7 Ways To Talk To A Conservative Without Going Crazy

They are unavoidable. They turn up in the nicest families and in otherwise very desirable neighborhoods—and many of them insist on flaunting their lifestyle (or, worse, thrusting it upon others).

I’m talking about extreme social conservatives, and no matter how well you try to insulate yourself, you are going to have to talk to one at some point during this increasingly contentious election season. Here are some tips:

1. Pick your battles
This is the overriding principle of talking to someone who thinks that Medicare is a Communist plot to euthanize senior citizens. Well-reasoned arguments rarely work on these folks. (It’s like trying to teach a cat to waltz: it’s a waste of your time, and it just annoys the cat.) If we’re talking about a temporary acquaintance or a grocery cashier, ask yourself, “Is it worth the bother?” You’ll probably want to steer the conversation toward simple inanities—like how dessert tastes good.

2. Don’t fight on Facebook
By the same token, no one’s opinion was ever changed by a comment on a Facebook post. If outrageous “Where’s Obama’s birth certificate?” posts by someone you barely knew in high school are driving you crazy, don’t counter with “Where are Mitt’s tax returns?” Unfriend her. Save your sanity.

3. Don’t talk about the weather
The weather used to be a safe subject, but when you’re dealing with people who think global warming was made up by liberals as a weapon in their war on Christmas, that’s out. Same goes for the price of gas (it used to be so easy to chat with a distant relative about gas prices in various places we’d been recently). If you want inanity in these divided days, you have to find widely agreed-on topics: “desserts I’ve enjoyed,” for instance.

4. Facts will probably not help you
Oh, liberals and their facts! So cute. As Paul Ryan knows, it’s not what you say but how you say it! OK, so  your Aunt Mavis insists on talking about how Sarah Palin is right about how the Gulf oil spill was the fault of extreme environmentalists, and there is no way to avoid her. Just try to remember that Tea Party conservatives take the idea of equality too far, to a place where ignorance is equal to knowledge, and where your facts are no better or worse than a bunch of made-up stuff that they heard on Fox.

It’s maddening, but if you think facts and empirical data will help you, you’re setting yourself up for heartbreaking frustration.

5. Stay calm and appeal to their emotions
If you’re talking to someone who isn’t swayed by facts, focus instead on stories he can identify with. This is how we’ve swayed more people toward supporting marriage equality. Parsing legal judgments or measuring the positive economic impacts of same-sex weddings? A dead-end. A love story about a lesbian couple who’s been together 45 years? That can work. If it’s your parents who are on the wrong side of the marriage debate, promise that your same-sex marriage will result in grandbabies. Grandbabies solve a lot of problems.

6. Let them speak—and listen!
Sometimes there’s no avoiding a political conversation: You’re seated next to your Republican cousin at your niece’s graduation, and he’s going to educate you on why Romney-Ryan is right for the USA. First step: Listen. As we saw with the national Chick-fil-A drama, many social conservatives think that your expressing a contradictory opinion somehow infringes on their “freedom of speech.” (Besides it’s always helpful to know what the opposition is thinking.)

So listen and keep your cool. Discussing politics at the dinner table or other social occasions is not bad manners—shouting and name-calling are. If you and your cousin can talk politics without doing that, you’re fine.

7. Know when to agree to disagree—and when to follow up
There are signs that a conversation with a social conservative has reached its logical end: one of you keeps repeating himself, for instance, or you want to start pulling your eyebrows out, hair by hair. When you reach this point, be the bigger person. Smile sweetly and say, “Well, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on that one.  So … had any good desserts lately?”

Of course, some statements are so homophobic, racist, or generally hateful (and “social conservatives” have been saying a lot of them in public lately) that they’re immediate conversation killers. In those instances, you’re within your rights to say “I will not listen to talk like this” before turning an icy cold shoulder.

But if you feel you’ve made progress in the conversation—and that maybe, just maybe, you’ve found an ideological opening—by all means follow up with a well-reasoned and friendly email. Thank the conservative for an interesting discussion, and then get the last word. Remember to mix your facts with some storytelling, and don’t sink to the level of foul language or name-calling.

That’s no way to talk to anyone, even a Tea Partier.

