A Good Rhetorical Lesson

I had linked to Brian Niemeier favorably on this blog a couple times but that was before it turned out that he’s an idiot. On my personal blog, I made, what I thought to be, an innocuous comment about something stupid he said. He responded by attacking… a bizarro world version of me.

Read the whole thing and when everyone who knows me stops laughing lets look at this.

A blogger named for the president who normalized relations with the ChiComs…

Puts the idea in people’s head from the get go that this Nixon fellow he’s a communist sympathizer.

The addict lashes out at friends trying to cure him of the vice that’s destroying him.

Nixon = addict. Brian = nice person who just tries to help people!

Nixon’s clumsy effort … sounds more like the squealing of Disney paypigs wallowing in the muck, shivering for their next fix of poz slop.

Wait, wait, I’ve got to wipe away a tear with my Kylo Ren t-shirt.

…a shopworn rhetorical jab of the Left…

Who uses leftist rhetoric? Leftists.

…Nixon is clearly proceeding in bad faith…

Easy way to discount something that’s said without actually addressing it.

It’s not on me if being confronted with the true moral character of your entertainment choices triggers your amygdalae.

Projection. I wrote a post which was less than 200 words on a blog which nobody reads and he does this. Somebody’s amygdala was spun up, but it wasn’t mine.

As an aside, that sentence is also an example of why it’s very annoying that English doesn’t have a distinct plural second person pronoun.  On first glance it might look like he’s referring to a single “you” but amygdala is plural so it can’t be.

…this guy’s pearl-clutching…

From the image of a genteel woman clutching her pearl necklace in shock… (idiomatic, derogatory) Prim, prudish, or easily offended.”

…that shit test…

Shit tests are things that women do. He just called me a girl.

Niemeier went on to continue in this vein on Google+ especially with the accusations of being girlish, the best being where he orders me to “Grow up, talk to me like an adult male instead of a cat lady with PMS”.

His post is an excellent illustration of rhetorical attack. The point is to trigger the target and make them cry (metaphorically or not). This is the sort of rhetoric you’d expect to see used on an SJW because, not being able to reason with them, people kick them instead.

What happens if the target isn’t an SJW? What happens if the target is someone who’s been studying rhetoric and trying to teach himself how to spot and use it? Well, not what it’s supposed to do that’s for sure. This is another reason why studying rhetoric is so important. It gives you the tools to be able to spot attacks like this, see what the aggressor is doing, and if you’re inclined to be hurt by silly insults, understanding where they’re coming from and why should certainly help to avoid being hurt. Knowing rhetoric also allows you to hit back and to analyze what you might have done wrong in responding to the other person.

It’s a tool like a hammer. You use a hammer with nails. You don’t use a hammer with screws. So in order to use rhetoric, you need to make sure first that you’ve got a nail. If the person shows up and starts calling you a cowardly piece of shit instead of addressing points, as seen here previously, then it’s a pretty safe better they’re a nail. But in that case, I googled every one of them. I also didn’t go far enough because my response one in particular would have be different if I had taken the time to read more of her blog and see that she was bipolar.

You won’t be able to research everyone who attacks you, but you also don’t have to respond to everyone who does. I know this is hard for internet egos to understand but when someone talks about you on the internet when you’ve set yourself up as public figure, they’re not actually talking to you. Sure, there’s some “notice me, sempai!” types but some people just want to have discussions and make comments without wannabe e-celebs butting in.

Learn rhetoric.  Learn how to use it.  Learn when to use it.  It’s good for you.


Somebody’s STALKING ME

I’m LITERALLY SHAKING.  Do you have any idea how creepy and sickening it is when some weird, unknown person on the internet is going around talking about you to other people and sharing links to things you said publicly on the internet.

You know, like this:

SJWs share a link to AG and say it's creepy

Who is this “Brenda”, who is her anonymous “friend”, and how dare she read my public blog posts?!?!

I’m kind of “amused” too– that she thinks blue haired feminist was supposed to be an insult.

Now I have to go back to cyberstalking Shia LaBeouf because He Will Not Divide Us IS BACK but he isn’t there like the dancing monkey he’s supposed to be. 😡  Come back, Shia, Pepe is waiting for you!


A Short Guide on How to Talk to SJWs

Brian Niemeier knows how to do it:

Experience shows that the best advice on how to argue with SJWs is that you shouldn’t. You should mock them relentlessly instead.


