|
It's 22 million jobs.
I wouldn't write the note if I were you. You can write a hundred good things President Clinton did, and this boy will come back with "but Clinton got a blowjob from Monica Lewinsky, so he's a fag." (Which should immediately prompt you to ask, "if he's such a fag, why did he get a blowjob from a woman?" When he says "because that's what fags do," you know he's an idiot; fags don't get blowjobs from women.)
Your little classmate is what we DUers call a freeper. A freeper is technically a person who posts on Free Republic.com (which is kind of like Democratic Underground except that it's a really ugly site and the only people who post on it are stupid conservatives who think George W. Bush is a good president) but really it's any stupid conservative. You cannot fight freepers by defending your position because they always fall back to three things: 9/11, Clinton's blowjob, and Iraq.
How they use 9/11: when you're tearing Bush apart because he's a rotten president, they'll say "but if Al Gore was president on 9/11, we wouldn't have gone after the terrorists." Now, how you use 9/11 is to ask, "if George Bush was acting like a president back then, would he have gone on a month-long vacation after he was told terrorists were going to attack America? Would he have sat in a classroom reading a storybook to second-graders after he was told America was being attacked? And would he have let Osama bin Laden's family leave America by airplane a couple of days after 9/11 without asking them any questions? Because Bush did all of those things."
How they use Clinton's blowjob is to blame everything bad that happened after Bush took office on the fact that Clinton went in the back room with an intern while he was president. You don't use Clinton's blowjob, but you can use some of Bush's history against him, like "how can he send troops to war when he hid out in Texas during his war?" or "how can he be pro-life when he paid for his 15-year-old girlfriend to have an abortion when abortions were illegal in Texas at the time?" or "how can he call himself a Christian when he violated the Ten Commandments by worshipping money instead of God, and by executing 173 prisoners in Texas without checking to see whether they really did it?" (Some of the people he executed had lawyers who fell asleep in the courtroom during their trials. And "checking to see whether they really did it" is absolutely part of a governor's job when he's asked to sign a death warrant against someone.)
They use Iraq like 9/11; you use it by saying that Saddam Hussein got rid of all his weapons of mass destruction ten years ago, that Saddam Hussein posed more of a threat to himself than he ever did to America, that Saddam Hussein was only ever in power because George Bush's father engineered Saddam's takeover of the Iraqi government, that George Bush's father gave Saddam the chemicals he used to gas the Kurds, and that while Saddam was a very bad person, the people who run Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are worse and we didn't attack either of those countries. Oh, and add that thousands of American kids are fatherless because their fathers who were soldiers were killed in a war that George Bush started so he could steal Iraq's oil.
That's how you defend. How you go on the offensive: Make him defend Bush. Remind him that Clinton hasn't been president for three years now. Make him tell you why Bush is better than Clinton, and be ready to tear apart any argument he gives. Because he can't defend George Bush.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