Do you have other tips for dealing with right-wingers civilly? Share them in the comments


Charles Purdy is the author of the book Urban Etiquette: Modern Manners for the Modern Metropolis and a longtime manners-advice columnist. In his Queerty column, he addresses issues related to social behavior.


Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #politics #charlespurdy #conservatives stories and more


  • Fitz

    Fairly good list! I don’t do, and don’t want to do #6. I’ve successfully cut the right-wing nuts from my life, including the ones who share some DNA with me. I’ve never felt better.

  • Captain proton

    #3 – oddly enough the “global warming hoax” crowd has gotten pretty silent in recent months. think it has anything to do with the warm weather we’ve been having?

  • Aidan8

    So I’ll play hardball here, for the fun of it: Why is it that I, as a progressive, have to continually take the “high road” or “play civilly” with the right-wing fringe that wants to oppress me and impose their ideology on the world? How many times do I have to walk “across the isle?” Everything in my soul says that human beings need to talk rationally with each other and reach consensus and solve problems. Yet I now face an opposition that doesn’t believe in facts as relevant and takes a black-and-white view of nearly everything. If nuance and subjectivity have no place in the modern conservative’s lexicon, why do I have to be nice and “listen?” Evidence of this abounds, most recently at the RNC… facts don’t matter any more…. how can you have a real conversation with someone for whom facts don’t matter? Tell me why I shouldn’t stand up at that dinner table and simply call out the douchebag for what he is… and then throw my drink in his face?

  • Neo

    @Aidan8: If more people did this the world would move a lot faster, by treating these people as they have and will never treat us is hampering progression.

    These parasites and disgusting people need to be called out everywhere, every time.

  • Aidan8

    @Neo: I’m beginning to totally agree with you. And I’ve tried, for years, to be the “smart one in the room” and take the “high road” and “try to enlighten” people who seem bent on oppressing me (and others). But I’ve gotta say, at 50 years old, I’m tired of being civil and being nice to these fuckers. I’m tired of “biting my tongue” in the face of idiocy. They don’t treat us with respect… they don’t deserve it in return.

  • JonahEastCoast

    Wow! What an amazing article I remember being very touched by your writing on other sites and you are still incredibly thoughtful! I’m 23, I live on Long Island and just returned from an impromptu weekend there with my immediate family + my and my sister’s boyfriends to St. Louis because we thought there was a health/housing situation with my paternal grandfather. I’ve been there at least once, usually multiple times every year and I’m used to the slight cultural shift when I head westward. Sure there are bright Midwestern gals like my cousin, a firm liberal and gay rights supporter but there were also people who had never met anybody Jewish before encountering my mom. Even this weekend we overheard people talking casually over biscuits and gravy at the Drury Inn about what Obama has done/will do… you know the script. We got together we family and friends at a bar where some folks, mainly oldtimers, smoked inside. My mom has also gone from a Brandeis liberal to something of a right leaning pragmatist as she’s gotten older. She has bizarrely come to enjoy conservative radio and its rhetoric. She is totally immune to my economic, racial justice, and just because its awesome arguments about legalizing marijuana and is big on law and order. Yet we all mingled together at this gathering, I ate their delicious flat pizza and toasted ravioli, sipped on a bit of Jack&Ginger. Everything was congenial, upbeat; people want to know how you and the siblings and longtime friends are doing and careers, but more than anything, to rehash fairly predictable stories and good times. My boyfriend was on his second trip there and we were gently, occasionally, affectionate and all was well. Introduced him as L. or my boyfriend but didn’t insist on the latter. I think that what I’ve learned is that in the long run opinions are changed by example or not at all. Back home in New York this year, some high school kid shouted “you’re gay” as we strolled through a local seaside village. But both we, and even the passing interloper were kind of quizzically bemused, as if it was some kind of spoof, something out of Strangers with Candy. I hate when people say “It’s 20_ _!” and so this is the year that all causes are overdue for fruition… but when it comes to being gay and alive in many places we’ve won! And we’re winning because of dudes like you Charles, thanks!

  • Scooteroo

    Good list. But, I believe you need to fight fire with fire. If there is one thing that reicht-wingers do constantly, its flipping the script. Attack and then feign to be the victim. Lie and then say the other person is lying. Push someone down the stairs and then say that they pushed you…. you get the idea.

