Tim Haines

First I want to make clear that I don’t use “liberal” as a pejorative, I use it in the most technical way.  Really I wish I could come up with a better word than that because I don’t like the implications of its use.  So forgive me if it sounds divisive. 

Typical liberal rhetorical devices to derail an argument they are losing.

1. “That’s not true!”  

This is a ridiculous tactic because it’s a petty response to what was likely a well formulated argument.  You’ll also notice that when they say “That’s not true!” they never say why it isn’t true.  They’re just gambling on some hope that by saying “That isn’t true” they can neutralize the strength of your argument. Because how does a rational adult respond to “That’s not true”??  By saying “Yes it is!”?  Do you perpetuate the nonsense?  Of course you don’t.  So by their saying “That’s not true” it tends to derail the argument, neutralize your focus, and the discussion comes to an abrupt end.  If it sounds desperate and dishonest, that’s because it is.  The best way to respond to this is to say “Tell me why it isn’t true?  How do you know that what I’ve said isn’t true?  How do you REALLY know I’m lying?

2. “Cite your sources” - Usually when someone says “cite your sources” or “where’d you hear that from” or “Do you have a chart or spreadsheet that proves this?” all they really want to do is throw you off and buy some time to figure out how they can wiggle their way out of the corner you just backed them into.  They have no real interest in your sources.  In fact, the only interest they have, if any, is having the opportunity to discredit your sources, even though they themselves are likely not even familiar with your sources, or their work.  

It’s a very effective tactic; it instantly—and illegitimately—throws their adversary off balance.  Because, really, who can remember every source of every bit of knowledge they’ve accumulated over their lifetime?  It’s impossible.  In fact, I’m reading a book right now, written by a theologian whose name I can never recall.  

Much like the “That’s not true!” line, “Cite your sources” is a desperate measure to put you on the defensive, and get you to defend your knowledge rather than your argument. And ideally what they really want to do is get you to “out” your sources so that they can discredit them, thereby discrediting your argument.  In other words, they attempt to discredit your argument not through counter-argument, but by impugning your sources…sources they almost certainly are not even familiar with.   It’s very dishonest.  But liberals don’t argue with honesty in mind.  For them it’s not about the truth, it’s about the contest.  It’s about defeating the big, evil conservative.  It’s about winning the game, even if the truth falls by the wayside.  They debate with illusion, not with arguments.  If they can build the illusion that what you’re saying is a lie, or that your sources are not credible, that’s enough to affect the perception of anyone listening to the debate, and that’s enough for them to escape the debate looking like they didn’t lose (thereby discrediting your argument, even though they didn’t actually defeat your argument).  Again, all it is for them is about the contest.  Not the truth.  Here’s how you address that.  It is not your responsibility to present an inventory or a pedigree of your knowledge or education every time you share your thoughts.   It’s a ridiculous expectation, and only faux-intellectuals would demand this.  The only time you should have to cite your sources is when you’re creating an intellectual work.  There is no such expectation or requirement when engaging in casual discourse.  Anyone placing such a demand on you is, himself, a fraud.  Also, anyone asking you to cite your sources generally won’t have sources of their own, and they’re gambling on the likelihood that you will not ask them to present THEIR sources.  Again, it’s a dishonest tactic.  But who needs intellectual honesty when all you want to do is win the contest?  

Whether or not you choose to indulge them and share your sources is up to you.  But take my word for it, it won’t help you.  Because no source will be credible enough, or substantial enough for them…because they aren’t truly interested in your sources, they’re only interested in the evasive measure of asking you to cite them.  When you start getting into your sources, the discussion becomes about your sources, and not about the issue.  So I highly suggest you avoid getting side-railed talking about your sources.  Ask them for THEIR sources if they pull that one on you.

3. Oftentimes liberals will use unqualified sources.  Don’t let them off the hook.  Documentarians, for example, are not valid sources.  Documentarians are not historians.  Documentarians produce interpretations of historical findings.  They do not unearth history itself.  Documentarians report only as much history as is necessary to tell the story they’re trying to tell.  And that isn’t necessarily dishonest. That’s just how a documentary is done.  However, insofar as a documentarian has nowhere near the authority of a historian, be careful not to let your liberal adversary use documentarians as sources.  Certainly not as substantial sources, at least.  Watching a one-hour gem on National Geographic Channel does not qualify as valid critical study.  Also, Bill Maher and Jon Stewart are—for some bizarre reason I will never understand—commonly used by liberals as valid sources.  Are you seeing a pattern here?  Bill Maher…Jon Stewart…Documentaries…the nature and source of the intellect of a modern liberal is not founded in study or research, but in the entertainment industry.  Be sure to point that out to them!  Bill Maher and Jon Stewart (and others like them) are not valid sources.  They’re entertainers.  They are no more a valid source of credible knowledge than your mail carrier is.  They may have opinions, and those opinions may or may not be well-formed.  But people with opinions don’t equate to valid SOURCES.  They’re merely reporters of opinions.  And personally I’ve heard Bill Maher “report” flat out lies in a way that sounded like he was stating indisputable truth (one example of such a lie…”Every scientist in the world agrees on global warming!”  This is categorically untrue.  If anything the science community is split down the middle on the issue.) At the end of the day, there’s nothing wrong with exchanging knowledge, even with your mail man.  There’s nothing wrong with your perspective being affected (but not shaped!…) by the opinions of even an imbecile like Bill Maher.  But when it comes down to an intellectual discussion, brother you’d better have something more to back you than Bill Maher or the freakin mail man.  

