What themes have worked for you in opening gop friendly minds?

Many of us have experience talking with folks who don't want to listen, who just want to repeat the one-dimensional talking points repeated ad nauseum on talk radio /faux news and other pro repub media. With public opinion shifting so sharply in the past year - I venture to guess that many DUers have witnessed previous closed minds begin to open. Opening can be the full awakening (Yea!) or the beginnings - the questioning, the agreement on some points - which indicates actually listening to counterpoints where before any counter points to the pro-repub lines would be immediately dismissed.

Let's share stories about the themes that resonated with different folks. Lets put these ideas collectively together, as a resource for one another - more angles to try out when openings for conversations begin.

I'll start by sharing a conversation this fall with the token repub in the family, who for several years has brought up politics to try to a) bait me into conversation (for family peace, I generally decline to be baited) and then b) if I do discuss quickly would dismiss my points with some comment echoing rush ala crazy liberals and a begging off of further discussion.

So the conversation begins about the trouble with Rove's potential upcoming possible indictment... relative says "I hear that there is much more that isn't being told yet" in a tone that indicates that he believes this means that the whole Plame outing isn't a big deal. So I latch on and say yes, I hear the same, and that one has to read very closely to see what it is she was doing - her work - that was ended. I go on to talk about her undercover work running an intel operation collecting data on the flow of the commercial/industrial flow of WMD components to prevent them from falling into the hands of rogue states or rogue leaders, and that there are statements to be found from the intel community that it could take up to ten years to rebuild/replace such a network, and that it was very ironic that to try to score political points to keep bush strong on "the WMDs threat per the rationale for invading Iraq" - that they would be willing to compromise national security via intelligence on WMDs.

Relative was silent. Sorta stunned. Not ready to process the real implications - but for the first time in years, silent and not interrupting/dismissing. He suddenly said that it was as if politicians now viewed politics/policy making as football - more important to score a few points for a win rather than to make good decisions. Hadn't heard anything like this out of his mouth before... clearly some of the news /reality had been getting a little under his skin.

So playing on that - I said that it was almost as if some in power (re: republicans) were much more loyal to making more money for corporate sponsors (and themselves) than for the people - and that they no longer had real allegiance to serving the public or the public's interest. No response from said relative.

Later in the day said relative was discussing the prospect of his high schoolers going to college, and worried about shifting jobs and thus their future economic security. He asked if I had heard that we were 'about to move into a service economy' where most jobs were lower wage. Ah, folks have been talking about this for years - and we have already moved into it - and have been going that direction for the past decade or more. Then get into a discussion of the downside of globalization and outsourcing. Then he did something he hasn't done in years. He asked me WHY I thought folks (politicians) were making decisions to accelerate this trend (re: MIND OPENED A BIT). I went back to the line about folks whose loyalties to making a whole lot of money and controlling said money and power have more allegiance to said greed than to their country. By now he was actually nodding.

The theme of to who or what those making policy decisions hold most loyalty/allegiance to resonated with him more than anything else. I think that the reality of the shifting world, through which his kids are soon going to try to make their own way, has made him pay more attention - and that was more receptive to thinking about things that have made him uncomfortable. With a theme that resonated he shifted his four-year or longer political combative/obnoxious/dismissive stance. I definitely heard his mind open.

What are some of your experiences? What themes resonated? What else should we try out in conversations?

Good work!

1) It is an immmediate reality or a looming economic threat to many - and thus hard to ignore as a real issue.

2) It is a good point to get folks thinking about WHY - especially on things like Bush's trip to India and his touting of how GOOD outsourcing is for "us"? Why....? It is hard not to sit and dwell (and thus grow more skeptical) on the point as to who benefits? Very potent.

