Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Liberal tricks

2008-02-29T02:24:03Z

Economist68:

[[Image:Monkey-typing.jpg|thumb|center|500px|<center>Please ignore this blog entry.</center>]]

Here are some common [[liberal]] tricks that many people fall for:

# [[liberal]]s [[liberal friendship|befriend]] you so you should become liberal (why don't they become [[conservative]]?)
# "live and let live!" except when it comes to praying aloud in school, keeping the money you earn, building on your own property, and every other liberal issue
# it doesn't hurt to try! (In reference to drugs, alcohol, and other immoral behaviors)
# everyone else supposedly believes in something so it must be right
# your [[parent]]s aren't cool
# [[Hollywood]] is cool
# there is a shortage of everything we want
# [[prayer]] is for dummies, or is antiquated
# [[children|kids]] are getting smarter than old folks
# smear your adversary with a highly offensive accusation or insinuation
# atheism equals intelligence
# call someone a racist if he criticizes a ''liberal'' having a different skin color
# [[conservative]]s don't care about regular people
# [[vandalism]] is ok
# if you don't like it (something offensive on [[television]]), don't watch it (but they don't seem to go for ''if you don't like [[whale]]s being killed, don't watch them being killed'').
# don't kill the [[shark]] that attacked someone; the person invaded the shark's territory (ignoring/rejecting that all of creation was made for [[homo sapiens|man]]).

(please add to list)

== Example ==

Here is an example of an actual attempt at [[liberal tricks]] that was posted on this very page:

{{QuoteBox|This article, and many others on a similar line, are a sad demonstration of incipient mental illness. Andrew Schlafly appears to be an educated man - after all, he edited a legal journal which was later edited by [[Barack Obama]] (I assume that Andy's tenure wasn't a result of affirmative action in favour of the narrow minded and the bigoted) - yet his denunciations of 'liberalism' get ever wilder and more paranoid as his definition of that beknighted state become ever more encompassing.}}

The above example (by a non-American) attempts to smear a [[conservative]] by implying that he has a mental illness, reflecting '''liberal trick''' #10 above. To someone unfamiliar with '''liberal tricks''', this can be upsetting and intimidating. But once one realizes that this is a basic trick from the [[liberal]] playbook, its silliness and ineffectiveness becomes obvious. The [[liberal]]'s foolish tactic is then revealed for what it really is.
[[category:liberals]]

Liberal tools

2008-02-29T02:23:59Z

Economist68:

[[Image:Monkey-typing.jpg|thumb|center|500px|<center>Please ignore this blog entry.</center>]]

These are the tools used by [[liberals]], in a proposed order of priority:

#[[Deceit]] <ref>Michael Reagan, [http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MichaelReagan/2007/10/05/people_of_deceit People of Deceit], ''Townhall.com''.</ref>
#Holding [[conservatives]] to a higher standard than they hold themselves.
#[[Bullying]].
#[[Censorship]].
#Capturing and misleading [[youth]].
#Sowing division among [[conservatives]].
#Desensitization. <ref>David Kupelian, [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49958 How Ohio State University is marketing evil] "Desensitization," these two gay marketing gurus tell us, consists of inundating the public in a "continuous flood of gay-related advertising, presented in the least offensive fashion possible. If straights can't shut off the shower, they may at least eventually get used to being wet."
"The main thing," they confide, "is to talk about gayness until the issue becomes thoroughly tiresome," adding: "[S]eek desensitization and nothing more. … If you can get [straights] to think [homosexuality] is just another thing – meriting no more than a shrug of the shoulders – then your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won."</ref>
#Jamming. <ref>David Kupelian, [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49958 How Ohio State University is marketing evil] "Jamming," explains marketing expert Paul E. Rondeau of Regent University, in his comprehensive study "Selling Homosexuality to America," "is psychological terrorism meant to silence expression of or even support for dissenting opinion." Radio counselor and psychologist Dr. Laura Schlessinger experienced big-time jamming during the run-up to her planned television show. Outraged over a single comment critical of homosexuals she had made on her radio program, activists launched a massive intimidation campaign against the television program's advertisers. As a result, the new show was stillborn. </ref> <ref>Jennifer Harper [http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20071004/NATION/110040047/1002 Liberals targeting radio hosts], ''The Washington Times", October 4, 2007.</ref>
#Conversion. <ref>David Kupelian, [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49958 How Ohio State University is marketing evil] "We mean conversion of the average American’s emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media. We mean "subverting" the mechanism of prejudice to our own ends – using the very processes that made America hate us to turn their hatred into warm regard – whether they like it or not."</ref>
#Undermining [[religion]].
#Mocking conservative interpretations of [[science]].<ref>[http://www.nodnc.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=291 NODC]</ref>
#Portraying criminals and miscreants as being on the other side of the political fence.
#Dismissing criticism for no other reason than it comes from a conservative.
#Using the term "conservative" as a [[pejorative]].