    Also, start making up your own facts— after all, as the other side knows, it is way easier to support an argument when you can just make up facts to back up your point, rather than go out and find real facts. Make claims like, “conservatives are 22 times more likely to die of syphilis than progressives”…”that evangelicals are 18 times more likely to molest their children than any other religious group”. The key is to not overdue it- you gotta be careful about making it sound believable. Also, it is important to make up details within the lie— this is key! Those details are what sell it. Hence the use of numbers like 22 and 18. They are much more believable than a rounded number. Don’t make arching statements- make sure you make up specifics that sound like they could be true. There is a fine line between believability and an evident lie. Most teavangelical-types are incredibly lazy and will never take the time to actually look up your “facts”.

    Also, make sure to say these things are facts, especially if they pertain to the supernatural, or are open to interpretation. Most of us have dealt with those crazy right-wing evangelicals who say things like, “Its a fact that blah, blah, religious text, blah”. By definition we know these are not facts- but it is important to make sure you say that unsubstantiated claims are facts. It is also a sure sign you are dealing with right-wing crazy when they do say that something is a “fact”, especially when citing religious text

    On that note, whenever you reference any sort of Religious text, be it the bible the koran, the torah, or Dianetics— make sure to also say that “The <> is CRYSTAL CLEAR when it says…blah, blah, blah”. Even though religious texts are generally not clear at all and pretty much any passage in them is open to multiple interpretations, but still- you need to say that a certain passage, etc. is “crystal clear”. This alerts the right wing brain that what is about to be said is absolute truth, even when it is not.

    Speaking of religious texts, another fun thing to do is make up bible quotes. As with making up general “facts”, make sure to try and sound authentic so it has a bit of believability. The great thing about making stuff up, especially making something up and saying it is in a religious text, is that those to the right of god will never check to make sure your “facts” are indeed facts if it comes from the bible.They can’t be bothered to check their own facts, they sure as hell aren’t going to put in the effort of a Google search to check yours, especially if you frame it as an obscure bible passage. Seriously- they don’t know many of them to begin with, so as long as it sounds bible-y you are clear for take off. On a side note- I once convinced an anti-gay bible thumper who claimed to know the “good book” inside and out that there was a “Book of Francis” in the bible.

    Above everything- have fun! If you take an discussions with those people seriously you are only harming and frustrating yourself. There is the old adage that “you can’t argue with crazy”. Keep this in mind when having “discussions” with these people.

  • cosmicbayer

    I’m not sure how civil my suggestions would be, but some are emotional appeals and others shame the haters.

    On the marriage equality issue, how you might handle a social conservative depends on whether you are out or wish to come out to them. If you don’t wish to get into your own sexuality, you could make some stuff up. You have a new relative, let’s say a step-nephew who you met for the first time over Christmas, one who you really like, but you learned he’s gay. This new gay relative of yours has a significant other or partner (whatever you choose to call him)who you also have met. They are a very devoted couple of some 10 years, they make sense as a couple, they are super happy together, and they desperately want to get married and have wanted to do so nearly the entire time they’ve been together. They told you of key protections they don’t have in an unmarried state, particularly how one partner can be kept from visiting the other partner in a hospital.

    You want your new step-nephew to be happy, to marry the love of his life and be protected against these kinds of problems, which only can be avoided for sure by recognized civil marriage. You know what Romney, the Would-be-Theocratic-Freak-In-Chief, would do to those plans. You know that voting for Romney would be the equivalent of driving a dagger into the back of your step-nephew and you just don’t have the heart to do something so cruel. Your step-nephew’s wellbeing is dangling in the wind, poised to be destroyed depending on who gets in the White House and who appoints Supreme Court justices. Stabbing your gay relative in the back by voting Romney is something you’re simply not willing to have on your conscience.

    On the shaming side, you could say that Republicans, not at the level of family members, co-workers, friends and neighbors, but as people with real power to harm, such as the President, Congressmen and Senators, SHOULD be regarded as your mortal enemies if your gay. And to vote for such vermin if your gay not only is psychotic on your part, but it also makes you a traitor to your own people.

    Today’s bigots-with-power are rapidly finding themselves on the wrong side of history and, in decades and centuries to come, they will be laughed at, scorned and despised.

