Liberal argument tactic exposed!
 

I would like to point out my conservative/libertarian colleagues and
associates a liberal argument tactic used mainly by the likes of Saltydog,
Ganz and recently by Jeff.

They will argue something at length using great contortions, leaps of faith
and immaculate assumptions to no avail. They will experience a thwarting
like no other at the hands of one skilled in correct, logical
conservative/libertarian thinking.

So when they realize their case is hopeless they will roll out this one
question in exasperation:

"So what is your point?"

in an attempt to put the correctly thinking conservative/libertarian on his
heels. The proper response to such a tactic is to point out that they have
been arguing with great fury and foaming about something they admittedly
fail to see or comprehend. Those conservatives/libertarians skilled in the
art should phrase their reply to the great amusement of fellow
conservatives/libertarians and with a keen eye to further enrage the already
irrational liberal. There's nothing better than to hang someone with their
own noose.

Liberal argument tactic exposed!
 

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...
I would like to point out my conservative/libertarian colleagues and
associates a liberal argument tactic used mainly by the likes of Saltydog,
Ganz and recently by Jeff.

They will argue something at length using great contortions, leaps of
faith and immaculate assumptions to no avail. They will experience a
thwarting like no other at the hands of one skilled in correct, logical
conservative/libertarian thinking.

So when they realize their case is hopeless they will roll out this one
question in exasperation:

"So what is your point?"

in an attempt to put the correctly thinking conservative/libertarian on
his heels. The proper response to such a tactic is to point out that they
have been arguing with great fury and foaming about something they
admittedly fail to see or comprehend. Those conservatives/libertarians
skilled in the art should phrase their reply to the great amusement of
fellow conservatives/libertarians and with a keen eye to further enrage
the already irrational liberal. There's nothing better than to hang
someone with their own noose.



Hoist with their own petard!

Liberals goons have been doing it for years. But I still get a good laugh
out of it anyway. To a liberal an argument is a method used to display their
real world ignorance.

Wilbur Hubbard

Liberal argument tactic exposed!
 

"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote in message
anews.com...

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...
I would like to point out my conservative/libertarian colleagues and
associates a liberal argument tactic used mainly by the likes of Saltydog,
Ganz and recently by Jeff.

They will argue something at length using great contortions, leaps of
faith and immaculate assumptions to no avail. They will experience a
thwarting like no other at the hands of one skilled in correct, logical
conservative/libertarian thinking.

So when they realize their case is hopeless they will roll out this one
question in exasperation:

"So what is your point?"

in an attempt to put the correctly thinking conservative/libertarian on
his heels. The proper response to such a tactic is to point out that they
have been arguing with great fury and foaming about something they
admittedly fail to see or comprehend. Those conservatives/libertarians
skilled in the art should phrase their reply to the great amusement of
fellow conservatives/libertarians and with a keen eye to further enrage
the already irrational liberal. There's nothing better than to hang
someone with their own noose.



Hoist with their own petard!

Liberals goons have been doing it for years. But I still get a good laugh
out of it anyway. To a liberal an argument is a method used to display
their real world ignorance.

Wilbur Hubbard


Right you are Wilbur, a true conservative such as yourself easily recognizes
such liberal foils and canards when deployed.

Now, my fellow Americans, the tide has been running against freedom. Our
people have followed false prophets. We must, and we shall, return to proven
ways-- not because they are old, but because they are true. We must, and we
shall, set the tide running again in the cause of freedom. And this party,
with its every action, every word, every breath, and every heartbeat, has
but a single resolve, and that is freedom - freedom made orderly for this
nation by our constitutional government; freedom under a government limited
by laws of nature and of nature's God; freedom - balanced so that liberty
lacking order will not become the slavery of the prison cell; balanced so
that liberty lacking order will not become the license of the mob and of the
jungle.

Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they
regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version
of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always
create the most hellish tyrannies. Absolute power does corrupt, and those
who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed. Their mistaken course stems
from false notions of equality, ladies and gentlemen. Equality, rightly
understood, as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to
the emancipation of creative differences. Wrongly understood, as it has been
so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to
despotism.

