Newt is almost impossible to debate

[Wetzelbill]

I thought Dodd did a solid job, but, how the hell can you debate a guy who starts saying stuff so wild that it tilts the debate in a weird direction.

Like when Newt conflated Iraq with the American Revolution. They may have similarities to an extent, but he makes it sound like what goes on in Iraq right now is as important to the U.S. as the very actions that created our country. So then Dodd is almost forced to answer certain questions about Iraq and the American Revolution.

Then Newt picks up on one topic, studies it and hammers it through and through. Something relatively obscure, like Columbia. He kept bringing Columbia up. Sure it's been in the news a little lately and last month Gore canceled an appearance at an environmental conference that Uribe was going to be at and all, but it's not one of those really heated topics like Iraq that someone would think would be brought up in a debate. It's a good technique to throw somebody off their game, but Dodd actually knew something about it, so he ended up making some good points on it in the end.

But Newt is a tough guy to debate in a situation like that because he uses certain techniques that ensure an opponent has to spend a certain amount of time on defense addressing unorthodox topics.

[rfranklin]

1. There are no similarities...

That is a typical right wing debate technique. Derail a cogent argument with some wild ass attack on the other side that attacks them on an emotional level and turns the entire debate into a raging screaming match.

[Wetzelbill]

2. well there are but very superficial

Two countries in their infant democratic stages. That's about it. And that is making big assumptions about Iraq, saying that it actually is a democracy. It's so far-fetched it's ludicrous. Yet that debate technique almost forces the other guy to address the issue, no matter how wrong it is.

Newt was very good at framing the debate like that right off. Dodd came back out of it pretty well though.

There was no screaming though, plenty of emotion. You hit that right on. Newt was going with emotional arguments. Hard to debate on merit when there is no merit to debate on, so he has to go with something, you know? :)

[HuskiesHowls]

8. Well, in a way they are similar

We were fighting an empire that was trying to keep the colonies subjugated...they're also fighting against an imperial power that dominates their right to choose their own course.

Not that I'm making excuses for the Newt, though!!

[aquart]

12. No.

Iraq is NOT in an "infant democratic stage."

What an arrogant viewpoint. This is the Middle East. There is NOTHING "infant" in the Middle East. This "democracy" was imposed by an invading army. Do you think they are unfamiliar with invading armies? Or what to do when they get one?

This nation did not choose democracy. Democracy was forced on it. That actually makes a difference.

[Wetzelbill]

17. well duh

What I'm saying is from the way Newt is trying to categorize it. That's why I say you have to make big assumptions about Iraq.

[TransitJohn]

3. Throw enough shit

at a wall...hope some sticks.

[European Socialist]

4. I think he makes a lot of people change the channel--So, I not sure how

effective his debate strategy is.

[SoCalDem]

5. Republicans are master obfuscators

It's all about eating the clock and making the democratic opponent wander off his/her points.

[xultar]

30. I just assumed they didn't know wtf they were talking about. I didn't think

it was intentional.

[TahitiNut]

6. The American Revolution ... people trying to free themselves from King George

Yep. I see the similarities. Throwing out the foreign miltary - insurgents firing from behind trees called 'terrorists' and 'savages' - military-enforced foreign entitlements to local resources - local 'religious extremists' fighting alongside secular people. Yes... there are some parallels.

:shrug:

[sutz12]

7. It's an old debating tactic...

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.

I just read a philosophical book on Bullshit and it's uses. One primary tactic of a bullshitter is to keep the subject matter fluid, like you describe. Never really answer the question they ask you, just finagle in whatever talking point you want to make. A good image would be from Vonnegut (God rest his soul). He postulated a race of alien beings that communicated through farting and tap dancing. Debaters who use that tactic should be treated like the fictional aliens were in Vonnegut's story.

Sad to say, the Repubs have been doing this a lot better than Democrats over the past few years, and the media almost never calls them on it. We need more interrogators who will act like the Irishman in Braveheart and demand that they "Answer the fucking question."

[annabanana]

26. That is not "debating".... No one should agree to even TALK to one of these

fuckers without the formal rules of a debating society in place...

[Peregrine Took]

29. You're right - they can't be trusted to act in any way like "normal" people and

have to be monitored very rigorously in any situation with normal people.

[annabanana]

34. If you have ever seen "Outfoxed" you will know that it's not

a matter of them not being "normal".. It's a matter of them being deliberately manipulative and misleading. They learn the techniques of interrupting and shouting over someone...

Part 1: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=385&topic_id=86

Part 2: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=385&topic_id=87

(Oh, and welcome to DU!)

[annabanana]

35. DAMN! . I just saw that YouTube took down those clips...

It's worth owning:

http://www.amazon.com/Outfoxed-Rupert-Murdochs-War-Journalism/dp/B0002HDXTQ/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-4948909-4217420?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1179683384&sr=8-1

[Greyhound]

33. Thus the reason for a moderator. It is the responsibility of this person,

Russert in this case, to call the participant on the false premise or outright lie.

Of course that would only apply in a case where resolution is sought. MTP is just a NASCAR event, everyone watches the tedium in the hopes of seeing a wreck.

