Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Fighting Words: How to Humiliate -- and Convert -- a Right-Winger

By John Dolan, AlterNet. Posted March 25, 2008.


Drop the condescending "populist" talk and get mean.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by John Dolan

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

I'd like to suggest a very simple strategy for American liberals: Get mean. Stop policing the language and start using it to hurt our enemies. American liberals are so busy purging their speech of any words that might offend anyone that they have no notion of using language to cause some salutary pain.

Why, for example, not popularize slogans that mock the Bush loyalists as "suckers"? Something like, "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." Put that on a few bumper stickers and I guarantee a lot of "South Park Republicans" will quit the GOP. They just smirk when you tsk-tsk at them for being disrespectful. They want to be disrespectful; every normal young male wants to be.

And this, of course, brings up a big issue: At some point liberal writers are going to have to decide if it's OK to be young and male at all. For better or for worse, millions of American men hold on to playground ethics long after they leave elementary school. For most of them, the 2004 election came down to a classic playground scene: Would John Kerry defend himself when attacked by bullies? Liberals, still stunned by the way a legitimate combat vet like Kerry was beaten by a combat-dodging spoiled brat like Bush, never understood that for millions of voters, the question wasn't how well Kerry fought in Vietnam but whether he would fight in 2004.

Would he defend himself when called out by the gang of disgusting bullies Bush had gathered around himself? It would have been so simple, so glorious, if he'd just turned on his accusers and reacted like a human being: "You're questioning my record on behalf of a skunk like Bush who spent the war with the Alabama National Guard, and then went AWOL from the Guard?"

Millions of American voters were waiting, hoping Kerry would react like any sane person would have. He never did. I don't know why not; I assume he was in the hands of some Clinton gurus who babbled about "rising above the fray." Well, that sure worked well.

And please, don't tell me you're above such gross playground considerations. The American people are the beneficiaries of centuries of serious Leftist violence, starting with the American Revolution and climaxing in the Civil War. Without brave Leftist warriors slaughtering British and Confederate soldiers in large numbers, the whole tradition of American liberalism would not exist.

And we are the sufferers from the most disastrous wimp-out in recent American history: Carter's debacle in response to the taking of American hostages in Iran in 1979. That refusal to use punitive force to free his country's diplomats may have made pacifists feel nice, but it was an expensive treat; it got Reagan elected, showed a host of evil right-wing PR staffers that all they had to do was talk tough to win, and convinced a huge number of disgusted American male voters that the liberals would not fight back.

Kerry could have turned that around in 2004; it was almost as if a Hollywood scriptwriter had arranged the perfect confrontation, in which the liberal champion could flatten his orc-like tormentors and show the voters that one can be a progressive without being a wimp. Instead, he confirmed a prevalent myth that liberals are "soft" on terrorism and the military -- in other words, like illustrator Gary Larson's Wimpodites: "Though skilled with their pillow arsenal, the Wimpodites were frequent targets of Viking attacks."

And so far, the liberal response, the liberal attempt to reach out to the guys in the big trucks is embarrassing "populist" essays using bad imitations of American slang. Let's be blunt here: "populism" is condescension. If you want male voters' respect, stop patronizing them. (It just creeps them out.) Far better to insult them -- to their face, in their face, telling them bluntly that the talk radio nonsense they parrot is pure crap. They know that themselves. Half of what they say is designed simply to reassure themselves and their friends that they're not the same sort of wimps their social studies teachers tried to make them into. So they're not afraid of being called cruel or insensitive; they're afraid of being suckers.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: liberals, language

John Dolan is an editor of the Moscow-based English-language alternative paper, "The eXile." He is the author of, most recently, "Pleasant Hell" (Capricorn, 2005).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
F-kin A
Posted by: YogiBear on Mar 25, 2008 12:32 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just make sure you are right, otherwise you come off sounding like a dumbass.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: F-kin A Posted by: mmckinl
» NO LEADERS Posted by: rancespergl
» RE: F-kin A Posted by: rickiey
» RE: F-kin A Posted by: mmckinl
» RE: Hand over my heart and tears Posted by: boydranchitos
» WE are the leaders Posted by: deepseas
» RE: Leaders Posted by: sasquuatch55
» RE: F-kin A Posted by: dockboy
» did somebody say "get mean"????? Posted by: CulturalMutilation
» nonsense Posted by: realtruther
» RE: nonsense Posted by: Patriot46
A class element
Posted by: andabottleof_rum on Mar 25, 2008 12:35 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You have a point. There is a visceral contempt for the whining discursive style of liberals and their "moral high ground" strategies. Many people react with contempt because such an attitude reveals the person has never been in the military or worked a back-breaking job or fought with chronic economic instability.

