A primary root cause for the debacle that is current public discourse in America is the media beehive that propagates leftwing talking points that are identical word-for-word regardless of which talking head is conveying them. This happens on every issue of the moment: ChiCom virus health guidelines, Hamas attacks on Israel, Hologram open border crapola, cancel culture actions, the “most secure election ever,” the supposed “insurrection” on 6 January, etc., etc. Thankfully, many Americans have been red-pilled by President Trump to understand the perfidy of the media in endlessly propagating and promoting Democrat talking points.
The dilemma is that — even now — so-called conservative pundits and conservative politicians and candidates seem to blindly accept the premises put to them by leftist commentators during their short, televised appearances. The premises associated with the above examples include:
- Therapeutic drugs like ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, corticosteroids, and anti-coagulant treatments cannot be administered or trusted despite their proven positive effects because only “big randomized controlled trials of drugs by big pharma/big academic medical centers are accepted” (because “we” say so); corollary from Democrats and their media hacks: Dr. Fauci is right (except when he’s wrong!)
- Israel is at fault (while ignoring that Hamas initiated the recent rocket attacks), and the Squad et al. are entirely right in their invectives against the Israelis
- There is no border crisis (despite continuing dispersal of illegal aliens throughout the interior US as facilitated the Hologram’s flunkies – “nothing to see here” being the message conveyed)
- Erasing our cultural history (e.g., changing the names of military bases) is “good because diversity” (“diversity” triumphs over all other considerations in Democrat-speak)
- The Arizona forensic audit (and other efforts to investigate a plethora of “election irregularities”) is “crazy train,” according to Chris Cuomo and many other legacy media hacks
- The event on 6 January was an armed insurrection, and white nationalists/Trump supporters need to be prosecuted to the fullest (Oops! Not armed per the FBI and certainly not an “insurrection” as the term is defined)
Whether the ostensible conservatives actually believe those endlessly repeated narratives/memes/premises because they are themselves Uniparty members is a debatable point. Some certainly do, and those who do need to be publicly outed, ridiculed, and consigned to the dustbin of irrelevance as relates to political discourse.
Since the average American accepts what is on TV as “truth” (particularly when repeated incessantly without challenge or counter-point), it is a losing strategy to accept the premises, straw men, and proposed solutions of Democrats and their media allies based on those premises and straw men because the average person (i.e., someone not directly engaged in political activism daily) will accept the liberal context because “that’s all they see on TV.”
Here are some “Rules for Conservatives” that should guide how we collectively and consistently respond to Democrat-media complex critiques and caterwauling. These must be consistently employed by all politicians, political candidates, spokesmen, and conservative pundits, in order to educate average Americans on the correct conservative context for the issues of our time. If we don’t engage and debate the issues on our terms, we are fighting a losing battle, and that is one reason why the Left have been so successful in undermining American culture over the last few decades. We need to be very skeptical of those people who claim to be conservatives but who are not willing to engage the Left in public on these issues. Those who don’t/can’t need to be marginalized immediately.
The Rules are as follows:
I. Challenge every premise. Do not let the assumptions of liberals frame the issue. Restate all questions from liberals in the correct conservative context.
II. Use conservative terms vice words/phrases concocted by liberals. For example, use “homosexual” vice “gay.” “Gay” was a term invented in the ’70s to help legitimize homosexuality. Avoid repetition of Marxist-inspired lingo, e.g., pandemic refugees (they’re illegal aliens!), our democracy (we live in a constitutional republic!), reproductive freedom (abortion kills human beings), etc. In short, use terms not colloquialized by the Left that convey conservative values and principles while correcting the Left’s verbiage in real-time when used by their spokesmen.
III. Parse every sentence spoken by a liberal. Don’t let a single false statement or presumption slide by without a counter-point. Don’t let anything said by a Democrat escape immediate repudiation when warranted, particularly their unfounded and unsupported claims.
IV. Define any and all ambiguities from a conservative point of view. If there is any doubt, make sure to convey the conservative interpretation of the issue at hand, including the underlying moral principles linked to history and proven doctrine (e.g., the Bible).
V. Use humorous anecdotes that convey commonsense answers that all can understand whenever possible. The Left are humorless in general, as noted here. I mean, when is the last time the lunatic Nancy Pelosi, the deranged Rachel Maddow, or The Hologram himself pulled off a joke that (a) made sense and (b) was actually funny? And they STILL can’t figure out Donald Trump’s joke during the 2016 campaign when he suggested that the Russians hack and release Hillary Clinton’s emails. These clowns have ZERO sense of humor.
VI. Cite historical evidence that proves conservative points. The flip side is to demand historical evidence that the Left’s cockamamie schemes have ever worked in human history. Nine times out of ten, they can’t do it.
VII. Do not accept any strawman (false) arguments. The Left constantly makes false claims to justify their policies and intentions. Here is the definition of a strawman:
A strawman is a fallacious argument that distorts an opposing stance in order to make it easier to attack. Essentially, the person using the strawman pretends to attack their opponent’s stance, while in reality they are actually attacking a distorted version of that stance, which their opponent doesn’t necessarily support.
Barack Obama used strawmen all the time to make his case but was rarely confronted directly, as noted here. BIG mistake! When not confronted directly, the premise passes into “truth.”
VIII. Compare and contrast how liberal positions and issues typically run contrary to human nature. A good treatise on the subject can be found here. Refer in particular to paragraph 4, “Socialism insists that human nature is malleable, not constant.”
IX. Use the law of unintended consequences to debunk the more extreme and reckless liberal ideas. An example is “gun-free zones”, which the Democrats pushed for years (some still do). Gun-free zones, in reality, become magnets for crazed shooters, exposing that Democrat lie that such zones make people safer and more secure.
X. Define what a right is and differentiate a right from a privilege. Here is a good definition of a right:
The word “right,” standing alone, along with the word “freedom” and the phrase “right of the people,” is used in the Constitution to designate a right that one may assert affirmatively and which the government is precluded from invading. Among these are natural rights, which antedate the Constitution, such as the freedom of speech, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects. Another category of constitutional rights comprises procedural rights, both civil and criminal.
A right is something that does not infringe on someone else, i.e., require loss of someone else’s rights and freedoms in order to fulfill. Democrats frequently seek to legislate privileges for classes and categories of people that infringe on the rights of others.
XI. Compare and contrast the definitions of “tolerate” versus “condone.” Conservatives practice toleration of human failings but can never be forced to condone immorality that goes against Judeo-Christian beliefs. Democrats seek to use the force of the government to make us condone that which we intuitively understand to be evil.
XII. Finally, do not under any circumstances endorse or vote for anybody unwilling to comply with the above rules in public discourse, as that person is gutless, craven, and not worthy of your endorsement! We desperately need to sort the sheep from the goats, including in the Republican Party. And that involves actually engaging in real debates, not simply knuckling under to the Democrat-media onslaught.