[conscious evolution]

9. No Dem should be debating him

He should be denounced loudly and often instead.

[Wetzelbill]

18. yeah everytime I see him on a show

I wonder why anybody considers him a credible voice. It's like when DeLay goes on a show too. How are these guys even considered viable?

[theoldman]

10. Pretty hard to debate someone who tells 10 lies in the first

sentence. The is the typical strategy used by Republicans.

[napi21]

11. Man, I found myself yelling obcenities at the TV again when he wasd on!

The thing that shames me to no end is this AH is from Atlanta! I live about 1/2 hour from there!

[MissWaverly]

13. it's not a war - it's an occupation and our soldiers are

not fighting an enemy, they are sitting ducks for planted bobby traps using explosives in a county engaged in a religious civil
war between two islamic factions in a country that we invaded based on bad intelligence.

The truth will set you free.

[Wetzelbill]

19. based on false intelligence

not just bad. :)

[MissWaverly]

24. well, yes, but there are those who continue to use the fig leaf

that the invasion was just a mistake. There are those including George Tenet that still assure us that they honestly believed it to be the case. Using the term "bad" includes it all. Whether they failed becuase they didn't do their jobs, or they didn't speak out, or they deliberately maninpulated information for their own private agenda. Bad intelligence covers both sins of omission and sins of commission. The fact is that we are in Iraq that we attacked as a pre-emptive strike to fend off an attack on us by this dictator, which premise has been proven completely untrue.

[annabanana]

27. The REAL intelligence was right... It was Idiot Feith's

version and adaptation of intelligence that was KNOWN to be BS that was used to justify the invasion.

[Jade Fox]

14. This seems to be a tactic of the Right.....

Unable to defend their positions with truth and logic, they steer the discussion on to some minor issue, or make some obscure connection. Their audience/base is too ignorant to see this, and I suspect those like Newt know it. Not for no reason does the Right beat the drum of "liberal media": It is to set themselves up as the only source of reliable information, which handily allows them to say ridiculous stuff and be taken seriously.

[AndyTiedye]

15. It IS a Bit Like the American Revolution -- With Us Now Playing the Role of the British!

And we're losing, just like the British, even though we have the most powerful military in the world
(just like the British did in 1776).

[dogday]

16. Republicans believe to own the conversation they

must attack and put their opponent on the defensive...

[DainBramaged]

20. So Washington fought the terraists at Deleware?

Newt is a douche bag.

[BlooInBloo]

21. He's very skilled at that sort of thing - he was a regular on Ethics In America for a long time.

[omega minimo]

22. Frankly, the trick is

Frankly the trick is

to-talk-rilly-rilly-fast-in-an-arrogant-overbearing-stream-of-bullshit-so-no-one-will-be-able-to-stop-him-and-point-out-that-what-he-says-makes-no-SENSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111



Frankly, the best weapon against Kermit THE Gingrich would be Stephanie Miller Show's Voice Diety Jim Ward skewering Noot. Frankly. :rofl:

[LiberalFighter]

23. Why was Newt denied tenure at University of West Georgia?

[LiberalFighter]

25. Newt Newt Newt... why are you making things up?

[stevedeshazer]

28. For a guy who resigned as Speaker in total disgrace and humiliation,

...he sure gets a lot of attention. He was kicked out by HIS OWN PARTY.

People sure have short memories.

Flashback 1998:

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/11/06/gingrich/

<snip>

Gingrich calls it quits

Speaker's surprise decision follows challenge from Livingston; post-election recriminations continue

WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, November 6) -- In the face of a brewing rebellion within the Republican Party over the disappointing midterm election, House Speaker Newt Gingrich made the stunning decision Friday to step down not just from the speakership, but also leave Congress.

"Today I have reached a difficult personal decision. I will not be a candidate for Speaker of the 106th Congress," Gingrich said in a written statement released Friday evening.

Gingrich told friends it is unlikely that he will return at all when Congress reconvenes in January, but is not ruling out that possibility altogether. Gingrich did say during a series of phone calls informing members of the Republican caucus of his decision that he will not serve out his full two-year term in the 106th Congress.

[pansypoo53219]

31. debate that point?

just say yeah, and we are the red coats. only difference is the iraqqis don't have to quarter us. we gots halliburton for that

[LiberalFighter]

32. The same actions in Iraq the same actions in US becoming a country?

Iraq has been a country for how many years?

American Colonies - not a country yet.

Dictator ruled Iraq.

Each colony had their own governor appointed and controlled across the Pond.

Iraq was invaded by a foreign government and overthrown.

American Colonies overthrew their own government.

Iraqi's told by a foreign government to create their own Constitution.

United States created their own Constitution and Bill of Rights at a Convention called by the states.

Iraqi's given strong hints on what should be in their Constitution by a foreign government.

Representatives from each state decided based on much of Madison's readings on past governments in throughout history.

Iraq still doesn't have a functioning government.

American Colonies had a functioning government during the Revolutionary War.

Iraq is occupied by a foreign government.

The American Colonies took control of their own government a year after declaring independence.