When they say, “It’s the damn teacher’s unions! That’s what’s ruining our schools!”
Do not argue with them. Nod your head up and down while holding your chin. Look a bit puzzled and ask them: “You know, I’ve looked at twenty or so countries with better test scores than ours in math, reading, and science, and all of them have teachers unions. How then are teacher unions a problem here and nowhere else?”
When they say, “The government can’t do anything well and we need more things transferred to the private sector!”
Do not argue with them. Nod your head up and down while holding your chin. Look a bit puzzled and ask them: “You know, I have a smart phone and I learned that virtually all the technology that makes it smart is technology that was conceived by, developed and paid for by the federal government. Why do you suppose that was never mentioned in the biography of Steve Jobs?”
When they say, “The Debt/Deficit is going to be a terrible burden on our children and grandchildren!”
Do not argue with them. Nod your head up and down while holding your chin. Look a bit puzzled and ask them: “You do know that Republican administrations have left higher debt/deficits than Democrats, or am I missing something?”
An old favorite: When they talk about crazy lawsuits and money hungry people and their lawyers suing over “hot coffee”..
Do not argue with them. Nod your head up and down while holding your chin. Look a bit puzzled and ask them: “Yes, I read about that case. Did you you know the coffee was hot enough to cause third degree burns requiring eight days in the hospital and skin grafts…and the woman just wanted McDonalds to pay her medical costs…and that since the incident, McDonalds no longer keeps their coffee that hot? If McDonalds was not doing anything wrong., why did they change it? Is the coffee from your Mr. Coffee hot enough to cause third degree burns? Mine isn’t. I wonder what was going on?”
In short, do not argue with them! Allow your body language to agree with them and then ask them a puzzling question as you recognize them as the authority.
It’s kind of fun. Yes, it’s passive aggressive and takes some preparation, but i the end, especially if there is an audience, you always come across as the good guy.
Heh. This approach might work with fine and upstanding New England Republican “blue bloods”.
In my family of origin, the Maryland and Virginia “good old boys” would tense, get upset, and sharply respond with something along the lines of “I don’t want to hear any of that bu****it in my house. Take your commie lies somewhere else, boy”.
Until the team changed their name, my response of choice was “How about them Redskins?” 🙂
That response says a lot more about them. If that’s how they respond then they have lost the argument and they know it.
And when they say Donald Trump won the election…?
How about them [football team name]…
I’d be reluctant to let that one go completely unchallenged, however.
Yes, indeed. I would not do this at a family event, but in the past I have said the following, “I’ll tell you what. If you can bring me any creditable proof of significant fraud that prevented Trump from winning, I’ll gladly write a check in the amount of $100 payable to the Trump campaign and hand it to you. My offer does not include anything that is simply a hunch, suspicion, or Internet Meme. As a matter of fact, if you can find me a court ruling, I’ll double my offer to $200. Do we have a deal? It should ne easy money for you, eh?”
You might ask them if they’ve contributed to their favorite GOP candidate in order to help them “stop the steal”.
I’d say, You know that aluminum foil that’s on the turkey that’s resting before we carve it? I think there’s a little left on the roll. Would you like me to make a hat for you?”
I think I came up with an answer. – “I heard that audit in Arizona that was supposed to prove Trump won the state actually resulted in Joe Biden adding a few votes to his lead.”
This highlights the actual reality of all this — the intent of all these lies is to:
Steve Bannon was already being prosecuted for felony fraud when he was pardoned by Mr. Trump. The case against him was airtight — he ran a fraudulent fund-raising scam that was allegedly raising money to “build the wall”. He and his associates were spending the money on themselves.
It might be interesting to pivot the conversation to a discussion about Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, and similar evangelical fraudsters who solicited contributions from the faithful in order to spend the resulting millions on themselves (including various sexual favors in the cases of Mr. Bakker and Mr. Swaggart).
At the time of this posting, the Trump Campaign is having a “Black Friday” SALE on “Let’s Go Brandon” doormats for $62.
Really. This is the Republican Party.
And the RNC is footing Trump’s legal defense bills for cases really not relevant to his presidency, for reasons passing understanding.
Apparently, existing statutes against outright fraud do not apply to the GOP.
I wonder if any other organization — besides a Protestant religious organization — could get a way with all this.
The Republican Party has become a caricature of itself. A religious cult that worships a false idol, poor working class voters that praise their exploiting bosses, patriots that celebrate the attack on the US Capitol in an attempt to kill members of congress.
What concerns me even more is their numbers in my community, and I live in Massachusetts!
There are parts of the country, Florida for example, that I no longer trust are safe for me to travel unless I assume the persona of a Republican.
Most people I interact with when I travel have no reason to know my party affiliation.
If you travel in the south and wear a mask, there’s a very high likelihood that you’ll be asked or confronted.
I don’t think you realize how violently polarized America has become.
Maybe this isn’t far enough south, but I was in the DC area first weekend of October and I experienced more local requirements for indoor masking than I have here recently (that includes DC itself plus MD and VA jurisdictions). I personally am in only-wear-a-mask-if-required mode (because I got my vaccine, darn it!), but why is confrontation necessary? Except for being a bit difficult to understand when speaking your wearing a mask doesn’t impact anyone else.
I’m not sure what the laws are in this case, but it seems to me the RNC shouldn’t need a law to motivate them to be better stewards of their own money. Every dollar they are spending to defend Trump is a dollar they are not spending on helping to elect their candidates (including Trump himself should he be their 2024 presidential nominee). Democrats have stormed the barricades over much lesser offenses by the DNC and I can’t imagine Republicans, particularly large donors, being very happy about this. I’m also not sure what the religious reference was about. Such organizations can advocate on issues, but are expressly forbidden from donating to candidates or parties, though I don’t know if they are allowed to foot someone’s legal bills. Generally speaking, non-profits are supposed to stick to the purpose for which they are created.
My reference is to groups like “PTL Club”, “700 Club” (or whatever Jim Bakker called his scam), “Jimmy Swaggart Ministries”, and the myriad of similar televangelist scams that exist primarily to fleece believers in order to fund the lifestyle of their founder(s).
We should not forget the infamous L. Run Hubbard as well.
Federal law provides great latitude for religious organizations in the name of protecting religious freedom, and apparently similarly great freedom for political organizations in the name protecting political speech and action.
The latitude for religious groups has long been exploited by con artists (cf “Paper Moon”). Donald Trump has shown the GOP how to exploit political freedom in the same way.
It is no accident that both scams pander to the same audience.
Seems to me that says something about the audience. I wonder how we fix that.
Yes indeed it does say something about the audience.
I fervently believe that the answer involves federal education standards — something we had until they were destroyed by incoming Ronald Reagan administration.
I actually thought the Reagan administration was pro-standards. Wasn’t it his Education Secretary Bill Bennett who issued the report “A Nation at Risk” arguing for such on the premise we were falling behind?
“A Nation at Risk” was a ruse designed to dismantle federal regulation in favor of shifting the emphasis to states.
The Reagan administration wasn’t pro-anything — except states rights — when it came to public education.
The lie was “federal government has screwed it up, states do it better”.