Most liberals are middle class. They live and work among other middle class people in nice clean professions that often don't even seem like real work.

Working-class person: What do you do? Consulting? That's getting paid just to give your opinion?

I'll give you a piece of my mind about your job if you pay me for it.


I don't know if liberals have it in them to be down and dirty. That would transgress class lines and make them look like something they dearly don't want to be: low brow laborers. Also, after living cushy lives, I doubt they'd have it in them to be really cruel and even, if need be, violent. Notice war is a working-class thing and middle-class people do what they can to avoid the military.

Who was it killing those Brits and Confederates and Nazis in those glorious liberal victories? It was mostly the lower class, of course!

Who was it rioting in the 60s for racial justice? Poor blacks in ghettos!

Who were some of the most aggressive anti-war protesters? War veterans!

What did middle class liberals do in the 60s? They organized non-violent protests and some of the younger ones occasionally became violent when they realized there was a possibility they would be drafted.

Aggression and violence are lower-class male things. It would probably be useful in winning their support if liberals knew how to be aggressive and violent, but I am unsure if they have it in them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Where's our Limbaugh? Posted by: kegbot1
» RE: Where's our Limbaugh? Posted by: toddcory
» RE: Where's our Limbaugh? Posted by: kegbot1
» His name is Bill Maher . . . Posted by: Scientz
» Joe Lyles . . . ? Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Mike Malloy Posted by: Techubus
» RE: Where's our Limbaugh? Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Where's our Limbaugh? Posted by: kegbot1
» RE: Where's our Limbaugh? Posted by: Longdream
» Been up-country lately? Posted by: Itsthewater
» I'm There With You Posted by: pdxstudent
» Yes, we have it in us Posted by: deepseas
» RE: A class element Posted by: Dr. P. Mooney
» RE: A class element Posted by: Dr. P. Mooney
» RE: A class element Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» RE: A class element Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: A class element Posted by: Lauren
» Aggression and Violence ... Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: Aggression and Violence ... Posted by: Intellect
» RE: A miliary element... Posted by: harryf200
» RE: A class element!?!?!??? Posted by: cbishopp
» RE: A class element!?!?!??? Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» RE: A class element Posted by: Hovey
» You mean like Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld... Posted by: trappedintwilightzone
» RE: You mean like Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld... Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» RE: A class element Posted by: Longdream
» Many Years Ago Posted by: jackyD
» RE: A class element Posted by: Suz
» RE: A class element Posted by: Longdream
» RE: A class element Posted by: ringo
» RE: A class element Posted by: trpeer
» RE: A class element Posted by: yetischmeti
You Should Talk to Your Fellow Writers, Here and Elsewhere ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Mar 25, 2008 12:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Or maybe that is what you are doing in a round about fashion.

I see a gaping hole in the anger that should be expressed by Liberal writers and politicians everywhere. Just look at what this shit hole Bush and a Republican Congress has done to this country over these last 7 years.

Look at our leaders in Congress, Reid and Pelosi. Pelosi takes Impeachment off the table before she even sees the evidence or hears the charges. Reid gets all puffed up one day then sucks up the next ... With leaders like this who's gonna pretend we're gonna stand up to anything ...

It just goes on and on with the whining and whimpering and when someone like Pete Stark stands up and gets mad he's immediately beaten up by his own cowardly party.

Almost all liberal radio hosts and TV personalities have no attitude whatsoever.

So you can talk about us liberals out here in the real world all you want, but from the weak at the knees writing we get and the cowardly leadership that whimpers from Washington, what the hell do you expect?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good grief! Posted by: trappedintwilightzone
» RE: Good grief! Posted by: mmckinl
Great strategy . . . if you are going after the 2-year-old vote
Posted by: Rune on Mar 25, 2008 12:53 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do we really need more crap obscuring the very serious and daunting wrongs that the Republicans championed and the Democrats have continued? Partisan bickering is no more effective than the compromise (Obama) or sell-out (Clinton) being offered by the "opposition party's" leading candidates.

