TexasCHLforum.com

Here is the dilemma: In the case of the social media examples I gave, a local community group over 5,000 was being bullied by a couple of dozen Progressives.

I am with you. Bullying and the propagation of untruths in the public sphere need to be dealt with straightaway -- in as kind a way as possible. Let those taking to the bully-pulpit be unmasked for what they are -- people attempting to sway opinions on the basis of emotion rather than facts and reason, and all-too willing to act in a fascist manner rather than be truly liberal (classical liberalism rather than the dangerous progressive liberalism we are faced with these days).

They say there are two types of people, Leftist who are motivated by their heart (emotions) and conservatives who are motivated by their brain (logic and reasoning) When a discussion devolves into statements like "I feel that .." there is no point into continuing unless the party can put aside their feelings and consider real facts and logic.

I have always found it interesting, if not outright odd, that the folks motivated by emotion are the ones more likely to "know what is good for" me and everyone else than those who carefully consider facts and logic. How can they possibly know what is best for anyone when they distance themselves from facts and logic for the sake of emotion and a holier-than-thou attitude?

Perhaps too often, I simply fail to engage in discussions with Antis. Of course, the attitude they usually bring to the discussion ("righteous" indignation that there can possibly be another perspective to consider) is not one I care to support by engaging them in debate. The "feelers" typically won't even try to debate and favor shouting down the opposition, using volume and the appearance of anger to carry the day. Such as these are not really worth the time to interact with since neither side will change opinions and all will walk away from the encounter feeling dissatisfied.