How to make a Lib look stupid - quicker

1. Document his public rants and suppositions ... paying particular attention to his view of what is funny in terms of political discussion, example:

Become a Republican

2. Parse them for innuendo, throwaways and invective and have those translated into bullet point format

3. Challenge the Lib to substantiate those points

4. If he agrees, tie him to a chair, attach a polygraph and a fence charger to his gonads. A fllodlight in his eyes directly in front.

5. Empanel three polygraph experts and three forensic (debate) judges all with buttons linked to logic allowing that 2 of 3 of each group engages the electric shock if the examinee either prevaricates or lies in response to the question
- Warn the examinee that this will happen.

6. Present the fore-mentioned bullet points, one by one, to the examinee with one or both of the following questions:

A. Do you really believe that
B. Why do you say that.

In case the examinee follows the 'B' path, proceed to logical end and then ask "A"


Result: One political Agnostic!

 

Re: How to make a Lib look stupid

you know damn well that libs don't have any balls

 

Re: How to make a Lib look stupid

Well, then.. up an aperture! :twisted:

Here's some required reading - LATimes: Adrift in a sea of phoniness fo rthose who would protest...

 

Note there are other ways but they are tedious and take longer..

Another way would be for a conservative to study up on how the opposition party does business and then employ all their tricks and loopholes to defeat them in the state elections and assembly.

Thus enraging the other party to the point that their legal pit-bull finds a way to indict them for employing those dirty tricks... and subsequently insist on going to trial and subpoenaing all the documentation and testimony surrounding the bogus indictment including that of members of Grand Juries

As I said, though, that may be effective but takes a lot longer , nonetheless..
-so-
Why dont we call it the "Delay Method"

I suppose I should have retitled the thread and added "Quicker"

 

I said this in a previous thread...but what's the deal with the fascination with libs?

You've got a second term president, and a large majority in both houses, and have recently appointed one and soon a second conservative to the Supreme Court. Conservatives control every branch of the Federal goverment, and will probably until at least 2008.

But you're still concerned with the Democrats. who knows when you're going to have this much power again. instead of worrying about what the democrats are doing, why don't you concentrate more on what your party can accomplish in the next few years? The democrats are unimportant for at least for another year until the elections next fall.

Is it that after 8 years of mudslinging during the Clinton administration that the republicans have become so reactionary that they've forgotten how to lead?

 

I want Democrats to go back to SANITY!

Sole control breeds corruption... progress only happens through true competition!

Carter was a total failure on both the dometic and foreign policy front.. ONLY accomplishment was Camp David.. and that may have just put off the troubles.

So the Dems try even MORE libs...I thought Clinton was the answer, that's why I voted FOR him in 96 ... but then...

 

Hey now...

I dont think the goal while gaining power is to make progress Johnny... that to obvious :wink:

I think its to keep the power...

Petty is right, progress in bred through competition... things seem to go more smoothly when the people feel more represented. In this case of near absolute power Libs come out of the woodwork to say their piece simply because the GOB don't actually consider the beliefs of all...

Lets create a middle party... so that they can influence both sides... For the love of god... kill the two political party bull...

 

He!!... Ohio elected 1 conservative Rep Sen, and 1 "moderate" Rep Sen and got one pro-life moderate and one lib.

So essentially, you have 2 right there.

We elected a moderate/conservative Gov and got a 'politician'. We're pretty pi&&ed off!

By the way, the more i think about it... my little test above should be applied to ALL politicians - on both sides!