  • brent

    I have an idea why doesn’t Queerty come with a list about how to deal with irrational liberals when it comes to their fantasy world of wind mills and solar panals. Not to mention their paranoia about oil companies. I notice like many gay liberals you lump all liberal causes as gay causes. You can support gay mrriage but think global warming is bunk, which it is. In the 1970s they were telling us the earth was cooling. As for medicare the democrats lied to people about it. In 1965 they said it would cost $9 billion a year by 1990. In reality in 1990 it cost over $60 billion. It’s no communist plot just lies by the democrats.

  • BJ McFrisky

    @brent: Wait a minute—you mean to tell me that global warming ISN’T going to cause the oceans to flood the planet and the earth to split in two within the next 10 years? You mean to tell me that . . . that Al Gore was WRONG?!? That he LIED just to get RICH off the backs of the gullible?!? Oh. No. Say. It. Ain’t. So.
    I thought everyone on this site was a brainwashed liberal who believes Republicans want us dead and that Obama secretly wants to blow us all. I think you owe the people here an apology for daring to express an independent thought. Just don’t let it happen again.

  • tdx3fan

    I remember the good old days when my dad used to tell me how AIDS was sent by God as a punishment for homosexuality. Then, when I was 18, I came out to my dad, and my dad told me he never wanted to talk about me being gay.

    Now, only about 12 years later, I feel that he sometimes likes my partner more than he does me, and he feels that the government should not “be part of the marriage business.” (Which I recognize is a step in the right direction, even though he is not quite there yet).

    So, hopefully in another 10 years my father who was a raging homophobe for the first 18 years of my life will be attending my wedding. People change. When people really care about you and they know who you they are they change much faster in the direction that you want them to, and if they refuse to change then they are not worthy of being part of your life.

  • tazz602

    Well, since I live in Arizona and we want everyone to have guns everywhere you go, probably best just to shoot ’em and get it over with. No high blood pressure from arguing with someone who will never change their mind, you can carry on with your day and one less right wing nut to vote in November. (This is sarcasm, if you cannot read between the lines.)

  • tdx3fan

    @brent: You mean, EVERY single scientist in the ENTIRE world is incorrect, but you of course are 100% correct. Please, tell me where you got your advanced degrees in science that allow you to contradict every known scientific thinker. Brigham Young University!?!

    Also, I do not think anyone foresaw the ballooning medical costs that are associated with the medical system of today back in 1965. However, they also did not foresee the ability to do heart transplants, micro optic surgery or to “cure” most forms of cancer either. What is your alternative to Medicare? Should we kill off all of the seniors and disabled people that are unable to pay for their own medical expenses so that you do not have to pay taxes!?!

    Hospitals are obligated to treat any patient that walks into their building. They often do this as a loss of revenue (tax deductible). However, they still bill the patient anyways (with a bill they cannot afford to pay). That often ruins their credit rating which affects their ability to find a place to live and a decent paying job. Which means both the hospital (a for profit corporation) and the patient are paying less taxes (or no taxes at all). Also, people without insurance are often more likely to avoid routine check ups and doctor visits so the common cold is not treated until it morphs into pneumonia and suddenly a $20 bottle of antibiotics and a $50 doctor’s visit becomes a $3000 hospital visit (all which is paid for by the American public because the hospital takes it as a tax deduction).

    All this is before you consider lost wages and lost jobs on the part of the unemployed person because they are so sick that they can not go to work. If they are not going to work they are not paying taxes. Not paying taxes is depriving the United States government of income.

    Before Obamacare, all of the studies and figures showed that the United States is actually spending more annually on healthcare costs (due to the current system of tax abasement to hospitals that are required to treat) than most of the nations with free national healthcare.

    However, I know that you are a conservative, so I hope I did not just confuse you with facts. If I did, just go run to Ryan and listen to his lies so you feel better.

  • tdx3fan

    @tdx3fan: *unemployed = unisured!

    @BJ McFrisky: It is a liberal leaning gay website. There are PLENTY of conservative leaning gay websites. If you think everyone here is a waste of time liberal just because we believe in facts, evidence and science instead of religion and sky daddy then why do you come here at all?

