I recently ran across a blog explaining some of the “conservative” debating styles on the Internet.  The writer has apparently been trolling conservative blogs in order to find consistent debating tactics.  For someone who tries very hard to identify generalizations and criticize conservative pigeonholing of their liberal debate opponents, he sure does a bang-up job doing just what he is criticizing in conservatives: labeling them “the Tea Party/Red State GOP voter,” as if they all fit into a nice, comfortable niche.

In the article, he criticizes conservatives as using consistently similar debating techniques.  I’ve quoted some here.

Democrats are the racists!
Some may go to the trouble of digging up historical facts to prove this. Lincoln era Democrats were racist! Also, “Democrat” and “liberal” are interchangeable to these folks.

Parents’ basement!
Yes, all people who disagree with them on the Internet are nerds in their parents’ basement.

You misspelled something
Countering arguments requires knowledge and effort. Most people on the Internet learn early on to ignore poorly constructed arguments along with typos. Not these guys.

You lose!
That’s it. That’s the complete response.

Bong
For these people weed is evil, but not just any weed-smoking, bong-smoking. The best  response, therefore, is to attribute the opposing argument to weed-smoking. It is assumed that all Liberals smoke weed.

You’re scared!
This is an addendum of the “you lose” one above. Whatever you say it means that you are scared.

Troll!
This means that they don’t have to take anything you say seriously.

Black guy quote
Accusations of racism are often met with a quote by Martin Luther King or Booker T. Washington.

Conspiracy!
The Liberal Democrat Complex has nothing else to do but frame Conservatives for racism among other things. Everything a dissenter says on these boards is an indication of some greater conspiracy to take down the Tea Party movement, or Sarah Palin, or the members of that particular blog, or white people, or America in general, “America” consisting entirely of Red States.

Username jab
Invariably there will be a comment on your username.

Well, I’ve been around the Intertubez for a while, and I’ve noticed some trends from the leftist side of the house.  Those unable to construct an argument will invariably use one of the below techniques, mostly involving ad hominems and well-beaten strawmen.

Racist!
Yes, the liberals engage in the race card much more than the conservatives.  Disagree with Teh Won™? You’re a racist. Any disagreement to the policies of the current administration means you hate African Americans.  You are a racist.  Just remember that.  Oppose welfare? You’re a racist. Oppose opening our borders to all sorts of criminal trash? You must hate Hispanics.  Support military action in Iraq and Afghanistan? You must want little brown people dead!

Tea Bagger!
If you happen to advocate lower government spending, are worried about skyrocketing debt and record deficits, you are a Tea Bagger!  In case you were wondering, “tea bagging” is a sexual act that involves a man squatting over his partner and lowering his junk into her mouth. That’s what those who disagree with the Tea Party protesters call these people who are concerned about the ever-growing power of the federal government.  Nice, eh?

It’s ALL Bush’s fault!
It’s been nearly two years since Bush left office, and yet he still gets the blame for everything from spiraling debt to the current BP oil spill to the split between Al Gore and Tipper.

Fundamentalist Christian
I’m not a Christian in any way, shape or form, but I do respect people’s faith, regardless of my lack of agreement with it.  But to liberals, all conservatives are Christians, and all Christians are very similar to fundamentalist Muslims, who want to oppress women, keep them barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen and stone them should they step out of line.  So during the debate, expect the libtard to refer copiously to some form of “fundie” insult as reason for the conservative’s views, because having faith makes one stupid.

Profanity of choice
When liberals can’t counter an argument, they invariably devolve into obscenity-laced tirades.  Now, I’m not opposed to good invective.  I’m quite proficient at it, actually, and I enjoy making up new and different insults.  I view it as an exercise in language skills.  However, when liberals disagree with your points, they simply launch the F-Bomb and think this is a good substitute for actual… um… you know… debating points.

You’re a liar!
When liberals disagree with your points, but can’t find anything of substance to counter them, they simply accuse you of lying.  What you say doesn’t matter.  I seriously doubt they actually read what you write. They simply accuse you of lying and move on.  Game over.

Nazi!
Liberals love to Godwin themselves into a corner! Anything a conservative says will necessarily be compared to Hitler, Nazis or fascism.  Liberals can’t possibly find an insult that’s more heinous than comparing their opponent to Hitler. Hitler committed genocide and all sorts of atrocities. Hitler was fascist and limited personal freedoms. And because you’re a conservative who must believe in a strong national defense, you invariably must believe that personal freedoms must be limited as well.  Any time you debate with a liberal, expect the reductio ad Hitlerum to be whipped out… well… liberally.

Conspiracy!
War in Iraq? Conspiracy by Halliburton!  Katrina? Conspiracy by white, conservative establishment to rid New Orleans of African Americans.  Clinton’s impeachment? Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.  Oh, and 9-11?  Government conspiracy to go to war against Saddam Hussein.

You quoted Drudge/Human Events/Malkin/Coulter!
Liberals fear the conservative boogie men!  People like Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Matt Drudge, anything written in Human Events, Fox News, Hannity and Beck make liberals seize in apoplectic rage.  It doesn’t matter what these pundits say or why.  The moment they open their mouths, liberals deposit froth-flecked spittle on anything that happens to be in front of them at the time.  So vast and irrational is their hatred, that any link to these sites as evidence in a debate is automatically discounted with scorn.  “Oh! You linked to a Faux Snooz article as proof?  Puhleeze! That’s not proof! You lose!”

You see, the Intertubez breeds a faux courage!  Those who are normally too cowardly to start a debate face to face, certainly feel hair growing on their chest when they engage in an anonymous debate on Teh Webz.  Politics is a passion for many. Emotions run high on both sides of the aisle.  And while both sides would be much more effective if they worked on actual substance instead of constant insults…

…frankly it’s much more fun this way!

Advertisement