I know. She explained that what’s done is done so there’s nothing she can do about it now, and I asked, “Don’t you want to know the truth?” Previously, she had said she was living in a different reality (which I don’t dispute!), and here, she said something to the effect of it not being the truth. I asked, “How do you know if you don’t examine the evidence?” She couldn’t answer that or any of the many other “why’s” I asked her.
Leftists and Democrats hate "why?" questions. I always say to them, "Don't tell me what you believe, tell me WHY you believe it."
They'll tell you *what* but a conversation killer is when they're asked "why?" It has happened sooooo many times in the past that it's no longer just anecdotal.
Their opinions are based on emotion, not intellect, and so they can't answer whys without sounding clueless or ignorant. So they don't bother. They change the subject, or leave the conversation.
Andrew - excellent point. I live in the "whys" - the amount of time I've spent mulling over the "whys" - why should/shouldn't I wear a mask, get the vaccine, request a religious exemption, attempt to persuade others, etc. My liberal friends spend all their time in the what - what should we do about trump, what should we do about florida, what should we do about anti-vaxxers, what should we do about climate change. Their entire intellectual discourse floats on the surface of unvetted assumptions.
Yes! You can immediately demolish every talking point by exposing their faulty premises, but it’s like their script reboots and they start looping through the narrative all over again.
I love the whys. It’s taking responsibility for myself and my decisions. The liberals I know just want to criticize others and how they live their life. So many times I’ve been in conversations where liberals are pontificating theories and solutions about policies and events and individual people’s choices, things they know nothing about—at best they’ve read an article or seen a video. I always say, well, if I really wanted to understand what’s going on, I’d start with these questions. It’s crickets. And they’re off to another topic they are ill-informed about.
Interesting you should say that as my letter to her included a bulleted list of 35 why’s, and no doubt I’ll think of more by the time I end up publishing it.
Here's what I consider to be *the* quintessential example of what I assert about the "why" thing:
Maybe 10 years ago, when I was in Farcebook and my Leftist sister hadn't unfriended me yet, I saw a conversation on her page that involved maybe half a dozen of her female friends.
The conversation was about Gabby Reece, the volleyball player. Gabby had recently been on a talk show and the discussion turned to her fiance. When questioned, Gabby offered that she might, just one time, forgive her future husband for a unfaithful indiscretion. Just ONCE, and only MAYBE, would forgive him.
That sent the gaggle of hags in the FB conversation off the deep end. One of them said that Gabby had been a hero of hers, but now Gabby was dead to her. The worst person on the planet. The others said similar hostile, hateful things.
That's when I stepped in(to it).
I observed that "All you women who have just thrown Gabby Reece under the bus, you did so because she suggested ONLY that she MIGHT forgive her husband's indiscretion just ONCE. For THAT, she is dead to you all.
And yet...you all supported Hillary Clinton for president and still support her today. Yet she made a LIFETIME of forgiving and excusing her husband's serial, pathological marital indiscretions, time after time after time, and did so to her own selfish, personal benefit.
Yet Hillary is your hero, and Gabby is the worst person on the planet.
Can you explain this contradiction?"
Mine was literally the last post in the conversation thread. Not even ONE of them had the integrity or character to answer the question, let alone to admit to their dishonesty and hypocrisy. The conversation was over.
This is a great example too of what is wrong with the whole panic-demic response, too...so much of it is based on "MIGHT" and "COULD" and "WHAT IF." And although I don't look at this scamdemic as a left right issue, I DO think that the avowed liberals I know lean toward envisioning and in fact fetishizing the MIGHT and then acting on it. "We need a nanny state because there MIGHT be someone, somewhere, getting "their" (not his or her) feelings hurt by, well, life." "You not wearing a mask are a direct threat to me I must run from because you MIGHT be contagious, and I MIGHT catch it, and I MIGHT get severely sick or even MIGHT die." None of the actions and reactions are reality based, they are 'what-if' based.
I also have some ideas about how this is maybe because more lefties I know work in academia vs more right-leaning I know work with tangible, 3-D world actual things (farm, construction, vegetable sales, chiropractic), but that's a nascent theory on my part, I want to investigate that more.
Yep. That's exactly their pathetic argument about so-called global warming, too. Just that the globe MIGHT maybe possibly warm up at some very distant point in the future is enough reason for mankind to put a gun to its head now.
And speaking of guns, "if it saves just one child's life"...
Oh trust me Andrew - that conversation wasn't over. They just continued it somewhere without you - and then it was about you and how you ruined their fun with your right-wing ideology. I know these types.
"I'd rather be ignorant than be uncomfortable." Yeesh.
and y'all wonder why cats laugh at humans....
