the reason he argues with you is because he thinks your tactics are both not achieving the desiered goal, and in fact impedeing other efforts wich in his oppionion would work, being the calm rational voice, PASIVE agressive in argumentation, not provokeing the opposition.
I would like to put before you the gay marage stunt in california a few years ago. this did nothing but pissed off 50.001% of the population includeing a very vocal 20% that used it as proof that the libruls were comeing for 'em.
end result: five(?) states passed constitutional amendments banning gay marage, and Bush got reelected.
this I think quite clearly demonstraights a _severe_ tactical weakness in the modern democratic party, prety much all of the high level members, and the most visable suporters.
you need to sell the mesage, Kaz, not beat it into there heads, as pleasureable as that may be. pissing them off makes them stronger, you just need to sit back for a year or two, play along, then VERY slowly try to ease the issues into public discusion, stick to the facts, don't call people names, even if it is accurate
