How to talk to a Conservative----if you must
Well, I just luuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrvvve Ann Coulter, so after reading this exchange between Paul Wolfowitz and a student from billmon I decided to imitate Ann and offer some advice after this exchange with old Paul.
First Student: We are tired, Secretary Wolfowitz, of being feared and hated by the world. We are tired of watching Americans and Iraqis die, and international institutions cry out in anger against us. We are simply tired of your policies. We hate them, and we will never stop opposing them . . .
Wolfowitz: I have to infer from that that you would be happier if Saddam Hussein were still in power . . .
Well, hell, yeah, Mr. Secretary, go ahead and infer all you want! Except don't infer the stuff that's actually there in what the student said.
Suggested answer: "Uh, no, asshole, we're unhappy you're such a fucking prick that you put words in our goddamned mouths, bitch. We said we were unhappy with your policies and we will oppose them. We didn't say shit about Saddam. Now, once again, we're sick of your trifling ass, and oh BY THE WAY, that little act right now didn't give us any reason to hate your butt any more."
Second Student: I'd just like to say that people like Ruthy and myself have always opposed Saddam Hussein, especially when Saddam Hussein was being funded by the United States throughout the '80s . . .
Wolfowitz: It seems to me that the north star of your comment is that you dislike this country and its policies.
Suggested response: "Christ, do you have a learning disability? Who the fuck are you, the Great Karnak? If you're that damned psychic, pick me some winning lottery numbers, bitch. I love my country. It's you I hate because you're such a lying-ass fuck."
Another good example, from Alas, A Blog:
I'm a bit late with this one, but if Maureen Connolly of the Coalition for Anti-Sexist Harvard is reading this, I just want you to know that you're my hero. If you've got to appear on a hopelessly biased fake-news show like Hannity & Colmes, then I admire someone who is willing to be obnoxious to Sean.
From "Hannity & Colmes," March 2 2005, about the Larry Summers bru-hah-hah.
SEAN HANNITY: Is it sexism or a point of valid debate? Joining us now, Harvard students on both sides of the issue, Josh Mendelsohn from the group Students for Larry and Maureen Connolly for the Coalition for an Anti- Sexist Harvard.
Maureen, are there differences between men and women? Do you see differences in men and women? Not just physical, their other differences?
MAUREEN CONNOLLY, COALITION FOR ANTI-SEXIST HARVARD: Differences between men and women? Of course, I see differences. Do you see differences between men and women?
HANNITY: What are some of the differences?
CONNOLLY: Oh, Sean, I think you can answer that question for yourself. You don't need me to explain that to you.
HANNITY: You know, this is how it works here, Maureen. I ask the questions. You answer them. What are some of the differences you see between men and women?
CONNOLLY: Well, for example, I have long hair. You have short hair. That type of thing, don't you think?
HANNITY: That's not exactly the type of difference I was talking about. For example...
CONNOLLY: What differences are you talking about?
HANNITY: ... do you think, and this is just an intellectual exercise, do you think women by nature are more nurturing to children than men are or is that a stereotype?
CONNOLLY: Oh, see, there's your first mistake. The nature-nurture debate is far outdated, Sean. You're making a big mistake. And that type of...
(CROSSTALK)
HANNITY: Do you think that or not? I'm asking a question, and is it yes or no? It's a simple question.
CONNOLLY: That absolutism is entirely outdated. So why don't you check up on your psychology and maybe we can go back and talk about the nuances of that debate?
I saw Bill O'Reilly a while ago 'debating' social security with some wimp from the National Organization for Women. Abruptly he asked her why the NOW didn't support any traditionalist positions for women. Here's what she should have said:
"Yo, dickhead, we're a liberal organization. Go get a dictionary, fool."
Then he asked her if she was gay. The correct response would have been:
"Are personal lives up for discussion? Well, then, let's discuss your sexual harassment lawsuit, dickhead."
Of course, Bill O'Reilly would then cut her mike, because even though he changed the subject, it's Okay If You're a Republican.
But, anyhoo.....Christ, I swear, I think if you showed some of these assholes a river, they'd say the Democrats would call it a desert. And that's it for me today, I swear.
So in conclusion, if you must talk to a Republican, here are some simple things to keep in mind:
They're sneaky. They'll change the subject: change it back.
Don't let them frame issues as black and white. Jeer if necessary. "I get to ask the questions."
Suggested response: "Yeah, whatever, fuckwit. Ask some intelligent ones. What is this, 1970? Nature versus nurture my ass. Life isn't black and white, dude."
Be brutally blunt. They can't handle that. They'll do all kinds of shit to get your unnerved. Don't let them. Turn it back on them. Bill O'Reilly has reportedly had to settle more than one sexual harassment lawsuit and this latest time Faux News made him pay this one himself. Always, always, stay calm and stick to the facts. Bring up grey areas. They're like vampires; they don't like anything but black and white.
Last but not least: do your research, and then you get to insult them. Of course, well, insulting them is kind of a judgement call. What sounds like an insult is often just the simple truth: "So, Mr. Family Values, exactly how many divorces HAVE you had?"