It would be much more useful and effective, I believe, for the Democrats to pull an entirely different page out of the GOP playbook. Tell the story of giving people back something they regard as wrongfully taken from them and let them dream of how they will make use of that "gift." In the case of the Republicans, the game is played by telling people they can have their tax money back to spend as they please (ignoring the services and devaluation of the currency that results from deficit spending). The GOP has set the table for a whopping round of giving people back their privacy, the security of their identities and private information, the right to be told the truth by a whole range of scientists working the public interest, the right to know what their government is doing on their behalf, and the right to have the government respect their wishes about, say, war or consumer protection even if it is not a presidential election year.

Offering to give those things back, and restoring a bit of America's dignity in the process, would make for a very attractive and compelling choice that people from all walks of life could dream about and long for. It could . . . if that was what the Democrats intended to do if Obama or Clinton got elected. But so far, neither has indicated they are committed to such clearcut reversals of Bush's policies and harmful laws he signed into being.

Instead, the Democrats make a big noise about what a bad boy Dubya has been, but they won't call for his impeachment (which the majority of citizens support) nor will they come right out and say they will undo the long list of unconstitutional policies he and privileges he has brought into play. They won't even promise to bring defense spending down to something comparable to the already high level it was at when Bush declared himself to be the untouchable commander in chief. (Soon, the Democrats will be handing Bush another $100+ billion blank check for more lawless warfare, BTW.)

That being the case, why, exactly, are we so determined to make fools of ourselves by trying to humiliate Republicans instead of demonstrating some wisdom and concrete ideas for ending one of the worst periods in U.S. history? Shouldn't Democrats be rather sheepish themselves for sticking by what has become the Republican-lite party?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» One of the best damn posts... Posted by: trappedintwilightzone
» RE: I'm tired. Posted by: Longdream
» RE: American people (think again) Posted by: Itsthewater
» RE: American people (think again) Posted by: democracynowiniraq
» RE: American people (think again) Posted by: democracynowiniraq
Silence Is Not An Option!
Posted by: skizum on Mar 25, 2008 2:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In my personal experience I have found myself afraid to incite conflict for fear of retribution. At the same time, when I have had to confront bullies and people who are mean spirited, I have acted aggressively, engaged in conflict and earned respect. I have experienced on more than one occasion that when I engage in heated conflict I have earned respect but only in cases where I have spoken or acted from the moral higher ground. Alternatively, I have also found that by engaging people in rational debate with strong principal can be quite effective too.

In both cases, I have found it productive to always direct my points to attack my opponents ego. The whole dynamic seems to revolve around defending one's sense of self pride. I have earned respect by challenging another person's ego until the point where I have shown that I will not be steamrolled. It's all about finding a way around, over, under or through someone else's walls of rationalized self defense to earn respect. Once this point of tension has been reached, often a mutual respect of one's adversary can be achieved. People often become good friends in this way and sometimes bitter enemies.

In any case, we progressives need to continue to communicate our messages and challenge the very logic and premises that our aggressive opponents spew forth on a regular basis. In this regard, my contribution to the effort is focussed on providing progressives with a means to broadly disseminate their voices whether boldly and publicly or quietly and discreetly. Repetitive messaging works, it's the basis of advertising, learning and propaganda; let's use it effectively and with great frequency.

One thing is for sure; silence is not a viable option if you care about bringing America back from the brink of social implosion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Well Said Posted by: kegbot1
» RE: Well Said Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Well Said! Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Well Said! Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Well Said! Posted by: Intellect
» RE: Silence Is Not An Option! Posted by: The Old Hippie
What would Washington say?
Posted by: Adler Berriman Seal on Mar 25, 2008 2:22 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy....

