Smackdown & stfu arguments

[Mojo2]

SMACKDOWN & STFU ARGUMENTS

These are the arguments that can't be countered on any given topic.

For example, almost everyone on the left still thinks George W. Bush failed to help the post Katrina hurricane and levy collapse emergency in the Gulf, here is what Democratic consultant and resident ABC News & CNN's leftist big mouth, Donna Brazile said:

CNN’s Donna Brazile says Bush got Katrina response right
Apr. 25, 2013 4:49pm

Donna Brazile, CNN contributor and former chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, was born in New Orleans and much of her family was still in the city when Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005. In a column for CNN.com, she says Bush was “as good as his word” in responding to the disaster.

Brazile writes:

He visited the Gulf states 17 times; went 13 times to New Orleans. Laura Bush made 24 trips. Bush saw that $126 billion in aid was sent to the Gulf’s residents, as some members of his own party in Congress balked.

Bush put a special emphasis on rebuilding schools and universities. He didn’t forget African-Americans: Bush provided $400 million to the historically black colleges, now integrated, that remain a pride, and magnet for African-American students. Laura Bush, a librarian, saw to it that thousands of books ruined by the floods were replaced. To this day, there are many local libraries with tributes devoted to her efforts. …

Our recovery can be credited to the civility and tireless efforts of President Bush and other Americans, who united and worked together to help rebuild the Gulf and the place of my birth, New Orleans.​

At the time (and still today) the Bush administration was widely criticized in the media as being ineffective in its relief response to the Katrina aftermath.

@eScarry

CNN?s Donna Brazile says Bush got Katrina response right | TheBlaze.com

The Subject: Bush's Katrina Performance
STFU Argument: GWB can be proud of his administration's response.
SMACKDOWN: Donna Brazile said so and she can't be disputed.

 

[Mojo2]

Moderate Muslims are Irrelevant When it Comes to Islamic Jihad and the Quest for a Global Caliphate

BRIGITTE GABRIEL FOREVER DESTROYS ‘PEACEFUL MUSLIM MAJORITY’ ARGUMENT GETS STANDING OVATION (VIDEO)

NTEB News Desk | June 24, 2014 | 12 Comments

THE PEACEFUL MAJORITY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN IRRELEVANT

At a panel discussion sponsored by the Heritage Foundation to talk about the 4 Americans who were murdered in Benghazi and why the Obama administration refuses to do anything about it, a Muslim-American woman stands up in an attempt to rehash the “peaceful Muslim majority” argument. What happens next is not only a masterclass in debating by super awesome American Terrorism Expert Brigitte Gabriel, it’s also a much-needed dose of intelligence and rational thought.

Ms. Gabriel is founder, president and CEO of ACT! for America, the largest grassroots citizen action network dedicated to preserving national security with 279,000 members. She’s the author of two New York Times Best Sellers, BECAUSE THEY HATE: A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America. And THEY MUST BE STOPPED: Why we must defeat radical Islam and how we can do it. Ms. Gabriel is named one of the top 50 most prominent speakers in America. She speaks Arabic, French, English and Hebrew.


Brigitte Gabriel Forever Destroys 'Peaceful Muslim Majority' Argument Gets Standing Ovation (VIDEO) - Now The End Begins : Now The End Begins

The Subject: The FALSE BELIEF That the Existence of Moderate Muslims Proves ALL Muslims are Moderate, Innocent and Harmless.

THE FALSE BELIEF That There's No Need To Worry About a Jihadist Threat in America.

STFU Argument: Moderate Muslims are irrelevant to the matter.

SMACKDOWN: Moderates were irrelevant to Hitler's rise, Stalin's regime, Mao's revolution and to the Muslim Brotherhood's campaign.

These posts represent the leading arguments on the indicated topics and can't be contested.

 

[G.T.]

#1 I agree with.

#2 I feel is a strawman.

It's not "there are moderate muslims so don't worry about jihad."

It's "there are moderate muslims, so ALL muslims are not terrorists."

 

[Mojo2]

#1 I agree with.

#2 I feel is a strawman.

It's not "there are moderate muslims so don't worry about jihad."

It's "there are moderate muslims, so ALL muslims are not terrorists."

Thanks.

Edited.

 

[G.T.]

#1 I agree with.

#2 I feel is a strawman.

It's not "there are moderate muslims so don't worry about jihad."

It's "there are moderate muslims, so ALL muslims are not terrorists."

Thanks.

Edited.

Not really.

The "subject" part is not really the argument made by pointing to moderates.

It's not "because moderates / don't worry about violence."



It's "because moderates, don't assume all are bad and stereotype the whole Religion."

 

[Mojo2]

#1 I agree with.

#2 I feel is a strawman.

It's not "there are moderate muslims so don't worry about jihad."

It's "there are moderate muslims, so ALL muslims are not terrorists."

Thanks.

Edited.

Not really.

The "subject" part is not really the argument made by pointing to moderates.

It's not "because moderates / don't worry about violence."



It's "because moderates, don't assume all are bad and stereotype the whole Religion."

Look, this thread is meant to be a place where Conservatives and American Patriots could find the best arguments to use against certain topics.

Feel free to pass along to the readership your own SMACKDOWN and STFU arguments.

I call it that because once you employ them your opponent will have nothing left to say.

And you can qualify for a a SMACKDOWN citation and you can tell your opponent to STFU.

 

[G.T.]

It's easy to classify something as a smackdown when the thing you're smacking down doesn't even exist.

That's the point.

Nobody argues "there are moderate muslims, therefore, don't be afraid of terrorism!"


So naturally, you'd have a "smackdown" argument for that made up horseshit.

 

[Mojo2]

THE POLITICAL SCENE

THE ABSOLUTIST

Ted Cruz is an unyielding debater—and the far right’s most formidable advocate.