I had lunch with a group of ex and current automotive buyers and
reps yesterday. It is a group that has been meeting for over 30
years, every St. Patrick's day.
I am "the kid", and I'm 46! (I've been a member for 25 years!)
They are all men, most of them in their late 60's or early 70's.
They are all retired except one, who still works for a division
of GM.
I am the only female in the "group" that still shows up on a
regular basis. This is due to the fact that I never slept with
any of them, or had them pay for my education, as was the case
with other "junior" members of the St. Patrick's day club
(wives are NOT invited). I was working for an OEM Rep agency
when I first met everyone.

But I digress.....

These guys are ALL conservatives. Every year, I make the case
for the little guy, and the unions. Every year, they "indulge"
me, because they think I'm cute. Believe me, they would NOT
put up with my views if I was their KID! I'm the "token liberal"
and resident Bush-Basher. I have made them all aware of PNAC.

This year, I was AMAZED at the turn-around! I had a "discussion"
with the rabid conservative, in which he was forced to try and
defend outsourcing. It turned into a bloodbath, with all other
gents piling onto him! SWEET!

These guys now have THEIR divorced SONS living in their basements!
Their own jobs and the jobs of HUNDREDS of co-workers have been
outsourced. I was SURPRISED that the one "Low-Wage Conservative"
(and YES, I DID call him that!) had the gall to try and defend it!

When I brought up the FACT that the administration had "sexed-up"
the "intelligence" leading to our pre-emptive strikes in Iraq, and
that the SAME DRUMBEAT was stirring for Iran, THEY ALL NODDED
THEIR HEADS IN AGREEMENT!

SWEET VICTORY!

My only worry is that the 'pukes will figure this out before the dems
do, and present these guys, and their ilk, with a 'puglican savior
ala John McCain.

I agree that outsourcing, and the economy in general, is our
best hope for agreement with the fence sitters and rank and
file pugs.....

per McCain - I think he is losing credibility as the "Maverick" with each passing week - as he basks in bush in order to establish himeself as the front runner. If he continues to do this - the lack of difference in his posiitions from bushco become more and more apparent. The ads are so easy... bush morphing into mccain - with short snippets of statements on issues that mirror each other.

is pointing out how much * wants to/has gutted the Labor Unions. My Dad worked his whole life in the timber industry and gets mad about how the Unions are deteriorating in this country. I've been sending him some of the recent Thom Hartmann articles on Immigration and how the GOP has been reluctant to pass any effective legislation because illegal aliens will work for the minuscule wages Corporate America (aka Walmart) offer. We also bonded on the ports deal too. It's a start... and we have an incredibly long way to go (OMG Don't even get him sarted on the environment)... but I'm starting to make a little progress.

was ranting about Walmart more than a year ago. She seemed to know as much about their "evils" as I did. They are comfortable enough financially for this to be an issue (for some living close to the edge this is a much harder issue, as it is perceived that Walmart's "low prices" serve an immediate need to stretch money; a need which often supercedes the bigger picture issues of how Walmart effects local economies in ways.)

who ditched the GOP (even though he agrees on social conservative issues) when a repub gov in the eighties worked to break unions in this state. He tends to vote fringe/right - but that is a lost repub vote. We have had some interesting economic talks in the past couple of years (he is in the industrial construction/rebuilding/retooling field) - and his perspectives are very interesting... haven't yet pushed the "so how are you voting" these days - as I fear the old evangelical pulpit may still be stirring that pot and I don't know that I want to hear it. However, it is probably about time to see if the damage being wrought by bushco is starting to move him towards a periodic dem vote just to fight the GOP. I'll have to ask.

WWJBomb? with Christians. ask them to explain how we can kill innocents and still claim to live by Jesus' teachings and/or use the Jesus card about hunger and poverty on the rise in "the richest nation in the world"


and

Fiscal responsibility esp using the Medicare debacle. esp the story about the actuary who's job was threatened if he told the truth

and finally, the Constitution's basic principle of checks and balances. It's hard for them to argue that one. I like to say "The best thing that can happen to us working stiffs is that Congress can't get anything done. Laws should be passed only after much debate and with a lot of compromise."