  • Rockery

    The best point is about facebook – dont fight on facebook period

  • nwilsontaylor

    How about 7 points on how to talk to a liberal…that poisoned stream that has run through decent society since the appearance of the devil after “liberating” himself from the clutches of God. Hitler’s homosexual troops cracked down on decent people murdering them in the streets and in concentration camps.

    The current culture of those times is exactly like ours today – the manners, literature, theatre and movies reflect a morality of forgetfulness, intoxication, sensationalism and addictive eccentric pleasures – naked dancers exhibiting themselves to the applause of drunk people, an era of sadism, masochism, pervision, eccentricity, homosexuality – except that today the communist left liberals want to force their pervision on others by making their evil an “equality.”

    So yes, there probably will be a civil war since no good person will ever give in to this evil. Also, most of the types of people you picture in your article are LIBERALS…Aunt Mavis or whoever is normally a LIBERAL trying to get with the times, the fat guys with cigars are normally the town liberals – like the big fat guy here in our town who organized the local Occupy movement along with the town democrats and local teacher communists. He was HUGE, big and fat, and definitely not a republican or tea party guy.

  • Aidan8

    Thank you Brent and BJ McFrisky for giving examples proving my point.

  • the other Greg

    I’m a little concerned about this because my boyfriend and I are going down South soon. I used to travel a lot but it’s been years since I’ve left the safe haven of a “blue” state. We’ll avoid Florida because murder is essentially legal there!

    @nwilsontaylor: That’s very funny, your obsession with FAT people who of course are mostly right-wingers who gobble up fast food and junk food, and park as close as possible to the Walmart. They talk a lot about the “right” of kids in taxpayer-funded schools to have access to junk food vending machines (but of course, they want the taxpayer-funded schools abolished anyway – those damn “teacher communists”!).

    But I didn’t know you folks were still obsessed with Prohibition. You guys lost that one back in 1933 – you probably remember, you sound like you were alive then – but good luck trying to make THAT popular again.

    You sound like someone who needs a blo* j*b but you probably don’t have enough money for that!

  • the other Greg

    Also it’s funny to see “Blow J*b McFrisky” who is their current, closest equivalent to a Voice of Reason (i.e. not very close), juxtaposed against obviously insane wack-a-doodle crackpots like “nwilsontaylor.” With friends like that, poor BJ hardly needs more enemies. But remember, we’re not allowed to make fun of BJ or make jokes because he’ll say that’s “angry.” :-)

  • Aidan8

    @nwilsontaylor: Do you use a paper bag or plastic bag when you sniff your glue?

  • nwilsontaylor

    Thank you for your answers!! which are living proof of what I teach in class, i.e., that liberals only emote since they can never give an intelligent answer because they are unable to think while homosexuals always ALWAYS resort to sexual remarks.

  • BJ McFrisky

    @the other Greg:
    Thank you for the angry compliment. (and you’re right: Mr. N. Wilson-Taylor is indeed a wack-a-doddle crackpot, one whom I would never associate with. I may believe that the Right is right, but crazy is still crazy, politics be damned).

  • the other Greg

    @nwilsontaylor: You TEACH?!? So what’s “pervision”? You mentioned that twice – “pervision.” Since it’s not a real word, I’ll have to guess, but gee I think it’s a “sexual remark”! Hypocrite.

    @BJ McFrisky: Glad to hear it, Beej, and really, you’re welcome to hang around here.

    Seriously, I’m almost always more amused with you than angry (even though you don’t seem to notice). But, what’s so bad about being angry? You guys want to be angry, but you don’t want US to do it, that’s all!

    I’ve never understood the contrived double standard that you subscribe to, where liberals are supposed to be nicey-nicey and “kumbaya” all the time, while conservatives get to be angry all they want, any time they want. I say FUCK THAT! Back in the 1890s to 1930s people on the left got angry a lot, and accomplished a lot. We have a holiday TODAY, and weekends, and child labor laws, and national parks, and no human hands chopped up into the “beef” supply (see “The Jungle”), because back then people got justifiably angry. Even Theodore Roosevelt got angry about that stuff and he was a Republican.

  • nwilsontaylor

    The ad hominem attacks are great! Keep them coming to further prove the point that liberals can neither reason nor think.