It bears repeating: Do not attempt to answer SJWs’ loaded questions or engage with them rationally. They do not want information and are only giving you enough rope to rhetorically hang yourself. Go on the offensive, and punch back twice as hard!

He provides an illustration on how it’s done in a twitter conversation with an SJW.

JD Cowan, in the comments, adds this:

It’s easy once you keep in mind that they’re being dishonest and have no desire to be rational about anything.

Turn every question against them. No matter what you answer it will be used as ammo against you, so twist it into being about them instead. They will soon get frustrated and wander off trying to “win” before usually coming back with one massively spergy comment to end on.

Keep in mind that they think you’re evil and they want to destroy you. Once you remember that it’s easy to see everything they do coming before it does.

This is gonna seem like harping on the subject, but people don’t get it.  I can’t turn around without tripping over another conservative trying to insist that if they just use facts and carefully answer and refute each point of the SJWs argument, then they’re going to win somehow.  It’s a waste of time; don’t do it.

Literally Hitler Meets Literally Hitler

Trump’s a bad person for trying to bully North Korea and start World War 3 but he’s a worse person because he met with Kim Jong-un and talked to him.

On Monday evening, President Trump met with North Korean dictator Kim Jung Un, the tyrannical overlord of a slave state with 25 million prisoners and a gulag system containing hundreds of thousands of human beings, a radical threat to world peace who has tested nuclear weapons and long-range missiles. Trump gave Kim the thumbs up; the American flag, the symbol of freedom in the world, was placed alongside the flag of North Korea, the closest thing to the Nazi swastika in the world today. Then President Trump praised Kim fulsomely, using verbiage to describe him that he would never use about our G-7 allies.

And the right celebrated.

Ah, but not everyone, Littlest Chickenhawk, have no fear.

Kim Jong Un Criticized For Meeting With Nation That Has Killed 60 Million Babies

WORLD—North Korean President Kim Jong Un came under intense scrutiny this week after meeting with a barbaric nation that has killed over 60 million of its young since legalizing abortion in 1973.

Political commentators agreed that by meeting with the nation of savages that abort hundreds of thousands of their young each and every year, Kim Jong Un appeared to be legitimizing the backwards, depraved nation of America.

“Just picture Kim Jong Un up there shaking hands with Hitler,” one pundit said. “That’s basically what this amounts to, when you consider that he’s meeting with a country that has killed over 60 million babies since Roe v. Wade. I’m just not sure this kind of a meeting represents good optics for the North Koreans.”

Only the Best of Socialized Healthcare

As if there weren’t already enough evidence that the British medical establishment didn’t care about actually keeping anyone alive, especially not if it’s a baby.

Tribunal rules decapitated baby doctor can return to work

Dr Vishnavy Laxman was a consultant gynaecologist at Ninewells Hospital in March 2014 when the tragedy occurred.

She wrongly chose a natural delivery over a caesarean section for the pregnant mother.

The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service said there had not been an impairment of her fitness to practise.

It also decided it was not necessary to impose a warning on the doctor and it has revoked the current restrictions which had been put in place on her registration.

In its ruling on the facts of the case, given on Monday, the panel found that Dr Laxman’s decision “set in train a course of events” which resulted in the decapitation of the premature baby “and to this extent contributed to that decapitation.”

The tribunal noted: “But for Dr Vilvanathan Laxman’s error of judgement in this regard, the decapitation would not have occurred.”


The tribunal said the facts found proved “did not amount to impairment of the doctor’s fitness to practise”.

It said her decision to proceed with a vaginal delivery “was negligent and fell below the standards ordinarily to be expected”, however it did not amount to “serious misconduct”.

The panel found this to be an isolated incident where the unusual circumstances, emergency situation and the doctor’s genuine belief meant that the outcome “was not reasonably foreseeable”.

The tribunal said it was satisfied that “even good doctors can make mistakes and that it is sometimes a consequence of the field in which they are practising that the results of their mistakes can be significant”.

This woman DECAPITATED A BABY and it’s not “serious misconduct.”  It’s rather suspicious that a doctor who’s supposedly been practicing medicine since 2004 with an “unblemished” record suddenly manages to make a mistake so horrendous that she kills a baby.  What are the odds that there’s actually been a string of malpractice which has been overlooked or swept under the rug because it wasn’t so unmistakably horrifying and because she’s a woman and an immigrant and brown?