You can't go wrong throwing the Constitution and Jesus in their faces :evilgrin:

and tying it to defying the Constitution. If the response is to silent all whistleblowers - and take away any protections - how will we even KNOW what our govt is doing and whether or not our govt follows the Constitution... and in such a state - does the Constitution become a meaningless piece of paper?

I will have to try that one out.

... /relations/aquaintences...but I did score with one fundie woman I know slightly when she was talking about Saddam being executed sometime in the future. She said he was going to face a harsh judgment for being responsible for all those deaths.

I asked if she believed in a judgment after this life, and when she said yes, I said I wonder how Bush will be judged for all the deaths - our military and civilian Iraqi -caused by this war. Those people would be alive if Bush hadn't invaded.

A thought crossed her face, then she got that dumb sheep look again.

I might have asked a slightly different question - why she believes that we should act as God in casting judgement - if she believes that God will cast judgement after life. Then I would ask the one that you do per how Bush will be judged.

Fundy folks do often respond to the "why are we pretending to be wiser than God" - or "does God like us trying to cast his judgement for Him" type questions.

about a healthy environment for their kids, health care for their kids, (and themselves or their parents) decent jobs and a safe place to live.

These issues cross all political boundries for most people.

I usually point this out first. Then the question of how to acheive those goals opens the door to a political discussion based not on ideology but on self interest.

great approach.

I've had a bit of success helping them notice the difference between the 24/7 noise machine and real life on the ground.

since this crowd was so convinced that they would be winners in B*sh's America... They are, on the whole, smart & savvy. (Starting & running a business takes some functioning hardware.) And they are beginning to see that they are as screwed as those they had hoped to leave behind.

about the effects of this admin on small businesses? Thanks.

to specific and large corporations.

They are operating in the middle ground. They may benefit a little from tax cuts, but as their largest expense is usually their payroll, they have trouble keeping people they can't pay, people that they can't afford to offer benefits, people whose lives are so turned upside down that they can't function as employees because just staying healthy and housed is a full time job. :(


/oops

brothers a year ago. We were talking about the war, and he said he thought we should just "bomb the Iraqi's out of existence." Now, my brother is not a violent person at all, so I was shocked at what he said. He was upset at how many of our military men and women were dying, and how they were being attacked, often times by Iraqi's. So I said, "You know, we invaded Iraq. We came into their country. Many of the people attacking our soldiers are citizens trying to protect their country and, most importantly, their families. Imagine if another country invaded ours. Imagine that your family was in danger. Would you not do whatever it took to protect them, and to defend your country?" He got a look of "Whoa!" on his face, looked at me, and said, "Yes, yes I would." I've never heard him say anything like his initial statement again. Putting it into a personal context opened his eyes, and got him to see things in a whole different way.

Having recently (last few days) bailed out of the Republican party, I would suggest you keep an even friendly tone. Sometimes we are overwhelmed by our passion for issues that are important to us. Its very easy to scare someone off or put them in a defensive mode.

Don't try to introduce too many concepts at once.

Don't attack or put the person in a defensive mode.

Avoid ridicule.

Be positive.

Be targetted.

Ask them how they feel, or better yet do they feel like their political representatives are truly representative of them.

Don't do all the talking, and be sincere.

Part of active listening, is actually listenning and not waiting for "your turn to speak".

Compliment them on thinking about and discussing political issues.

Tell a neutral joke, for instance in some recent pseudo-stunt an interviewer had a map with Australia labeled as Iraq. When asked to identify Iraq virtually everyone pointed to Australia.

Follow that up with a comment along the lines of "Isn't funny/ironic that so many people have strong opinions but havent actually thought them out or researched them?"

Be kind, and affirm your concern/interest/or affection for the person inspite of their political opinions.

I hope you'll enjoy your "new life."
:hi:

his politics. Plus, it was Christmas Day when we had this conversation, and I sure didn't want to get into a fight (don't like fighting regardless of the day).