  • Scooteroo

    @nwilsontaylor: Yes, exactly. Thank you for giving clear examples of what I was talking about in my earlier post. i.e. Make up “facts” and present them as truth. And also demonstrating the idea attacking a group and then feigning victim: “Hitler’s homosexual troops cracked down on decent people murdering them in the streets and in concentration camps.”. As we all know the gay Hitler meme is a modern invention of paranoid schizophrenic and certified hate-monger Scott Lively. This “fact” has been debunked by all historical scholars. Gays and lesbians were actually the ones who were rounded up, placed in concentration camps, and killed; but kudos to you for showing us how to flip the script, even though it is highly offensive and morally depraved to say that type of thing.

    And then your whole second paragraph…BRAVA! Not a single bit of truth to it whatsoever, but your presentation and claiming lies are “facts”- magnifique! Extra points for making the lies seem like they might be sort of true. The reality of the situation was Hitler was a conservative Catholic and the atmosphere during the reign of the Nazi party was reflective of that. The closest thing we have to that sort of Nazi-esque atmosphere in modern times is the American Teavangelicals. Like the Nazis, they claim freedom while creating oppression. Followers follow blindly and without question. They claim to be acting for God- theirs being the only one and true God of course… the list goes on. So, yeah, I guess I was wrong. There is some truth to your second paragraph, but I don’t think it’s how you meant it to be.

    However, your third paragraph about civil war and fat guys and cigars… I would have stopped before that, as it starts to enter non-sensical, aluminum foil on the head territory. I mean one doesn’t need to have the brains and education of a bathroom attendant to know that modern civil war is pretty much impossible given the geography of the situation.

    During the civil war the country was divided clearly between northern and southern states, but today we have a near even split between liberals and conservatives. Problem is, unlike the civil war where geography clearly divided the 2 sides, in our modern situation you have liberals and conservatives living side by side in every city and state. Now, if there was a clear geographical divide, like all blue states become a country and all red states become a country, the problem would be solved. However there are still far too many blue-state-people living in red states and red-state-people living in blue states. Maybe if they figure out a house/life swap it would work? You know like a red-state farmer from Washington state can swap homes and jobs with a blue-state farmer living in Texas. Unfortunately I don’t really see that happening which pretty much makes another civil war impossible.

  • Scooteroo

    @nwilsontaylor: You’re a teacher?—Get out, no way! Ohhh- ha! You almost had me there….cheeky. :)

  • the other Greg

    @nwilsontaylor: Everybody knows that liberals don’t smoke cigars. That’s a conservative thing. Liberals smoke pot.

    And I’m guessing that “pervision” is a special set of 3-D glasses that one uses to watch pornography? We liberals are not that much into porn (since we tend to be comfortable with real-life sex) – porn is more of a con thing too, and the state with the highest rate of porn-viewing is Utah! There’s so much “pervision” there!

  • nwilsontaylor

    Liberals are OK with “anything goes” – no boundaries and all that sort of thing – so
    my brain working faster than my fingers on the keyboard and misspelling a word, which obviously gets under your skin, is baffling. We all know how perfect liberals are, though, so your stuffy, look how stupid everyone else is, uptightedness really tell the TRUTH. And that is…liberals make no sense, and always always contradict themselves. (Is that oK? Did I spell everything perfectly? Correctly? To you satisfaction?)

  • nwilsontaylor

    Uh oh. An “r” was left out…and also an “s”. But you liberals are OK with that, right? I mean, there are no rules really.

    Yea Scott Lively. And Hitler was not a conservative Catholic. He was no Catholic at allsince he left the Church in his youth because he didn’t believe anything the Catholic Church taught. He was a LIBERAL. No rules. Sort of like Obama.

    What is wrong with liberas is that if other people do not agree with them, they think they (other people) should be murdered. Killed. It’s liberals’ way or else. Sort of like fundalmentalist Muslims. Just chop their heads off. That sort of thing.

    As for a civil war…liberals just think that passing laws in their favor will force other people to “behave.” If they don’t…To jail! A lawsuit! They will ruin other people for their personal agenda. And if that won’t start a civil war, I don’t know what will. Just like Mao and Stalin…a house to house hunt.