I’m not saying liberals are stupid, and I’m not saying that ALL liberals employ such cowardly tactics when engaging in discourse.  But having debated both liberals AND conservatives on many, many issues throughout my life, my personal experience is that liberals are generally more inclined to use these tactics (among others) to escape or derail a debate when it becomes clear to them that they are losing.  Conservatives on the other hand tend to be more focused, more grounded in getting down to the truth.  I don’t know why that is.  I have just found it to be the case in my experience.  The hardest debates/discussions I’ve ever participated in have been against other Conservatives.  They definitely give me a run for my money.  I’ve happened upon the occasional well-informed, intellectually honest liberal, and those are probably my favorite discussions where I learn the most (and teach the most).  Unfortunately though, liberals like that are very hard to come by.  It’s very sad.  Anyway….stand your ground folks.

The Catholic Mind is going LIVE in a half hour. 1pm Eastern time. Show will run for about an hour and a half. Less, if things appear to be dead lol.  
Hope you give it a listen.  Call in if you’d like.  Call-in number is 347-945-7083.  Address where today’s show will be streamed can be found below.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/the-catholic-mind/2012/06/03/lets-get-acquainted

The new site (thoughtsandperceptions.com) is going really well.  Its Facebook fan page has garnered almost 80 likes in the past day and a half, and I’m even starting to get some negative comments on the site, so you know I’m doing something right lol.

It’s humbling.  And it’s terrifying.  It’s terrifying because it reminds me that what I’m doing (evangelizing) is to be taken very, very seriously.  It’s humbling because I don’t take myself that seriously.  It’s a big responsibility to teach the faith.  If you say something wrong, you’ve infected the minds (and perhaps the faith) of a lot of people with an untruth.  So I’m crazy-careful about what I say, and how I frame it.  What I don’t know, I don’t say.  If I only ‘kinda’ know it, I disclose that I only “kinda” know it, and I direct them to more solid sources of knowledge.  I have faith that God has spent a long time nurturing me, and that His Church has spent a long time educating me, and refining the whole of my humanity, including my intellect.  But I’d be lying if I said that the gravity of what I’m doing there does not give me pause sometimes.  If you’re reading this, please offer up a special prayer for me. And please pray for the success of Thoughts and Perceptions.  Thanks!

God is great.  His name is Holy.  His mercy, mighty.  His kingdom, glorious.  May His holy name be praised forever!

Did you see Sr Maureen Fieldler on CBS This Morning? I wrote a blog post in response to what this Twisted Sister had to say. And I swear…I don’t know why or how this woman is permitted to remain in active ministry. Away the post can be found here, along with a link to her interview
http://thoughtsandperceptions.com/2012/06/01/the-face-of-new-catholicism/

Okay, this is a shameless plug for my new blog project, ThoughtsAndPerceptions.com.  Not only will you find great content there (Apologetics, Philosophy, Theology, etc), but today I’ve also built in a chat feature into the site, similar to Facebook, only better.  It’s better because it includes chat rooms, and games.  Registration is required for the chat, etc. but registration is free.  And you can always just get into the content without registering.  Please check it out, pass it along to your friends and family, and by all means let me know what you think; good or bad, all feedback is appreciated! 

God be with you!

Tim Haines

Without making this painfully epic, I want to announce (mainly to my followers) that I’ll be shifting my blogitude to a new site called Thoughts and Perceptions.  It’s a blog whose posts are reflections of the Catholic mind.  It will include Philosophy, Theology (apologetics, evangelization, history), opinion pieces, and some news and politics.

Right now just my Tumblr posts are there (likely some of it is stuff you guys haven’t seen before, so go check it out), but more content is coming.  I’m working with a couple of contributors, and I hope you will be among the audience as this great stuff comes online.

I decided to shift my work to a standard blog because

1. Tumblr is limiting when it comes to the stuff I want to do

2. I’m sure you guys don’t want to see my heavy stuff popping up in your dashboards

3. Tumblr was not taking off for me. Some really solid posts get almost no movement.

4. Tumblr is a micro blog.  What I do is most definitely not “micro”

I’ll continue to use Tumblr, and I will probably post some lighter stuff here.  Things that are more Tumblr-appropriate.  So this isn’t good bye, really.  I sincerely hope you check out the new site! LIKE us on Facebook, and be a part of the experience.  For more about the site, check out the About link on the home page.

Let me know what you think.  Thank you all for your “follow-ship”, and for your prayers.  Hopefully we can all continue to bring the Gospel to a world in need, one post at a time.  May God be with you all!

[That Crazy Catholic]
Tim Haines