Why Democrats lose the intellectual argument
Just look at this debate:
Ann Coulter, whom the liberal media caricatures as a screaming maniac, offers far more reasoned, fact-based argument than her opponent. I don't know who it is, but he's an idiot: he brings up wedges (Alberto Gonzalez, whom Coulter did not mention) with no merit, and his main argument is this: "As a Democrat, ... I was choking up to see, an African American president of United States with the first Hispanic woman to the supreme court, it was quite a moment."
Well, I'm sure it was quite a moment. So is also seeing deers come out in the mountains or lions frolicking with rabbits. What does have anything to do with whether one is qualified as a judge or president? Being Black didn't make Obama any more or less qualified to be president (being a liberal statist, however, in my opinion, made him disqualified from the start to hold the office Washington, who voluntarily gave up power in an age when revolutions were convenient excuse for dictators like Robespierre or Napoleon, once held). Being a Hispanic woman with terrible hair style doesn't make her any more or less qualified to interpret the Constitution—but being a liberal activist judge who holds her own opinion in higher regard than the written law of the land might.
BTW, I should note that this liberal (other than that he looks like Lex Luther, I really have no idea who it is)'s emotionally charged statement comes after a second or two of trying to counter Coulter's argument rationally. Guess why? It's because the accusation Coulter makes, that statement claiming being a Latina woman makes her better qualified is racist on its face, cannot countered by any reasoned argument, just as no logical argument can counter my claim that "1 + 1" is "2" with the conventionally defined addition operator, and with the usual definition of "is" that everyone but liberals use.
And as statists are apt to do, when reason fails, they fall back on emotion. After all, that's the entire basis of communism, that because they feel like it, the worthless peasants who work the land should own the land—whether they have the ability to manage it or not.