  • the other Greg

    @nwilsontaylor: Hey “nwilson,” spellcheck is your friend. When a word turns up RED here it’s a sign to slow down your perfervid brain to match your finger speed.

    “To you satisfaction?” [sic!] Ha ha.

    It’s a holiday and I’ve had three beers and a joint while writing this, so yeah, I think I’m doing OK compared to you. And now I’m going to watch baseball. I guess you’re going to sit around all night worrying about liberals.

    Hmmm… I don’t see how I can be “anything goes,” plus “stuffy” and “uptight” at the same time! That would be a neat trick, but one I’ve never aspired to (and I’m pretty sure my boyfriend will disagree with one or two of the three), but I think you are proof that conservatives can be very contradictory too. Also, I don’t recall ever hearing a conservative call “uptightedness” a BAD thing before. I thought you guys thought being uptight was a good thing!

    “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  • the other Greg

    @nwilsontaylor: One more thing – I think it’s really funny you have such horror about alcohol. You may as well get drunk when you post here, because you type like you’re drunk already!

  • petensfo

    I live as an out person and apologize to no one. I’m old enough that I don’t argue w/ crazy people, either side of the spectrum; I walk away and minimize my contact with them.

    It’s still baffling to me that people my age support GOP even though they are so opposed to equality. In 2012, anything less than equality seems preposterous.

  • brent

    @tdx3fan: If you have access to the internet which you do you should have no problem finding scientists who do not fit the 100% you’re talking about. Go to google, type in scientists who do not agree with global warming. As for the cost of medicare. I notice when Bush got WMP’s in Iraq wrong liberals have no problem calling him a liar, so why should i not call the democrats the same thing for misleading people on medicare. If you’re right that we can’t project medical costs in the future then why is Obama doing that? Why should we believe that he knows what will be best 50 years fron now?

  • brent

    @Aidan8: Would you care to be a little more specific?

  • davros

    just as Tiffany implied I’m stunned that some one able to get paid $5098 in one month on the computer. have you seen this web link N u T t y R i C h d o t c o m

  • Aidan8

    @nwilsontaylor: Mmmm… that glue is smelling good, huh? Just keep breathing deep into that bag Wilson…. ahhh… the glue… the glue….

  • Neo

    @Aidan8: Not much good, brent, bj and nwilson are all the same person.

  • Atomicrob

    I find when I’m defending some liberal position on a blog, the conservatives will often resort to name calling and take it to a personal level. They characterize me as stupid or claim my facts are wrong. No matter what you do to prove you’re offering not opinion but real poll data or simple facts, they don’t want to hear it, and if they are willing to listen, it never changes their mind. Sometimes, I think it’s rather pointless to even try, but I keep plugging away.

  • Neo

    @Atomicrob: They seem to be permanently fixated on playing the victim card. Funny the conservatives go on and on and on about the race card, gay card etcetera.

    There is only ever evidence of white, rich middle aged and old republican christians playing any victim card ever.

  • brent

    @nwilsontaylor: Yes liberals do contradict themselves alot. I have a very hard time following their logic on prop. 8 In Gore-Bush they told us the popular will is what matters, in otherwords every vote should count. But with prop 8 they asked a judge to throw out all the votes and disregard popular will. Not only that they have thrown out the votes of 70% of blacks who voted for prop 8 Now what happens when republicans do that. They are called racist. It seems to me the proper thing is too concede defeat and move on too the next election. Liberals seem to think that the 2008 election on prop. 8 is the last elction on earth.

  • brent

    @Neo: Do you have some kind of proof we are all the same person? Why is it so important that you believe we are? If we were not the same person, do you feel threatened by that? why?

  • brent

    @Atomicrob: Have i done that? What facts do you think i should know?

  • brent

    @Neo: You are not a trial lawyer is obvious. They can turn any one into a victim.

  • BJ McFrisky

    @brent: Ironic how Lefties are always calling us names . . . and then accusing us of name-calling. Likewise, they can’t grasp the fact that one of “their own” would dare to have values different from theirs, and hence will convince themselves that any gay man who has a differing opinion must all be the same evil conservative troll typing comments under different names. I think there’s a nationwide panic among liberals because it’s looking more and more like Obama, aka the country’s first affirmative-action president, will be just another one-term wonder who’s dismissed by the history books.