You Can Lead a Journalist to Water but You Can’t…

This is too funny.  From a study last year:

Journalists’ brains show a lower-than-average level of executive functioning, according to a new study, which means they have a below-average ability to regulate their emotions, suppress biases, solve complex problems, switch between tasks, and show creative and flexible thinking.


The results showed that journalists’ brains were operating at a lower level than the average population, particularly because of dehydration and the tendency of journalists to self-medicate with alcohol, caffeine, and high-sugar foods.

Forty-one percent of the subjects said they drank 18 or more units of alcohol a week, which is four units above the recommended weekly allowance. Less than 5% drank the recommended amount of water.

However, in interviews conducted in conjunction with the brain profile results, the participants indicated they felt their jobs had a lot of meaning and purpose, and they showed high mental resilience. Swart suggested this gave them an advantage over people in other professions in dealing with the work pressure of tight deadlines.

That makes it sound like if they just drank more water they wouldn’t be controlled by their emotions and biases.  More water for the 4th Estate! Drown them if we have to.

That’s of course rather silly.  Sure, dehydration has bad effects, but I seriously doubt that journalists’ rampant inability to be objective has anything to do with it.


Do Nothings on the Other Side

A CASC member makes a comment about Roseanne:

And a friend of the blog offers an observation:

Does this principle apply also to women who have sex drunk and who claim they otherwise wouldn’t have? How does this not cut out the heart of the idea that a woman who is drunk can be taken advantage of?

It’s hard to see in the screenshot but Mrs. Connolly is one of those people.  The blue haired atheist feminist people.

She authored an article on the Coalition’s web page last month entitled “What does it mean to report to the Front Royal police?” in which she details the woes of anyone who happens to be raped in the area at or around Christendom.

We will pretend for a moment that we are reading a reliable source.

With that in mind, there’s still a couple issues this piece raises.  The stupidest first:

[If the rape victim] is an underclassman (freshman or sophomore), she has to hunt down a resident assistant (RA), whom she must beg for a curfew extension. If she goes to the hospital without first getting an extension, she may find herself in trouble with Student Life in the morning.

Hmmm, I was brutally assaulted; do I care what Student Life thinks?

Or, to put it another way, instead of being raped, you were stabbed.  Are you going to hunt down your RA before calling an ambulance?  If your college requires that, don’t go to that college.

The imaginary victim decides to go to the hospital to have a rape kit done but Connolly points out that it might not get tested.  That’s not exactly encouraging.  But maybe that won’t happen to this victim (spoiler: it does) and she still has to get to the hospital first:

Most students don’t have cars. She asks all the girls in her dorm, but most are already sleeping, or else not in yet. Odds are, she does not find a ride. There’s a sexual assault support nonprofit the next county over, Choices of Page County. They provide transportation to a hospital. Unfortunately, Front Royal is too far for them to come. She calls another nonprofit, The Laurel Center in Winchester, and is told that hospital transportation isn’t a service they’re equipped to provide.

So there’s nobody to take her to the hospital to get a rape kit done which won’t be tested anyway.  She’s too polite to wake anyone up except for the RA she had to ask permission to leave from and the RA doesn’t have a car and can’t call or wake up someone who does.

But I can think of someone who could drive these poor girls to the hospital: the women who are part of the CASC and live in Front Royal.  They should start their own version of Choices or volunteer to help add that service at the Laurel Center.   Help people on a local level instead of being hashtag warriors and making new groups so they can help all the women at all the Catholic colleges.  You know, subsidiarity right?

This is the other side of the coin from the Do Nothings I talked about earlier. Instead of writing articles or attacking people online, the CASC could be doing something to actively help the women they’re current trying to exploit, but SJWs destroy things.  They don’t do constructive things.  They’ll set up nonprofits they can leech off of, but start a van service for abused or endangered women in their own town?  That’s work.  They don’t have time.  Are they empowered feminists or not?  Start a group and recruit people who can do driving.  Something like that would be far more helpful than Dinah’s Voice.

I would hope, should any one of them do something like this, that they wouldn’t turn away girls who were raped when they were drunk just because people with lowered inhibitions don’t do things they wouldn’t have done otherwise.