Please add to the list or adjust priorities, or add examples (as references) to illustrate how these liberal tools are used.

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[category:politics]]
[[category:Liberals]]

Liberal logic

2008-02-29T02:23:55Z

Economist68:

[[Image:Monkey-typing.jpg|thumb|center|500px|<center>Please ignore this blog entry.</center>]]

'''Liberal logic''' is an argument by a liberal that is deceptively attractive to some, but is actually nonsensical. Here are some examples:

# often a [[liberal]] responds to a logical comment or question with an (illogical) expression of personal like or dislike, as in "I don't like him!"
# [[Barack Obama]] on [[Afghanistan]]: with fewer soldiers, we didn't have enough ammo and humvees!<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21text-demdebate.html?sq=transcript&st=nyt&scp=2&pagewanted=print]</ref>
# criticize [[Christians]] for literal interpretations of [[Genesis]], but then insist on even more literal interpretations when it suits the [[liberal]] ideology<ref>For example, liberals often insist that the [[Bible]] literally prohibits judging anything.</ref>
# no matter what happens in the weather, [[global warming]] caused it
# belief that a [[correlation]] and/or [[causation]] (e.g., between [[atheism]] and [[suicide]]) can be disproved by a [[counterexample]] (e.g., one [[atheist]] who remained sane)
# [[Americans]] should "move on" past the misconduct of [[Bill Clinton]] and [[Ted Kennedy]], but should dig up as much old dirt as possible about [[John McCain]]
# if [highly implausible assumption like "[[embryonic stem cell]] research will find the cure for paralysis"], then would you support it (without any consideration of alternatives)?
# personal experience dictates personal views, rather than rising above bad and/or unusual experiences and basing one's views on [[logic]]
# never admit shame for [[liberal]] behavior, but often tell others they should be ashamed of themselves
# [[free speech]] for anything and everything ... except the [[conservative]] truth, and religion.
# [[Hollywood]] promotion of [[abortion]] is welcomed, but views of Hollywood actresses towards their own children are concealed
# insisting that an [[atheistic]] culture cannot harm anyone, but also insisting that classroom prayer can cause harm
# carrying an unborn child to birth reduces risk of breast cancer, but choosing [[abortion]] rather than childbirth somehow does not increase the relative risk
# requesting increased spending by [[government]] to reduce poverty, which actually poverty is increased by the dependency
# insisting on "tolerance" for anything that is anti-[[Christian]], while censorship for anything is [[Christian]]
# insisting that teaching [[abstinence]] does not reduce premarital sex
# denying that widespread ownership of guns, largely defensive weapons, can reduce crime
# insisting that increasing taxes must increase government revenue, when often people just work less and revenues then decline
# Even though the [[Supreme Court]] overrules precedents every year by 5-4 votes, [[Roe v. Wade]] cannot be overruled, or can only be overruled if it is a unanimous 9-0 vote (this argument tries to make irreversible law out of the dicta in a weak majority opinion in ''[[Planned Parenthood v. Casey]]'', even though the very creation of that "secret opinion" was procured by [[liberal deceit]].)<ref>See Jeffrey Toobin's ''The Nine''.</ref>
# The pronoun "he" has been used to include men and women for centuries, but [[liberals]] find that illogical today

(add to list)

==See also==

*[[Liberal bias]]
*[[Liberal hysteria]]
*[[Liberal hate speech]]
*[[Liberal style]]
*[[Liberal denial]]
*[[Liberal obfuscation]]
*[[Liberal quotient]]

==References==
<references/>
[[category:politics]][[Category:Liberals]]

Liberals and friendship

2008-02-29T02:23:49Z

Economist68:

[[Image:Monkey-typing.jpg|thumb|center|500px|<center>Please ignore this blog entry.</center>]]

A '''liberal friendship''' is a friendship on [[liberal]] terms, as in requiring acceptance, allowance or lack of criticism of [[liberal]] values. It is often the product of [[peer pressure]]. Someone in a '''liberal friendship''' can expect loss of the friendship if he dares to express dismay or disapproval of the [[liberal]] values.