BY JEFFREY TOOBIN
JUNE 30, 2014

Ted Cruz, the Republican junior senator from Texas, has heard the line about how the Party needs to become more moderate to win Presidential elections.

“It is amazing that the wisdom of the chattering class to the Republicans is always, always, always ‘Surrender your principles and agree with the Democrats,’ ” he told me. “That’s been true for my entire lifetime.

The chattering classes have consistently said, ‘You crazy Republicans have to give up on what you believe and become more like Democrats.’ And, I would note, every time Republicans do that we lose.” Cruz then offered a short history of recent Presidential politics.

Richard Nixon ran as a conservative, twice a winner; Gerald Ford, moderate, loser; Ronald Reagan, also twice a winner. “President George Herbert Walker Bush ran as a strong conservative, ran to continue the third term of Ronald Reagan, continue the Ronald Reagan revolution,” Cruz went on.

“Then he raised taxes and in ’92 ran as an establishment moderate—same candidate, two very different campaigns. First one won, second one lost. In 1996, you got Bob Dole; 2000 and 2004, you have George W. Bush; 2008, John McCain; 2012, Mitt Romney. And what does the entire D.C. Republican consulting class say?

‘In 2016, we need another establishment moderate!’ Hasn’t worked in four decades. ‘But next time will be the time!’ ”

Jeffrey Toobin: The Rise of Ted Cruz : The New Yorker


The Subject: The FALSE BELIEF That the GOP Must Move to the Middle to Win.

STFU Argument: Moderate Conservative POTUS candidates have lost every election and real strong Conservative POTUS candidates have won every election since Nixon.

SMACKDOWN: Ted Cruz is the most well qualified Conservative Candidate for the 2016 election.

 

[Mojo2]

It's easy to classify something as a smackdown when the thing you're smacking down doesn't even exist.

That's the point.

Nobody argues "there are moderate muslims, therefore, don't be afraid of terrorism!"


So naturally, you'd have a "smackdown" argument for that made up horseshit.

Can't you simply create your own post which gives a fellow Conservative poster a surefire argument to use if the subject ever comes up?

You sound like you have a good bit of Liberal hardwiring, instead of creating and posting your own answer you nag your b/f about HIS effort.

 

[G.T.]

It's easy to classify something as a smackdown when the thing you're smacking down doesn't even exist.

That's the point.

Nobody argues "there are moderate muslims, therefore, don't be afraid of terrorism!"


So naturally, you'd have a "smackdown" argument for that made up horseshit.

Can't you simply create your own post which gives a fellow Conservative poster a surefire argument to use if the subject ever comes up?

You sound like you have a good bit of Liberal hardwiring, instead of creating and posting your own answer you nag your b/f about HIS effort.

lol you're not my boyfriend bro (b/f????)


wtffff

 

[Mojo2]

It's easy to classify something as a smackdown when the thing you're smacking down doesn't even exist.

That's the point.

Nobody argues "there are moderate muslims, therefore, don't be afraid of terrorism!"


So naturally, you'd have a "smackdown" argument for that made up horseshit.

Can't you simply create your own post which gives a fellow Conservative poster a surefire argument to use if the subject ever comes up?

You sound like you have a good bit of Liberal hardwiring, instead of creating and posting your own answer you nag your b/f about HIS effort.

lol you're not my boyfriend bro (b/f????)


wtffff

Sorry, Bro!

 

[Mojo2]

June 20, 2014

Stunning: DHS solicited bids for vendor to handle 65,000 unaccompanied minors -- IN JANUARY!

By Thomas Lifson

The Obama administration’s claim to have been surprised by the wave of children flooding over out borders may turn out to be another political lie of the year. Sundance of Conservative Treehouse noticed a very peculiar advertisement:

On January 29th of this year, the federal government posted an advertisement seeking bids for a vendor contract to handle “Unaccompanied Alien Children“.

Not just any contract mind you, but a very specific contract – for a very specific number of unaccompanied minors: 65,000.

• Why would DHS and ICE be claiming “surprise” by the current influx of unaccompanied minors on the border in June, when they were taking bids for an exact contract to handle the exact situation in January?

• Secondly, how could they possibly anticipate 65,000 unaccompanied minors would be showing up at the border, when the most ever encountered in a previous year was 5,000 total ?
​

The bid specifics are even more suspicious:

[...] The Contractor shall provide unarmed escort staff, including management, supervision, manpower, training, certifications, licenses, drug testing, equipment, and supplies necessary to provide on-demand escort services for non-criminal/non-delinquent unaccompanied alien children ages infant to 17 years of age, seven (7) days a week, 365 days a year. Transport will be required for either category of UAC or individual juveniles, to include both male and female juveniles. There will be approximately 65,000 UAC in total: 25% local ground transport, 25% via ICE charter and 50% via commercial air.

[...] In addition, the Contractor shall have personnel who are able to communicate with juveniles in their own designated language(s).
​

Link to the ad here.

This stinks to high heaven. It is time to subpoena the people who placed the ad to give testimony in Congress. We may have a Cloward-Piven strategy on illegal immigration underway.

Hat tip: Lucianne Goldberg

Blog: Stunning: DHS solicited bids for vendor to handle 65,000 unaccompanied minors -- IN JANUARY!


The Subject: The Obama Administration KNEW beforehand that 65,000 unaccompanied illegal alien minors would arrive at our border.

STFU Argument: Here is the proof of Obama Administration pre-planning for something no one could have predicted unless they helped cause it.

SMACKDOWN: Once again, Obama is caught trying to orchestrate a sham situation for his own political gain. Just as with Fast & Furious, Obama rigged the situation. He is a master manipulator and a con man extraordinaire who needs to be impeached and removed from office ASAP.