Welcome to DU!

To your point, I have avoided conversations with my relative because he would go into combative mode immediately. I *never* brought politics up. After one conversation (where I fell in, and was baited into conversation) it was his (moderate repub wife) who later pointed out to me - when I expressed frustration that he always tries to bait me - that he and I have been competitive since we were kids and that for him it was more of the same dynamic and when I averted the discussion he just tried harder to get that old dynamic going (and that he sometimes took more extreme points in discussions just to do the "competitive thing") - realizing that rather empowered me in terms of how to respond.

Focusing on the political gamesmanship - which does happen from both discussions - brought us into agreement per our frustration of how dysfunctional Washington is right now, per dealing with pressing issues taht really effect folks in their daily life.

May I ask what turned the tide for you?

thanks for sharing your persepctive and experience. Glad that you are here!

My wife and I went to a Saint Patrick's Day celebration in downtown Honolulu last night. Several streets had been blocked off, and the block party contained several bars, bands, etc. An evangelical Christian had set up and was standing on top of a portable speaker blaring away at everyone around him. He got into several altercations during the night. I'm proud of her but uneasy that she was a little drunk, but when my wife and one of her girl friends went to hit the porta-potties, he approached her and was winding up to shout in her face, he got out a "Jee.." when she promptly shoved him in the chest with both hands.

Now I'm Christian myself, but I just can't find anything in the Bible that suggests I should go yell at anyone to show them love. Ironically enough one of my friends was also, there a former pastor/minister and we had a laugh about it. I think if the street preacher had really wanted to reach anyone he would have exhibbitted a joyful spirit and approached people as individuals. He had only come to attack.

So maybe thats a lesson for any of us who may be trying to win over people who are wavering. Dont shout it at them, buy em some green beer and be the example of why their political affiliation may be misguided.

with a guy who had gotten worked up over the "burning the flag amendment". Me, I just couldn't get worked up about an issue that wasn't a crisis when there were real crises all over the place - I just hand't seen a rash of flag burnings all over the place.

So I started with telling him what really bugged me - was all the grand standing, wondering how much money was going to be spent on this issue in terms of time of congress folks - when I didn't see it as an issue that was really much of anything. I said that I thought that the reaction when someone burns a flag was likely to be folks turning away in disgust ... and that is probably why it wasn't a real issue - I mean during all this time of pumping the issue (in the Dukakis Bush race), I hadn't heard of all of the examples of actual flag burnings that had made it a serious enough issue to amend the constitution. I then said it burned me up when politicians (I kept it party-less) took "easy" issues that accomplish nothing to work people up, and waste taxpayers money in doing so... while leaving serious issues to fester - homeless population growing? Lets pass a Flag Burning Amendment! The point was I kept harping on politicians wasting time and money to accomplish nothing - while doing nothing about things of concern that are - or should be - a part of their job.

Totally nonthreatening as I wasn't attacking a party - and was tapping into good ole Hoosier distrucst of politicians - and by the end the guy was agreeing with me - and suddenly the issue that worked him up at the beginning of our conversation seemed to be of little interest/valence to him.

Thanks for sharing that story - I would agree - not to be screaming at folks to convert - though I would say finding common ground to scream at something else in unison - can be an interesting avenue as well.

Did you segue to a deeper examination, or leave him with a sense of doubt about what he considered important?

I was fairly young, had mostly been around liberals with liberal positions, and just found myself in the conversation... so I didn't go much deeper - but did defuse what had been a "hot button" issue.

Today I try to find the resonant point and probe on that - as I describe in the opening thread per my relative. When the questioning of allegiance of political leaders - per $ vs citizens - led to agreement - I circled back to that point at later points in the conversation. Sort of like a point for him to keep questioning when other news items get covered, and a point of questioning when he hears the rw spin on the stories (he listens to some rw radio.)

