Tuesday, 13 August 2013

Truth: Debate

'Getting To The Truth' Debate - Tonight

Moderator: Good evening.  Thank you for coming, or listening in.  As you may know, the rules for this debate are that each side is allowed to make an accusation towards the other side, and then allow for rebuttal, and then have some time for response.  We have had a flip of the coin, and the Liberal candidate has won the toss.  So, the Liberal candidate is to go first. 
     (nods to Liberal candidate)  

Liberal Candidate: Thank you.  My accusation of and to my opponent is that, You conservatives are so selfish.  (a bit of a snarling, self-assured tone)

Moderator: All right, Conservative candidate. You have five minutes to respond to the accusation.  Starting: Now. (sets a timer running)

Conservative Candidate (chuckling; a bit uneasily, but also with some self-confidence): Well; that observation seems rather wide of the mark, seeing as how we conservatives - right along with Americans in general - are the most charitable people in the world, giving more, population and income percentage-wise, to charitable causes than any other peoples.  Now if your response is that - in that snarly tone and attitude that you have already evinced - 'I don't want your charity; I want your money,' that would be rather closer to the mark. 
     (feeling confident; continuing in that manner) 
     But let me look at this word 'selfish' a little further in depth.  If you mean by that word, that conservatives like to keep the fruits of their labor, yes, that would, indeed, be closer to the mark.  And right on the mark would be to say, and mean, that conservatives - that we all - are entitled to the fruits of our labors.  And you liberals, with all due respect, can put your definition, and application, of 'entitlements' where the sun don't shine.  And, with all due respect, personally, can go to hell. 
     (Liberal candidate glares over at Conservative candidate; the reaction immediately captured by camera)
     Does that answer your statement, and accusation?  Have I made myself clear enough??   As for what we 'don't want': We don't want your effing attitude, about robbing Peter to give to Paul.  You can keep your effing hands out of our pockets, thank you all the same.  Especially when you do things with our hard-earned taxpayers' money like send huge amounts of it to help women quit smoking in Brazil.  
     (with an attitude of just warming up:)
     How much time do I have left.   

Mod.: You have about three minutes.  And keep it civil, please.

CC: That's hard, that's real hard, considering the subject.  But I'll try.  
     Now where was I.   

Mod.: You were -

CC: I know, I know.  I was giving my 'honorable opponent' some stick about 'robbing Peter to give to Paul'.  I'll make my position real clear to my honorable opponent.  And that is to say, and to the Liberal camp as a whole: Do with your income whatever you want; and we'll do with ours whatever we want.  Fair enough deal?  Does that sound like 'equality' to you??
     But of course it doesn't; and I understand that.  'Equality' to you and your ilk means having the state give to everyone an equal income - regardless of effort - so that there will be no more envy.  And trying to get rid of a quality like 'envy' in that top-down way is as wide of the mark as your definition of 'selfish'.  Just eliminating the environment where an attitude like 'envy' can express itself doesn't get rid of the attitude.  It just gets rid of the environment.  -  

Mod.: You have about -

CC (not being put off stride): - The attitude is still there.  For not having been treated in the proper way.  In one's heart, and mind.  Change the environment back lo one where the attitude - whatever it is - can be expressed, and it will be, until it is dealt with at its root.  
     And I'll let my rebuttal go at that.  I have been accused of being preachy in the past, and I don't want to give my 'honorable opponent' any more ammunition than I should, or perhaps already have.
     (wry smile; taking a sip of water)

Mod: All right.  (shutting off the timer)
     (to the Liberal candidate)
     Now; you have all the time that you need and want to respond to the rebuttal.  The floor is yours.

CC: Wait a minute.  What's going on here.  
     (Moderator looks innocently at Conservative candidate.  Conservative candidate looks warily back at both Moderator and Liberal candidate; the latter of whom is looking basically noncommittal at this point, but also glances a bit curiously at Moderator) 
     This debate is rigged.

Mod.: But that's what we do.  You of all people should know that by now.

CC (ignoring the comment, in getting into a high dudgeon, over a perceived injustice being committed):  I refuse to take part in a charade.
Mod.: Sorry; that's not within the rules.

CC: What?!  What rules??!

Mod.: The rules that we make up as we go along.  The rules that we set.  Which include the rule that: Words mean what we say they mean.  
     (Liberal candidate shoots Moderator a startled, quizzical look; as if to say, Hey, that's our schtick.  What's going on here???) 
     Regardless of how you try to twist them. 

CC: Twist!!   Me!!

Mod.:  Yes.  Like you just did.  Or 'as;' as you prefer.  You know.  Rules.  (smiles) 

CC (ignoring the comment; firmly:): I was making a point.  I'm entitled to make a point.

Mod.: You are 'entitled' to what we say you are entitled to, and no more.

CC:  What?!

Mod.: Of course.  Because, as you surely know by now, All is fair in love and war.  And as you must know by now: There is no love lost between the two of us.  

CC (a bit too satisfiedly triumphantly [Poor English; but you know: rules…]): So you admit that you're on the side of the Libs.

Mod.: I admit no such thing.

CC:  But -    
     (looks quizzically between them.  Liberal candidate is staying out of this interaction, at this point; but glances quizzically, and a bit uneasily, at Moderator as well.  Then, the light dawns for Conservative candidate; who nods)
     Oh.  I see.
     (continues nodding)

Mod.: (smiling, sinisterly)  Do you?  Do you really???

(Moderator then, with the question hanging in the air, looks directly at live audience, and camera.  Conservative candidate starts removing her lapel mic.  Liberal candidate looks at Moderator full-on quizzically; the dawning still a bit in the distance.
  Lights - in the studio - dim, on their way out.  Before lights full Up.)


P.S. Question: What's the difference between the EU and the NAU/TPP?
        Answer: An ocean.
                      To some.

No comments: