yourselves mixed up with God. This has lead to many scurrilous snafus.

Those are my lyrics, missy. You can sing your own version.

But observe, if you will, how quick conservative are to tell us we're wrong. There's no clarifying question, no attempt to understand the meaning the lyrics may have to me. Just immediate judgement. As if I'm supposed to fall in, lock step because I've been reprimanded. I don't think so. Yet again, another reason why we can legitimately call them the party of No.

This is why the conservatives are so eager to have monuments glorifying the Ten Commandments in publicly owned buildings. It's a clear, transparent goal of their crusade to judge everyone according to their religion, as if it were absolute truth.

Absolute truth is such an cheap, easy way out.

Do you suppose that in ages to come the word Rovian will replace Machiavellian? It's certainly easier to say and spell and takes less time to type out. It fits well with the new easier, dum downer, more simple turn of political "journalism." In any case, how often have we seen this argument [freedom of religion not freedom from religion] made lately, word for word? Conservatives have been out there on the talk shows and in here on the internet threads repeating it like little Pavrovian puppies.

Here's a new term for us to use. Whenever we find a Rovian argument reproduced for us to read (over and over) we should label it as Pavrovian.

Remember, the more you repeat it, the truer it is.

It's also advantageous to make your points as little sound bites, with emphasis. All the easier for it to be repeated by reporters, who are often lazy these days.

So, I think I'll refine this technique as it's developing. Feel free to make suggestions for how to make it even better.

Here is it:

1. Never address the argument of the opposition, unless you can use it against them. Never get yourself into a "you did too, I did not" kind of situation. It will drag you down.

2. Never engage in a legitimate debate.

3. Use whatever the opposition says as an example of what they are doing wrong. How mean they are, how negative they are, how power hungry they are, how abusive they are. If you do it this way, you have the power of being the victim to back you up. The sympathy is always with you. Plus you get the boost of having the upper hand. Blessed are the victims, for they shall inherit the earth.


Another advantage is that you never have to answer for your own inconsistencies or behaviors. You don't even have to blame GOD for your own behavior. Just point out what they are doing wrong and repeat it everywhere. Their argument gets lost in the barrage of repeated labels.

Good show, Rove, you've taught us all so well.

Oh, so true Lola, so very true....

I just love people who see truth in my wisdom.

<laughing>

I can't seem to step outside the influence of Rove on this thread.

ehhh? whatzzat ya say, young 'un ? ah,nope. got on ma seein' eye glasses and kin see things for what they are, thankee.

america is a racist country, you understand that right ? what ever social advances were made in the last century are again being undermined by special interest and demographic manipulation of the population. and apparently people like it that way with the self inflicted "hyphenated american" routine.

now, i watched the hannity interview with byrd (as hell froze over btw). i'm satisfied with his answers about the latest brouha. just as i was satisfied with what lott said.

as to successes? other than success at scaring the bejezus out of enough people to sway the vote, what successes are you referring to ?

awrighty, i have ta eat now. gotta take ma pills