And I needn't remind you - but I will - that it's been during Democratic
years that our strength to deter war has stood still, and even gone into a
planned decline. It has been during Democratic years that we have weakly
stumbled into conflict, timidly refusing to draw our own lines against
aggression, deceitfully refusing to tell even our people of our full
participation, and tragically, letting our finest men die on battlefields
(unmarked by purpose, unmarked by pride or the prospect of victory).

Today in our beloved country we have an administration which seems eager to
deal with communism in every coin known - from gold to wheat, from
consulates to confidence, and even human freedom itself.

I seek an American proud of its past, proud of its ways, proud of its
dreams, and determined actively to proclaim them. But our example to the
world must, like charity, begin at home.

In our vision of a good and decent future, free and peaceful, there must be
room for deliberation of the energy and talent of the individual - otherwise
our vision is blind at the outset.

We must assure a society here which, while never abandoning the needy or
forsaking the helpless, nurtures incentives and opportunity for the creative
and the productive. We must know the whole good is the product of many
single contributions.

I cherish a day when our children once again will restore as heroes the sort
of men and women who - unafraid and undaunted - pursue the truth, strive to
cure disease, subdue and make fruitful our natural environment and produce
the inventive engines of production, science, and technology.

We see, in private property and in economy based upon and fostering private
property, the one way to make government a durable ally of the whole man,
rather than his determined enemy. We see in the sanctity of private property
the only durable foundation for constitutional government in a free society.
And beyond that, we see, in cherished diversity of ways, diversity of
thoughts, of motives and accomplishments. We do not seek to lead anyone's
life for him - we seek only to secure his rights and to guarantee him
opportunity to strive, with government performing only those needed and
constitutionally sanctioned tasks which cannot otherwise be performed.

Our towns and our cities, then our counties, then our states, then our
regional contacts - and only then, the national government. That, let me
remind you, is the ladder of liberty, built by decentralized power. On it
also we must have balance between the branches of government at every level.

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And
let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no
virtue.

Liberal argument tactic exposed!
 

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...

"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote in message
anews.com...

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...
I would like to point out my conservative/libertarian colleagues and
associates a liberal argument tactic used mainly by the likes of
Saltydog, Ganz and recently by Jeff.

They will argue something at length using great contortions, leaps of
faith and immaculate assumptions to no avail. They will experience a
thwarting like no other at the hands of one skilled in correct, logical
conservative/libertarian thinking.

So when they realize their case is hopeless they will roll out this one
question in exasperation:

"So what is your point?"

in an attempt to put the correctly thinking conservative/libertarian on
his heels. The proper response to such a tactic is to point out that
they have been arguing with great fury and foaming about something they
admittedly fail to see or comprehend. Those conservatives/libertarians
skilled in the art should phrase their reply to the great amusement of
fellow conservatives/libertarians and with a keen eye to further enrage
the already irrational liberal. There's nothing better than to hang
someone with their own noose.



Hoist with their own petard!

Liberals goons have been doing it for years. But I still get a good laugh
out of it anyway. To a liberal an argument is a method used to display
their real world ignorance.

Wilbur Hubbard


Right you are Wilbur, a true conservative such as yourself easily
recognizes such liberal foils and canards when deployed.

Now, my fellow Americans, the tide has been running against freedom. Our
people have followed false prophets. We must, and we shall, return to
proven ways-- not because they are old, but because they are true. We
must, and we shall, set the tide running again in the cause of freedom.
And this party, with its every action, every word, every breath, and every
heartbeat, has but a single resolve, and that is freedom - freedom made
orderly for this nation by our constitutional government; freedom under a
government limited by laws of nature and of nature's God; freedom -
balanced so that liberty lacking order will not become the slavery of the
prison cell; balanced so that liberty lacking order will not become the
license of the mob and of the jungle.

Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they
regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own
version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones
who always create the most hellish tyrannies. Absolute power does corrupt,
and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed. Their mistaken
course stems from false notions of equality, ladies and gentlemen.
Equality, rightly understood, as our founding fathers understood it, leads
to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences. Wrongly
understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to
conformity and then to despotism.

And I needn't remind you - but I will - that it's been during Democratic
years that our strength to deter war has stood still, and even gone into a
planned decline. It has been during Democratic years that we have weakly
stumbled into conflict, timidly refusing to draw our own lines against
aggression, deceitfully refusing to tell even our people of our full
participation, and tragically, letting our finest men die on battlefields
(unmarked by purpose, unmarked by pride or the prospect of victory).