That's because dogs have owners and cats have staff lol.🐱
I know. She explained that what’s done is done so there’s nothing she can do about it now, and I asked, “Don’t you want to know the truth?” Previously, she had said she was living in a different reality (which I don’t dispute!), and here, she said something to the effect of it not being the truth. I asked, “How do you know if you don’t examine the evidence?” She couldn’t answer that or any of the many other “why’s” I asked her.
Leftists and Democrats hate "why?" questions. I always say to them, "Don't tell me what you believe, tell me WHY you believe it."
They'll tell you *what* but a conversation killer is when they're asked "why?" It has happened sooooo many times in the past that it's no longer just anecdotal.
Their opinions are based on emotion, not intellect, and so they can't answer whys without sounding clueless or ignorant. So they don't bother. They change the subject, or leave the conversation.
Andrew - excellent point. I live in the "whys" - the amount of time I've spent mulling over the "whys" - why should/shouldn't I wear a mask, get the vaccine, request a religious exemption, attempt to persuade others, etc. My liberal friends spend all their time in the what - what should we do about trump, what should we do about florida, what should we do about anti-vaxxers, what should we do about climate change. Their entire intellectual discourse floats on the surface of unvetted assumptions.
Yes! You can immediately demolish every talking point by exposing their faulty premises, but it’s like their script reboots and they start looping through the narrative all over again.
Yes!!!! Never forward motion.
I love the whys. It’s taking responsibility for myself and my decisions. The liberals I know just want to criticize others and how they live their life. So many times I’ve been in conversations where liberals are pontificating theories and solutions about policies and events and individual people’s choices, things they know nothing about—at best they’ve read an article or seen a video. I always say, well, if I really wanted to understand what’s going on, I’d start with these questions. It’s crickets. And they’re off to another topic they are ill-informed about.
Interesting you should say that as my letter to her included a bulleted list of 35 why’s, and no doubt I’ll think of more by the time I end up publishing it.
Here's what I consider to be *the* quintessential example of what I assert about the "why" thing:
Maybe 10 years ago, when I was in Farcebook and my Leftist sister hadn't unfriended me yet, I saw a conversation on her page that involved maybe half a dozen of her female friends.
The conversation was about Gabby Reece, the volleyball player. Gabby had recently been on a talk show and the discussion turned to her fiance. When questioned, Gabby offered that she might, just one time, forgive her future husband for a unfaithful indiscretion. Just ONCE, and only MAYBE, would forgive him.
That sent the gaggle of hags in the FB conversation off the deep end. One of them said that Gabby had been a hero of hers, but now Gabby was dead to her. The worst person on the planet. The others said similar hostile, hateful things.
That's when I stepped in(to it).
I observed that "All you women who have just thrown Gabby Reece under the bus, you did so because she suggested ONLY that she MIGHT forgive her husband's indiscretion just ONCE. For THAT, she is dead to you all.
And yet...you all supported Hillary Clinton for president and still support her today. Yet she made a LIFETIME of forgiving and excusing her husband's serial, pathological marital indiscretions, time after time after time, and did so to her own selfish, personal benefit.
Yet Hillary is your hero, and Gabby is the worst person on the planet.
Can you explain this contradiction?"
Mine was literally the last post in the conversation thread. Not even ONE of them had the integrity or character to answer the question, let alone to admit to their dishonesty and hypocrisy. The conversation was over.
THAT is emblematic of most of the Left, IMO.
This is a great example too of what is wrong with the whole panic-demic response, too...so much of it is based on "MIGHT" and "COULD" and "WHAT IF." And although I don't look at this scamdemic as a left right issue, I DO think that the avowed liberals I know lean toward envisioning and in fact fetishizing the MIGHT and then acting on it. "We need a nanny state because there MIGHT be someone, somewhere, getting "their" (not his or her) feelings hurt by, well, life." "You not wearing a mask are a direct threat to me I must run from because you MIGHT be contagious, and I MIGHT catch it, and I MIGHT get severely sick or even MIGHT die." None of the actions and reactions are reality based, they are 'what-if' based.
I also have some ideas about how this is maybe because more lefties I know work in academia vs more right-leaning I know work with tangible, 3-D world actual things (farm, construction, vegetable sales, chiropractic), but that's a nascent theory on my part, I want to investigate that more.
Yep. That's exactly their pathetic argument about so-called global warming, too. Just that the globe MIGHT maybe possibly warm up at some very distant point in the future is enough reason for mankind to put a gun to its head now.
And speaking of guns, "if it saves just one child's life"...
They do not reason. They cannot reason.
Oh trust me Andrew - that conversation wasn't over. They just continued it somewhere without you - and then it was about you and how you ruined their fun with your right-wing ideology. I know these types.
These types tend to be named , "Karen."
🤣
Haha, what a great (and sad) example! I think you short-circuited their brains by asking them to use logic to justify their position ;-)
"Karen," does not do logic.
I fear you will never hear from her again.