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another; foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passion. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose; and there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Very interesting quote Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» It's Political Pro-wrestling Posted by: Adler Berriman Seal
» RE: Very interesting quote Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Very interesting quote Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» RE: Very interesting quote Posted by: Longdream
at last
Posted by: MobileSucks on Mar 25, 2008 2:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OK, I just read the first few lines of this. I'll check the rest out latter. But if you've been around working class people, whites and blacks, this 'get mean' idea rings so true you may find it hard to believe. You got to speak to people in their language, not yours. People aren't nice liberals even if they agree with liberal positions more often than not and don't know it cause they're propagandized and are delusional.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: at last Posted by: bukharajones
» Right the fuck on... Posted by: MobileSucks
» Wait a minute! Posted by: trappedintwilightzone
While you're at it, buy a damn GUN.
Posted by: willie.horton on Mar 25, 2008 3:40 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My political compass is -9.00, -7.95 -- just about as far to the left as you can go, and extremely libertarian -- and we're heavily armed. There is no contradiction here: the leftist revolutionaries who wrote our Constitution would have been writing it (in their own feces) on the wall of their prison cell if not for their guns.

"Gun control" is the first issue they use to make us look like wimps. And, we're wrong about it. They use it to make the "sucker Republicans" vote their way by calling our politicians "gun grabbers."

Learn to shoot.
Buy the most carnivorous guns on Earth: a 10mm Glock and a Saiga-12.
If you live in a "shall-issue" atate, get a concealed carry permit.
Join the NRA, and co-opt it from within.
Write your Democratic representatives, and tell them to STFU about worthless "gun control" laws (join the chorus: Howard Dean & the DNC are already screaming that at them).

It might save your life... and you might even enjoy it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I'm not disagreeing, but Posted by: dover23
» What's your political compass? Posted by: deepseas
big mouth leftie
Posted by: LauraGRossHC@Hotmail.com on Mar 25, 2008 3:56 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, that it would be so easy! Aside from suckers, there are those who truly believe in creationism, in the primacy of MAN, are sexist, recist, homophobic, etc. They are voting against any changes, anything they are afraid of since the republicans are so skilled at waging fear. We can talk some middle roaders out of their fear, get logical with some willing to listen who have just not paid much attention and get their information from mainstream media - or at least hook in their kids. But there are millions of people who feel a great need for control, whether they are leaders or followers. And they have plenty of names for people who fight against those who use the Bible as their excuse.
We need to continue to speak out, to use the label "liberal" proudly, and argue reality with anyone who will listen, and I fully agree Liberals need to grow some huevos and argue back, and incite the discussion on our own terms. But it isn't going to be easy on any level, and some won't be swayed by name-calling.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: big mouth leftie Posted by: Xynyx
We are different
Posted by: robchapman on Mar 25, 2008 4:04 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is a profound psychological difference between the left and right.

The left seeks cooperation and accomodation of divergent views.

The right seeks confrontation and conversion to certainty.

It is not worth engaging them if we become them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: We are different Posted by: mejsmith
» RE: We are different Posted by: Tampa
» You are wrong on all counts. Posted by: Centavo
» Listen brunowe... Posted by: Centavo
» Listen centavo Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Listen centavo Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Yes, Brunowe Posted by: Longdream
» A waste of time Posted by: deepseas
» nada más por el testigo... Posted by: realtruther
Forget that!
Posted by: unitedstatesofstupidity on Mar 25, 2008 4:05 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
HEY HEY! HO HO! REPUBLICANS HAVE GOT TO GO! HEY HEY! HO HO!

Stick to what works guys!!!

Oh, what's that? That never works? Oh...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Uh-uh--remember! Posted by: Longdream
My bumpersticker
Posted by: Tompatriot on Mar 25, 2008 4:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What would the founders do?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: My bumpersticker Posted by: mwinmag300
» RE: My bumpersticker Posted by: Xynyx
» RE: My bumpersticker Posted by: Lauren
» RE: My bumpersticker Posted by: buzzsaw
» RE: My bumpersticker Posted by: dockboy
» RE: My bumpersticker Posted by: willymack
» Yea, that includes me... Posted by: deepseas
» RE: Yeah, thanks. Posted by: Longdream
» RE: My bumpersticker Posted by: ohb0b
» RE: My bumpersticker Posted by: Longdream
what would they be humiliated about?
Posted by: Dboy on Mar 25, 2008 4:35 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The right-wingers are largely an anti-intellectual crowd. "W" attended both Harvard and Yale yet managed to remain completely uneducated (a respectable accomplishment among his supporters). They've been in office 8 years, started a few wars, appointed some nut-jobs to the supreme court, avoided impeachment, own their own cable TV "news" network, and have the support of most of the fly-over states. They got what they wanted: a president they could have a beer with. They didn't ask for a competent president, or a good president, or a moral president. They wanted a regular guy president and that's what they got. So what exactly do they have to feel humiliated about? Dumb won.