Today in our beloved country we have an administration which seems eager
to deal with communism in every coin known - from gold to wheat, from
consulates to confidence, and even human freedom itself.

I seek an American proud of its past, proud of its ways, proud of its
dreams, and determined actively to proclaim them. But our example to the
world must, like charity, begin at home.

In our vision of a good and decent future, free and peaceful, there must
be room for deliberation of the energy and talent of the individual -
otherwise our vision is blind at the outset.

We must assure a society here which, while never abandoning the needy or
forsaking the helpless, nurtures incentives and opportunity for the
creative and the productive. We must know the whole good is the product of
many single contributions.

I cherish a day when our children once again will restore as heroes the
sort of men and women who - unafraid and undaunted - pursue the truth,
strive to cure disease, subdue and make fruitful our natural environment
and produce the inventive engines of production, science, and technology.

We see, in private property and in economy based upon and fostering
private property, the one way to make government a durable ally of the
whole man, rather than his determined enemy. We see in the sanctity of
private property the only durable foundation for constitutional government
in a free society. And beyond that, we see, in cherished diversity of
ways, diversity of thoughts, of motives and accomplishments. We do not
seek to lead anyone's life for him - we seek only to secure his rights and
to guarantee him opportunity to strive, with government performing only
those needed and constitutionally sanctioned tasks which cannot otherwise
be performed.

Our towns and our cities, then our counties, then our states, then our
regional contacts - and only then, the national government. That, let me
remind you, is the ladder of liberty, built by decentralized power. On it
also we must have balance between the branches of government at every
level.

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.
And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no
virtue.




Where, oh where is Barry Goldwater when we really need him. He was the
perfect blend of conservatism and libertarianism. Sadly, a man born well
before his time.

Wilbur Hubbard

Liberal argument tactic exposed!
 

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 13:00:52 -0700, "Charles Momsen"

said:

I would remind you

You would remind us if.....

I [r]ecommend a trip to the grammar books.


I recommend you sober up, dude! You're not making much sense.

--
Gregory Hall

Liberal argument tactic exposed!
 

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 13:00:52 -0700, "Charles Momsen"

said:

I cherish a day when our children once again will

I recommend a quick trip to the dictionary.

Dave, that was verbatim from Goldwater's 1964 acceptance speech. Real
conservatives would recognize those words immediately. It is one of the
greatest American political speeches of all time.

Liberal argument tactic exposed!
 

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 13:00:52 -0700, "Charles Momsen"

said:

I would remind you

You would remind us if.....

I Recommend a trip to the grammar books.

And for you a trip to the history books:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...aterspeech.htm


I was out on a climbing trip a few years back and managed to film a UFO
hovering overhead. Most importantly, I was able to record a message
broadcasted by the occupants of the other worldly craft. It is obvious that
the creatures within were of the most highly developed intellect in the
universe. See what I saw he

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WNMxBncCbA

Liberal argument tactic exposed!
 

"Wilbur Hubbard"

Where, oh where is Barry Goldwater when we really need him. He was the
perfect blend of conservatism and libertarianism. Sadly, a man born well
before his time.

Wilbur Hubbard

There may be a Goldwater waiting in the wings, but for now we'll have to
settle for this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u33kb...eature=related

Enjoy!

Liberal argument tactic exposed!
 

On 7 Nov 2008 15:54:01 -0600, Dave wrote:

On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 14:19:03 -0700, "Charles Momsen"
said:

And for you a trip to the history books:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...aterspeech.htm

Hey, I don't even believe in Papal infallibility, let alone Goldwater's
speech writer's infallibility. He simply got it wrong.

You would no doubt insist on adding eyebrows to the Mona Lisa.

Liberal argument tactic exposed!
 

wrote in message
...
On 7 Nov 2008 15:54:01 -0600, Dave wrote:

On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 14:19:03 -0700, "Charles Momsen"

said:

And for you a trip to the history books:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...aterspeech.htm

Hey, I don't even believe in Papal infallibility, let alone Goldwater's
speech writer's infallibility. He simply got it wrong.

You would no doubt insist on adding eyebrows to the Mona Lisa.


Too late...

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/17/mon...ery/index.html

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com