.......I talk about in this thread. Thanks for the idea.:toast:

Those who know rabid neocons PLEASE help with future counter points......
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x693668#693837

... who are contributing them). It always means more, on a gut level, to hear anecdotal stories like this than to look at poll numbers, which, while important, don't reflect WHY people are moving away from this Idiot and his administration's policies.

I live in Toronto, and ALL of my American friends here are Democrats, as it (luckily for me) turns out. Also my Canadian friends who follow American politics are pro-Dem all the way.

However, I do have one aquaintance who I know through business, who is also an American citizen here in Canada, and has been VERY pro-Bush from day one. Why? The man is an orthodox Jew, who spends part of each year in Israel.

Whenever we got into a debate about Bush, he always brought up the same thing: Bush is a good friend to the Israeli people. Bush is pro-Israel. Bush will act swiftly to defend Israel.

His assessment of Bush, on a personal level, was always that he was a man of ACTION, a man who made decisions quickly and acted on them IMMEDIATELY. I had to hear this more times than you can possibly imagine.

Well, in the lead-up to the 2004 election, I asked Mr. Israel if he would be voting for Bush. He put his head down, shook his head in a humiliated fashion, and said, "I don't think so, no."

I was TRULY shocked. I asked him what had happened to change his mind. He told me that his counsin had asked him to go and see "Farenheit 9/11" with him. He knew what the movie was about, but was convinced that even the most anti-Bush film could not shake his faith.

It turned out that the VERY BEGINNING of the film, where Bush sat in the kindergarten chair (for what seemed like an ETERNITY) after being told that the US was under attack, was the one thing that convinced him that the Bush he had seen portrayed in the media was NOT the man he had been held out to be. And once he was faced with that, he started to question EVERYTHING he had ever believed about Bush and this administration.

You NEVER know what will turn someone around. But it seems evident that once turned AWAY from BushCo, there's no going back.

effect ... I think with the public's growing skepticism that it would be a great time to revive the movie. Wonder what is involved to get local showings?

I own a copy of the movie (as many DUers do), and I'm sure we've all been struck, as we re-watch it years later, by how many things look SO DIFFERENT now with the 20/20 vision of hindsight. For us, it reinforces what we believed at the time. For disenchanted, former Bush supporters, it would mean a whole new 'take' on the events of those days; they would tune-in to details that didn't seem obvious at the time.

I have no doubt that a re-showing of the film across the country would be attended by RWers who NEVER would have attended it at the time! It changed ONE mind that I know of (as described above). How many MORE MINDS would it change now?

Any DUers out there know how this can be accomplished?

Done say at the public library under the auspices of a local organization?

As I mentioned, I live in Canada. So I am totally unfamiliar with how these things can be accomplished in the States.

Hopefully, a DUer with that kind of info will log-on to this thread.

the question - otherwise house parties work - but not sure that gopers who are a bit on edge would attend.

In red country it's all that matters and it's effective.

It doesn't require much knowledge, either; just compare the Clinton years to the Bush years.

The Chimp's fiscal irresponsibility makes my repube friends and aquaintences crazy...granted the repub's I know are NOT the crazed right wing religious wacko types (I do not consider all people of faith wackos).

have become ennured to the issue - so used to it being a "fact" (large deficits) that it no longer means anything to them. :-(

every issue and every type of self interest can be framed in financial terms.

I've had good results talking about greed in society and the corporate world and politics and also talking about the deficit. Tax issues become less relevant when the focus is on spending deficits that have already occurred.

back in 1998 or 1999 there were some political polls that suggested that the public no longer cared about tax-cuts when the cuts were put along side other priorities (such as paying down the deficit, or dealing with a national crises). I have never bought the idea that the public suddenly went gaga over tax cuts, that it was ever a priority for most folks save the upper middle class and upper class folks. Bush got the first one, because he was a new pres - and repubs had to vote for it (and he had both houses of congress... til just after that vote.) THe rest he pushed through, imo, for his cronies - but used his post 911 "security" capital to get folks to go along.

