Skip to comments.Shooting liberals and loons
Posted on 07/06/2004 12:20:01 PM PDT by hsmomx3
I recently shot a liberal who had been haranguing me for the last two years over my weekly opinion column in the Arizona Republic. I'll never hear from him again. If you want to know how to shoot liberals and other loons without getting arrested, read on.
I'll start with how I shot the haranguer. I shot him with a rhetorical bullet by asking him the following: "Since you dislike my libertarian views, could you please describe your political philosophy? To make it easy for you, pick a point on a 10-point scale, in which '0' represents totalitarianism, '5' represents contemporary liberalism, '6' represents neoconservatism and '10' represents the full array of liberty, including civil liberties, economic freedom, property rights, and the rights of self-defense and free association."
The haranguer wrote back and said that he was too busy to answer my question.. Yeah, right. He is not too busy to send me long, haranguing e-mails, but he's too busy to pick a point on a 10-point scale. In reality, the question flummoxed him, because like most people, he had spent his adult life thinking in terms of the traditional left-right scale, or liberal-conservative scale, and not a liberty scale. Like a shot in the forehead, the question undoubtedly made him realize that his political philosophy was not about complete freedom, and he was not about to admit it.
Here are six other bullets that I have found effective in shooting liberals and loons:
When a liberal or loon says that taxes should be increased in general or for some utopian purpose, shoot back with this loaded question: "Given that government spending has increased 300% in inflation-adjusted dollars over the last 100 years, given that the cost of government is $24,000 per household, given that a clerk earning $64 a day at a convenience store has almost $10 taken for the Social Security and Medicare of well-off retirees, and given that I pay more than 40% of my income in taxes, what do you think is a fair percentage of income for people to pay in taxes?"
I have asked at least 50 liberals and loons this question. None has ever answered the question with a specific percentage. Most answer with platitudes and generalities about fairness and justice. A few have actually said that no one should pay more than 25% of income in taxes.
When a liberal or loon says that schools are underfunded and need more money, fire the following question: "How much do you pay per year and over a lifetime in school taxes?" If the person doesn't know (and few people do), fire a follow-up question: "Then how do you know that schools deserve more of your money and whether you are getting your money's worth?"
When a liberal or loon says that health care should be provided by the government, squeeze off this round: "Do you also believe that everyone should get free food, shelter, clothing and transportation from the government, and wasn't that tried by the Soviet Union?"
When a liberal or loon says that health care is right, pop 'em with this: "Aren't you really saying that people have a right to take other people's money for their health care? If so, where is that right written?" If he responds with claptrap about the profit motive not working in health care, ask him the following: "Are you aware that the government critically wounded a consumer market in health care 60 years ago, when misguided policies resulted in employees getting their medical insurance from their employers instead of buying it on their own, and that the government delivered the coup de grace with Medicare in 1965? Why do you blame the market when there is no consumer market in medical insurance?"
When a liberal or loon says that higher gas prices are due to price-fixing by Big Oil, blast back with this bullet: "Then why does Big Oil allow prices to fall?"
When the first five bullets mortally wound a liberal or loon, and in his dying breath he calls you mean-spirited and selfish, finish him off as follows: "Gee, if you care so much about other people, why don't you give them your money instead of mine?"
Lock and load. Happy shooting -- rhetorically speaking. ___________
Mr. Cantoni is an author, columnist and founder of Honest Americans Against Legal Theft (HAALT). He can be reached at email@example.com.
Since his "libertarian views" were at issue, how does he know it wasn't a conservative doing the haranguing?
Great stuff! Thanks for posting that! We do need to make sure not to let those old assumptions slide by without comment anymore. This is a great list to maybe start people thinking for themselves (for some, for the first time ever!).
Depends on how old the liberal. If over thirty write them off, they will never get better.
When liberals complain that minimum wage is too low, one can agree! Why not triple it? Why not make everyone earn at least $100/Hour? This ploy makes THEM explain the economics.
Would appear as though someone subscribed to the Limbaugh Letter and got Rush's "How to Defeat a Liberal" paper?
So Libertarianism is the opposite of totalitarianism?
How about 1=Dictatorship, 2=Liberalism, 7=Conservatism, 7.1=Libertarian, 10=Anarchy?
I have found that the most effective way to enrage leftists is to subtly (or not) ridicule their arguments and laugh at them. They cannot stand thinking that they could possibly be the butt of someone else's joke; they take themselves far too seriously. We are all supposed to acknowledge that their socialist emperor is wearing superior brainpower, no matter how hilariously false that is. That is the reason they so revile FR (where we have a lot of fun at their expense), FOX (poking its finger in the eye of the rest of the media), and positively come unglued about Ann Coulter, and Mark Steyn. Even their "icon", Michael Moo, is so unfunny is kind of embarassing. So, let's remember that laughter is good for the righteous soul!
They were recently destroyed (again) in Christopher Hitchen's review of "Unfaireheit 911" (posted here on FR) for their lack of humor as well as honesty. Steyn also did a terrific job filleting them in his review of the film.
One comment to the Hitchens' article was that they'd never seen someone disemboweled by a keyboard quite so efficiently before; I agreed. The left HAS to be brain-dead to believe the tripe that Moo is selling.
And I think it is hysterical that the Dims are all atwitter about Edwards. That guy has all the brainpower of sludge. Remember the DOMA question in the debates? He couldn't just be honest and say he didn't know enough about it; he had to try to fake it and ended up sounding just silly. Personally, I think sKerry actually picked GeBhardt before he picked Edwards, and nuanced himself into a corner. sHrillary is rubbing her hands in glee.
I've always felt the same way, but I've never seen any hard data to back it up. Commonsense says that the right produces more wealth ("produces", not "has"), but I can't find any numbers to support it.
"If you can't prove it with numbers, it's an opinion, not a fact."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.