I think I should preface my diary first. See, this question is actually part of a broader strategy to either convince Republicans of their extremism or isolate them. The thing is, just telling a Republican that they are extreme will do nothing but make them angrier and entrench them in that view. I prefer to show them exactly how extremist their views are, not by arguing about an abstraction such as “higher taxes” or “socialism”, but by arguing about historical American figures, and historical American ideals. That makes the fight much easier for me and tends to humble them. Either they will actually change their views, or at the very least, stop their ridiculous hyperboles and have a conversation on facts. Having argued with tons of Republicans online (mostly trolls), I found that this sort of argument has a huge effect of calming them down and stopping their trolling.
For example, I have talked to many people who think ALL taxation is thievery, and that the Government has no right on ANY of our money. That is a pretty strange view to have, and is difficult to argue with at its face, since “taxation” is a disgusting word to them. So, to these people I say that “Washington supported taxation. In fact, he crushed a rebellion of farmers refusing to pay taxes (called the Whiskey Rebellion, look it up). Are you calling Washington a thief?”
Now, I have steered the conversation from taxes, a word of disgust, to George Washington, possibly the greatest President and a Founding Father. It is much easier to defend Washington than to defend taxation. If they stick to their guns, they end up looking like fools, because no one is going to support them and they know it. So, they might end up cutting their hyperbole, or they might just run away, and I will run shouting after them, banging that question into their brains (I call it reverse-trolling).
If they say that increasing taxes on the rich is “socialism, AARG!” I point out that “the first income tax, which forced the rich to pay more, was started by Abraham Lincoln (its called the Revenue Act, seriouslylook it up). Are you saying Abraham Lincoln is a socialist? Why do you hate him so much?” Again the fight is about Abraham Lincoln and that is a fight I am very happy to have.
If someone starts whining about “union thugs, BLAAH!” I say “Martin Luther King Jr. was such a huge supporter of Union rights, that he was at a Union rally the day before he was assassinated (Seriously, look it up). Why are you calling Martin Luther King Jr. a thug? To that matter, why are you calling the guys being shot and killed thugs, and not saying anything about the shooters?”
If someone has to stand up for patriots like Abraham Lincoln and George Washington, I will do it. If someone has to defend great men like Martin Luther King Jr., I will be happy to have that fight. If you want to be that guy attacking them… well, let’s tango...
So, about the title of this diary…. Rep. Akin said that giving student loans is similar to stage III cancer of socialism. First of all, how much of a hoot is this guy? I just burst out laughing when I heard that quote. I mean, how full of hate do you have to be that your most hateful word “socialism” isn’t enough to describe your hate. You have to combine that hateful word with more hate like “stage III cancer”. You can just imagine this guy red in his face, and with spittle out of his mouth saying it. Anyway, that is an aside. Here is my question to Rep Akin:
Mr. Akin, sir, if you believe Government student loans are stage III cancer of socialism, I would like to point out to you that 2.2 million veterans from the greatest American generation- the World War II heroes, went to college the G.I. Bill. Historians and Economists consider the G.I. Bill a huge economic success. But let’s ignore that for a moment. The GI bill (full of govt loans and subsidies) was much bigger than this piece of legislation we are fighting over, similar to a stage IV or V cancer. Is that what you are calling our greatest heroes? If using Gov’t loans for education is cancer, surely you consider our greatest generation to be cancer, correct?
It's simple, and effective. It gets the point across without too much debate, because there isn't too much debate to be had. I'm not arguing about the effectiveness of the New Deal, or what the CBO says about the Stimulus. All I am saying is that "the Americans that you respect the most (besides maybe Reagan) are ALL on MY side. Your world view where you are the "real American" is gone. How about them apples?"
Edit: Another great point that Ballerina below added: what about the fact that the greatest generation lived under income tax rates of 91% for the rich. If they are defenders of freedom, how can requesting an income tax of less than half that be socialistic? Was America socialistic under JFK when the income tax rates were 70% for the rich?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit 2: I was inspired by the diary "Sometimes Jesus is Plain Wrong" by MaikeH, you guys should check it out. When conservatives insult the poor as lazy and undeserving, I take a multi-prong approach:
First- Jesus. As MaikeH says, even if you feel someone is undeserving you should still be generous. Even if you feel the poor are lazy, and undeserving, is apathy the value that Jesus teaches or mercy?
Second- the Statue of Liberty. The same people you call lazy, the Statue of Liberty swears to protect:
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door."
Doesn't that make my values American values? And what does that make your values?
Third- derision. Do you seriously think that 8 million Americans with jobs suddenly decided to quit their jobs and become poor, coincidentally on the day the stock market crashed in '08? Doesn't it make no sense that they had no control over their destiny, and if that happened to you and it wasn't your fault, wouldn't you want help?