  • BJ McFrisky

    @Neo: I’m not looking to get into a pissing match, but I have to call you out on your comment, “There is only ever evidence of white, rich middle aged and old republican christians playing any victim card ever.” Can you cite a single example of middle-aged rich people claiming victimhood? Just one legitimate example?
    On the other hand . . .
    “If you won’t pay for my birth control, then you’ve declared a war on women!”
    “If you won’t allow same-sex marriage, then you’ve declared a war on gays!”
    “If you want to ensure the integrity of the voting process and require ID, then you’ve declared a war on minorities!”
    And the real kicker, “Republicans want us dead!”
    And yet, you claim that middle-aged rich whites are the ones screaming “victim”? Truly bizarre, your world.

  • Aidan8

    @BJ McFrisky: Actually, rich middle aged and old republican christians constantly claim to be victims. They just a different vocabulary. They are “taking our country back.” There are many examples of victim language in their complaints, if you just listen. Everyone is guilty of this nowadays, not just the Left.

  • the other Greg

    @BJ McFrisky: What prison term do you want for a woman who gets an abortion?

    It’s “murder,” right, so it’s a life term?

    I cornered a wack-a-doodle here into admitting just that – yes, she wanted the woman to be sentenced to a life term, unless she lived in a death penalty state, where she would be executed.

    Republicans are insane. They talk how the “economy” is all that matters but whenever they get into power, their true obsessions come out – the two F’s – fetuses and fa*gots.

    If they get back in they won’t do ANYTHING about the economy, but they’ll start another war (with Iran or whoever) on borrowed money from China, and will spend all their time obsessing about fetuses and fa*gots.

  • brent

    @the other Greg: What are the obsessions of democrats. You have you’re polar bear freaks, you’re tree huggers, global warming nuts. Democrats care more about laws protecting beastly polar bears and trees than protecting unborn babies.

  • the other Greg

    @brent: Oh yeah, so what prison term do YOU want for a woman who gets an abortion?

    If you guys ever honestly answer that question it will destroy the Republican party.

  • brent

    @the other Greg: I would say that a woman who opts. out of parenthood by having an abortion shhould be treated the same as a man who opts. out of parenthood by refusing to pay child support for a kid he doesn’t want. As a society we call him a dead beat dad, so i would say that a woman who opts. out of parenthood by having an abortion is a dead beat mom. Talk about jail, do you know if i cut down some state proptected tree on my own property i could go to jail, but a woman can kill her fetus/baby and not go to jail. Also what kind of prison term are you liberals going to give law abiding gun owners who refuse to obey you’re gun laws.

  • the other Greg

    @brent: A woman has a right to an abortion. (Especially if she’s been raped – “legitimately” or not.)

    If you don’t like it, go fuck yourself. You probably won’t get pregnant!

    So much for worrying about the “economy.” All that you wackos really want to talk about is fetuses and fa*gots.

  • brent

    @the other Greg: I notice that liberals who talk about how intelligent they are and how stupid conservatives are can’t seem to answer questions the dumb conservatives throw at them. I gave you an answer to you’re question but you made no attempt to answer my questions. Rape makes up a tiny percentage of abortion.If a woman has a right to an abortion then why doesn’t a man have the legal right to opt. out of parenthood? Being an intelligent liberal im sure you could answer that.

  • the other Greg

    @brent: A man has a legal right to put on a condom.

  • brent

    @the other Greg: Unless a woman is raped she has the same option. She can take birth control or insist on a condom. She is not a helpless bystander.

  • nwilsontaylor

    The child in the womb has a right to life. The mother has no right to murder her child inside her womb, just as she has no right to murder her child outside her womb. Murder is murder, a heinous crime against humanity and God.

    For instance, what if women want the right to kill gays in the womb? You people say that there is a gay gene, so what if mothers abort their children after getting the gay gene test. Would that be OK? Would that choice be all right with all of you men? It’s the woman’s choice so if she wants to kill her baby because the baby is homosexual or lesbian, it’s OK with you?

  • brent

    @nwilsontaylor: That is a good point if they discover a gay gene i’ll bet in more conservative countries they will abort gay babies. In countries like china and india they already use ultra-sound as a way to identify and abort female babies.

Comments are closed.