I would agree with you - I don't think tax cuts are a big seller for most of the public - esp since most folks received so little -and saw other taxes rise to make up the difference - that focusing on the COST of said cuts - to the public, to the country, and to the future is a very potent angle.

...when I said, not snidely at all (man, that was TOUGH!) "I just have to wonder... if the President who had gotten us into war in Iraq, and bungled Katrina, and pushed aside FISA to spy on Americans, etc., had been Bill Clinton, what do you think that would have done to HIS approval ratings? I mean, we're rushing to concentrate power in the Executive Branch, but what happens when another Bill Clinton gets elected, and he doesn't have to ask FISA or ANYONE for permission to spy on someone he thinks is a 'threat to national security?'"

A very, VERY thoughtful look.

helpfully,
Bright

The only way they can respond is either that they don't believe a democrat could ever be elected again (do they no longer believe in Democracy), or that perhaps these powers aren't a big deal and that they really don't mind the loss of power (yea, right), or they have to at least think about the prospect. Great tactic.

btw, :hi:

Pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions written by physicians, unqualified zealots appointed to HHS positions/FDA.

These things scare the crap out of any REAL GOP physician (Frist has been ex-communicated since the Schiavo dx) or other GOPer with a true science background/profession.

the relative I speak of in the OP is a doc. Somehow he thinks the threat of frivolous lawsuits, malpractice insurance, etc. is all the fault of democrats - and frankly it drives him (politically) more than nearly anything else. Somehow has missed how litigious very high profile repubs are. For example, I believe I read that Santorum's wife filed a several hundred thousand dollar lawsuit against a chiropractor.

Will have to test out the science angle on him. On these issues he tends to be pretty thoughtful - but a wee bit in denial (as in "they really wouldn't try to outlaw x or y") - yes, it is time to test this out.

Ask him/her with the GOP controlling the WH and both houses of Congress, WHAT have they done to help docs with medmal issues? If they really wanted to do something, why haven't they? The GOP is in control yet seem to have lost focus on docs since the election.

Reason: These are the robber baron Republicans and docs don't make enough money to be a real priority for them. Sure, they'll throw a bone to them during an election year but it's quite obvious you don't get the same attention as big corporations/wall street.

The mantra in my physician filled family since Bushco: We aren't rich enough to vote for the Robber Baron Republicans and we aren't crazy enough for the Rapturist Right brand.

to the country theme really gained traction. Next time will add your angle. Thanks!

though.

Even though shrubco's true friends are the multimillionaire corporate moguls, people making 200K and up (which includes a lot of doctors) do very well with the Repub tax structure, so there's a lot of self interest there.

might be an interesting wedge. Politics and greed connections determining which drugs are approved and which policies are adopted just might set a few more docs on edge.

from... I have heard two shrub voting docs at lunch talking with dismay about some creationist initiative in schools somewhere. Of course these weren't Bible thumping docs, of which we have plenty (though they are a minority).

It's interesting.. we always express dismay about blue collar people voting against their short term $$ interests, now we need to try to get some Repubs to do the same.

(GOP docs) is: a) the impact on the field of the flat-earth religious righters, and the greed of pharma/insurance directed policies; and b) that their children are going to have to try to make it as economically independent workers in the future... and what will the employment picture look like at that time - again due to the greed as a motive dictated policies in Washington (think bush touting outsourcing in India), and the short-term greed of the corporations doing the outsourcing.

term benefit versus short term gain.

If you're a doc making over 200K a year, then you benefit short term from shrubco tax cuts, period, and if the tax cuts are rolled back then in the short term you will keep less income.

