Blogs are a great way to disseminate news (read tomorrow's Fishwrapper stories today) but also to have an open dialogue. There are a regular group of people who comment here whose contributions are very much appreciated and usually I respond in the comments section, but today I am going to break down the typical liberal argument made by one reader, "Christian," regarding my post of illegal aliens that are in the Washington County Jail. Here is his comment:
Daniel, you racist son-of-bitch! Just because child-molesting kidnappers are overwhelmingly middle-aged and white, I don't go around assuming that every middle-aged white guy is a twisted fucking child molester. In parallel, an estimated 30 to 39 percent of the foreign-born in Oregon are here without proper documentation. Not all foreign born are Hispanic, and not all Hispanics are foreign born. Rather, the overwhelming majority, 96%, of undocumented immigrants participate in the labor force.
You are generalizing the bad actions of a very small proportion of a group to an entire population. Your project here is nothing more than a sad and desperate attempt to deal with your xenophobic fears. Get over it and debate the bigger issues.
What the hell do any of you care about "the efforts of people who come here legally" when you engage in such hysteric and ugly cultural stereotyping. What the fuck do you know about other cultures? Get off your asses and go experience something and stop trying to blame others for your problems. Is this non-pc enough for you?
Liberals always start their arguments with an accusation. More often than not it is an accusation that you are prejudice or racist. Liberals employ this argument because it usually puts people on the defensive. For liberals it is worse to be a "racist" than it is to be a child-molesting drug addict. I simply disregard the name-calling.
Most likely if the liberal accuses you of being racist they will follow with an irrelevant comparison using the "white male" as a potential stereotype "victim." Christian's specific argument in this case is not valid for several reasons:
First, as a father, I do assume that everyone is a child-molester. Do not have that attitude is dangerous and I am responsible for protecting my kids.
Second, my original post had nothing to do with stereotypes. I simply listed all the Washington County inmates who had an ICE (immigration and customs enforcement) hold. These are people who have broken the law, not simply rounded up because of their skin color, ethnicity, or cultural background.
So Christian's argument attempted to redefine my original point which was that illegal aliens continue to commit crimes disproportionately more than the general population. That most illegal aliens are Hispanic is a fact but did not factor into my list. I took all applicable names.
Christian then rattles off several "statistics" that did not seem to support any argument he was making. Presumably he was making the point that "only" 30 - 39% of foreign born people in the US being illegal aliens is far less that the percentage of "middle-aged white guys" who are child molesters. Even I am not so jaded as to believe we have that many perverts.
The liberal will usually realize that he must throw in a factual (and non-debatable) statement in around now so Christian makes the non-point of:
"Not all foreign born are Hispanic, and not all Hispanics are foreign born."
I would assume that the above statement goes without saying. But by saying something that is true and also keeping the argument focused on my "racism," Christian feels like he is making progress.
Christian then points out that not only have these illegal aliens broken our immigration laws but that 96% of them violate our employment laws as well. I'm not sure how this helps his case (I don't care if the illegal alien had a job when he got pulled over for that DUII) and his number is suspect anyways.
A liberal then will attempt to source his information by naming some ridiculous group/poll who agrees with them. HRC will always say that homosexuality is great and you are "born that way" while AFA will say otherwise. Both groups have various "reports" (scientific and otherwise) to back up their conclusion.
Example statement from Urban institute homepage: Broader access to public health insurance programs has kept the number of Americans without coverage from skyrocketing in this economic downturn. Urban Institute health experts explain why.
Since the original accusation of "racist" does not always work the liberal may follow up with a more sophisticated name, in this case "xenophobic." This is simply a change from "dummy" to "imbecile." It is basically the same thing but now Christian feels more sophisticated.
Christian leaves us with a hilarious comment referring to "any of you" in a general way (presumably referring to myself and people who read this blog) and then accusing "us" of generalizing people. This is to make me the issue rather than what we were originally talking about.
"We" are then told to go "experience something." I'm not sure what the last comment has to do with drug dealers, child-molesters, murderers, and drunk drivers who are in our county illegally but that is my point.
Any time you debate a liberal they will call names, redefine the issue or re-frame the question, make false comparisons, cite liberal groups as evidence, make more personal accusations, then make you the issue before coming up with a "get over it" or some other silly comment that they think should be the end of the conversation.
The important thing is that you realize that liberals are wrong about everything and that you don't hurt your head banging it on the wall when talking to them.