dboy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Exactly Posted by: messedup
Mister van Driessen
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Mar 25, 2008 4:40 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The liberal side has definitely been dominated by snotty, latte-sipping, PC goody-goodies for a while now. Some will say that's just a myth perpetuated by talk radio, but I think it's more than that.

At the same time, I don't want to act like Republicans just to get a bunch of fat, beer-swilling truck dudes to like us. They might just be extra baggage--kind of like the PC crowd. If they bring enough beer for the rest of us, maybe we'll think about it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» i hate coffee Posted by: happyhermit
» RE: Mister van Driessen Posted by: ohb0b
Absolutely Spot On Right, But
Posted by: kegbot1 on Mar 25, 2008 5:05 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Finally, someone is telling it like it is. Two small quibbles - (1) I've found that even using this tactic some cons absolutely DO believe fervently in what they're hearing from Limbaugh, et. al. It's not mere reassurance - its a reinforcement of deep-seated racism, nationalism and sexism, et. al. and merely calling them a 'sucker' causes them to cling even more to these beliefs because they don't want to admit they're wrong. You have to get even uglier than this and I never hesitate to do so. Check it out (I'm Bad American in the comments):

http://tinyurl.com/2frgns

Joe is not going to abandon a carefully defended belief system not just because he probably believes it but because to ADMIT HE'S WRONG is anathema to most schoolyard cons. He's there to get his shots in on a politically neutral blog and so am I. We're not going to convert each other but the casual reader. I think Dolan needs to consider this.

Now (2) some liberals believe that if we have to speak and connect to the pick-up truck Jethros than perhaps the country isn't worth saving - let it crash and burn and maybe the collective pain will be a two by four across the ignorant snouts. These libs, like their well heeled con counterparts, believe they can insulate themselves from economic and social meltdown. Whether its futile or not, I find it too enjoyable NOT to confront, quite frankly, what I consider to be evil ideas and philosophies that threaten the country my kids are growing up in.

Other than those two points its refreshing to read Dolan encouraging the liberals to rediscover their street fighting origins.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Great post. nm Posted by: MobileSucks
Classic Schoolyard Bullies.
Posted by: KeepsonTickn on Mar 25, 2008 5:35 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I cringe every time a Republican congressman or Right-Wing commentator says "Democrat Party" and the Democrats don't call him on it. Don't they understand that he is expressing his disdain for them and will continue to do so until he is forcefully called on it EVERY time he does it. Until they begin fighting back, Republicans will continue in the refrain of wife-beaters everywhere: "I do it because she deserves it."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That doesn't work. It's been tried. Posted by: KeepsonTickn
Ok yes I think I've got it like down
Posted by: TonyGottlieb on Mar 25, 2008 5:49 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kind of like the most personally irresponsible deadbeat act of child abuse a person can perform is the infanticide of their own child disguised as a woman's constitutionally protected right to privacy?
Before you slip off the gloves you might want to check your flank.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ok yes I think I've got it like down Posted by: Chickensh*tEagle
» Oh, come on now... Posted by: Chickensh*tEagle
» RE: Oh, come on now... Posted by: Moira61
» RE: Oh, come on now... Posted by: carcinoid112
Yeah! Bumper stickers are the answer! Genius!
Posted by: kenkruger on Mar 25, 2008 6:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yeah, great idea guys. Let's reduce our rhetoric to catchy slogans. Let's distill complex ideas and discussions into bumper stickers. Let's replace intellectual reason with emotional button-pushing. Let's work even harder to further divide the country into two insoluble tribes, and force everyone to choose a side between US and THEM, in the battle of good versus evil.

In short, let's jump in and imitate all the worst behavior of republicans.

Or...

Just an alternative idea...maybe we could take the high road. Call me a dreamer, but I believe it is quite possible to counter this group of born-again spoiled frat guy robber barons that have taken over the country withou