Of course if the shrub voting doc's practice area evolves into a situation where half of his/her patients are uninsured or on Medicaid either due to poor coverage or unemployment, and their gross income declines by a substantial amount as a result, then that shrub voting doc might be doing actually worse (as a result of shrubco policies) than if they paid a higher percentage of their income in taxes. But those realities are harder to "know" than the simple short term reality of tens of thousands more tax money held onto in the short term.

I have a colleague who voted for shrub. He's actually quite liberal socially, AND he voted for Clinton/Gore. He simply voted for the shrub because he perceived he'd keep more income. He is NOT bought into a package of idiotic shrubco ideology. He voted Clinton because he felt he'd do better economically with him. So for this guy, along with the huge majority of physicians that I know, economic short term benefit trumps all.

Because Repubs where I live are more emotionally invested in the shrub presidency than most areas, many of these money Repubs go through more mental gymnastics to try and rationalize, justify the whole shrubco package, how shrub is a great leader, how the Iraq war is a just and good thing, etc. But really, for most docs who are making a lot of money, it's really pretty much about the tax thing first, tort reform second.

said relative Doc is only now thinking about these things b/c his kids are about to go off to college... and he is worried about their lack of ability to earn later on (due to white collar outsourcing, and the kids interests in engineering) - suddenly his family's shorter term well-being is beginning to be factored in to the equation. For him it had been tort reform first (fear of medical malpractice costs), fear of Hillary style insurance reform second, taxes third... But this seems to be quickly shifting with the reality of the economic future of his sons quickly approaching.

cut, and second to "tort reform", so they can rationalize all the rest.

I ask them, if a baby is screaming and could be in pain but the parents cannot afford to take the baby to a doctor, should the baby be seen by a doctor? They always, always answer yes. When I ask them who should pay for it they squirm uncomfortably. It resonates with them.

who was telling me that local practice after practice was determining that they couldn't afford to see medicaid patients (pregnant moms) - and he didn't know how long before the local hospital might consider the same thing (he didn't say this with relish of moms not being treated - he was being clinically objective - as if this was innevitable)... WHen I asked - so what happens with the births, in a state where midwives exist but are regulated (and have to attend hospital births) - Where do these babies get born, I ask. And this Doc paused - as if the idea, even after all of the scuttlebutt conversation in the local md community was floating around raising the prospect that uninsured and medicaid could be turned awauy, the reaction to the idea that people would still get pregnant and how/where would those babies be born if not at the hospital - was silence as in.. 'hadn't really thought about that...'

hijacking their party. It is driving them back leftward.

the whole Schaivo theater began to shake up some centrist/business oriented repubs. It was the first of a number of wakeup calls that began to change public opinion against bushco in this region. I think the rush to absolutist abortion laws (one of which died due to inaction in our own statehouse) is having the same wakeup effect. Don't know, however, if it is isolated antipathy towards bush (as in HE is beholden, but not necessarily the whole GOP, to the exteme religious right) - or if it will generalize out towards voting in congressional races.

I just remind them that Clinton had us on the road to surplus and was actually paying down the debt. The Debt Clock was turned off for the first time in over a decade and now it is spinning so fast the numbers can hardly be read. The National Debt is now incrteasing by over $100,000.00 per second and gaining speed. The interest alone on that Debt is over a half million dollars a minute. Even Republicans can not defend those figures.

Back when the clock was "turned back on" (it had been turned off when the debt was being paid down) was about $22,000 per person. Use that point when talking about tax cuts that have primarily benefited the extremely wealthy.... ala our individual indebtedness per person has gone UP while many of the really wealthy have received (each year) that same amount back in the form of tax cuts. That tact ties together the fact that there is a huge tax shift happening in this country - for some reason the idea of tax shift is very hard for most folks to wrap their brain around - just too abstract.

they hear my story and become pro choice

it sounds gut-wrenching - so very sorry :cry:

It's hard for anyone to defend that.

of the govt - but keep getting billions of dollars in new contracts - while we are running up a huge debt. To drive this angle home: just how would we, as a citizen, be treated if we were caught defrauding the IRS?