At one of the three jobs I work (to support my family and at least two welfare families) I have an associate who vehemently claims to be a libertarian yet, if you listen to him talk, he is as liberal as the day is long. As I make no secret of my avowed conservatism he misses no opportunity to play his version of “gotcha” on me. His preferred method to make me admit how mean I am, until just recently, was the carefully crafted, factually inaccurate or emotionally based question. It has become a good natured way (we both served in the Navy) to keep my rhetorical skills sharp while educating a decent sort who has allowed himself to be mislead by his desire not to be seen as an evil conservative.
Questions are an invaluable way to make an instant, undeniable point. Liberals learned this a long time ago with the “When did you stop beating your wife” type questions. Despite their misuse of the tactic (liberals use it as a propaganda technique), it is a sound one and conservatives should use it at every opportunity. A well-placed question often accomplishes two goals. One, it silences the liberal for a moment or two (until the talking points kick in) and second (and more valuable) it causes the less rabidly oriented to think on some level.
A perfect example came about during a conversation on the so-called Palestinians and Israel’s “occupation” of their “historic” homeland. I simply had to ask the following question. If the arabs were there first, why is the al aqsa mosque built on top of the Temple Mount instead of the other way around? The question is factually accurate and that facts very existence destroys the narrative that Israel is occupying anything.
When my associate tried to engage me on the conservative “war on women” farce I did what I always do, let him go on and on until he ran out of steam. As I already know he is a huge supporter of importing thousands of Syrian fighting age male “refugees” who cannot be properly vetted, I asked him a simple question. Why is it okay to import thousands of alleged Syrians who believe it is perfectly acceptable to kill a women who has been raped unless she had four male witnesses?
During a recent discussion (I use the term discussion lightly) on the budget I got an earful about how broke the government was how critical it was for taxes on the rich to be raised. Of course I had a question. How is it the government is so broke seniors on Social Security cannot get a moderate cost of living raise but there is enough money to give thousands of so called “refugees” food stamps, housing, college and medical care?
Sometimes the question can be a humorous one. During a discussion about the “normalcy” of homosexuality I of course had a question. If lesbians aren’t attracted to men why are they attracted to women who look like men?
During a discussion on tolerating islam I naturally had a question. Why is it ok for liberals to hate Christians for believing marriage is between a man and a women (a biblical tenet) while remaining silent on the moslems religious right to kill gays (a koranic tenent)?
During a black lives matter conversation I simply had to ask, since, according to the so called Justice Department cops shoot and kill more whites every year than blacks, has there been a failure in the racist part of law enforcement training?
During a conversation on how fast food workers deserve a $15 an hour wage, you guessed it, I had to ask, why would you consider “you want fries with that” a career option? This conversation actually morphed into a reasonably intelligent debate. At the end of the day though my associate would not answer my final question, if $15 an hour is good for fast food workers why is it not good for every worker? In fact, why not really show your compassion and make the minim wage $50 or even $75 an hour. Surely that’s a livable wage for everyone. He didn’t want to admit it to me but I already knew. He had done the math and realized that his demands were financially unsound.
Sometimes you simply have to illustrate absurdity with absurdity. While discussing so-called hate crimes laws I had to ask a few questions. Why is it more wrong for a white man to rob a black man than the other way around? If a gay man and a black man are robbed by a white heterosexual male, who is the more aggrieved victim? The gay or the black? If they are robbed by a gay Native American is there any victim?
In a black lives matter conversation gun control came up. I had to point out that the same people who claim it is “open season” on young black men by the police are the ones publicly insisting that police are the only people who should be trusted to have guns. They need to answer this question. Isn’t that a racist position?
Sometimes, if a question is good enough, you can tackle two sacred cows at once. Example, if global warming causes terrorism then why aren’t Christians and Jews strapping on suicide vests and themselves blowing up in crowded places? That question ended our conversation right then and there.
Questions like these are an opportunity to educate. When used against a thoroughly indoctrinated liberal these kind of questions generally produce one of two results. Stunned silence, which can be awesome to watch or a total degeneration into blathering name-calling. On some occasions that one question can educate. Therein lies the point of a well crafted, well-asked question. It can affect a certain amount of change.