A '''liberal friendship''' can occur wherever [[liberals]] apply [[peer pressure]] to spread their belief system. It can occur in college, in relationships, and in the workplace.

In contrast, [[conservatives]] virtually never require censorship or acceptance of [[conservative]] principles as a condition of friendship.

==Criticism==
It is human nature to naturally be friends with people who agree with you, so people are more likely to be friends with people who agree with them politically. But this trait is not any more likely to be found in a liberal than a conservative, and to suggest that liberals refuse to be friends with people who do not agree with them politically is unlikely.

== See also ==

* [[liberal grading]]
[[category:politics]]
[[Category:Liberals]]

Liberal quotient

2008-02-29T02:23:44Z

Economist68:

[[Image:Monkey-typing.jpg|thumb|center|500px|<center>Please ignore this blog entry.</center>]]

'''Liberal quotient''' is a new term coined by Conservapedia to quantify how [[liberal]] a group is. It is used for assessing political bias and for evaluating statements or positions by such a group.

The liberal quotient is defined as the ratio of liberals to conservatives in a group. Thus the liberal quotient is zero when there are no liberals in the group, and, by definition, infinity if there are no conservatives.

According to a Harris Poll from 2005 [http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=548], 40% of all Americans identify as moderates, 35% as conservatives, and 18% as liberals. This gives a liberal quotient of about 1:2. These numbers have been fairly constant during the last decades.

A [[Wikipedia]] user can choose from 32 different categories to self-identify their political ideology [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedians_by_political_ideology]. There are 240 users who self-identify as liberal [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Liberal_Wikipedians], and 75 who self-identify as conservative [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Conservative_Wikipedians]. This means that the group of editors on Wikipedia that chose to self-identify has a liberal quotient of about 3:1.

Groups having a high liberal quotient would include university faculties, the National Education Association, the leadership of the [[Democratic Party]], the management of the ''Village Voice'' and ''New York Times'', and the leaders of the [[ACLU]]. Groups having a low liberal quotient would include a trade association of small business owners, an association of Christian athletes, and worshipers at church on an ordinary Sunday, with the exception of black protestant congregations [http://pewforum.org/docs/index.php?DocID=174].

== Comparison to Other Metrics ==

While some liberals oppose any measurement of their influence, others have proposed different metrics. One alternative proposal of a liberal quotient is the percentage of liberals in a population or group.

This metric fails to distinguish between conservatives and moderates. For example, this metric yields the same result if there were 50 liberals and 50 moderates as if there were 50 liberals and 50 conservatives, even though the two groups have very different political biases.

The formulation LQ = L/(L+C) has also been proposed - the Liberal quotient is the ratio of self identified liberals to the sum of self identified liberals and conservatives. This yields a range from 0 to 1, and is not affected by moderates or the unidentified. But by constraining the quotient to a scale of 0 to 1, it understates a large increase in liberal control. A group having 9 liberals and just one conservative would have a liberal quotient of 0.9, while a group having 99 liberals and only one conservative would have a liberal quotient of only 0.99. Increasing the liberal control eleven-fold would result in only a 10% increase in this quotient. A rebuttal to this criticism is that this is just how percentages work.

Proponent of this measure point out that both measure are mathematical equivalent. Given a liberal quotient defined as LQ=L/C the alternative measure can be obtained by the transformation LQ/(1+LQ). Since one measure can be obtained from the other by a simple transformation, preferring one over the other is simply a matter of taste.

== Criticism ==

Critics of the liberal quotient point out that it discounts groups identifying neither as liberal nor conservative, such as the 40% of moderates in the American public. A group with 97 moderates, 2 liberals, and 1 conservative has the same liberal quotient as a group with 1 moderate, 66 Liberals and 33 conservatives, although some might claim the latter group is more liberal. Furthermore, while "conservative" may be considered a general description for someone with right-wing ideological beliefs, "liberal" does not carry the same connotations for people of the left wing; many socialists would not consider themselves to be liberals.

It has also been pointed out that this metric does not differentiate between groups with differing levels of liberal beliefs; an extreme left-wing group may have the same liberal quotient as a mildly liberal group.

The metric can fail to distinguish between conservatives and moderates. The liberal quotient yields the same result if there were 50 conservatives and 50 moderates as if there were 100 conservatives, even though the two groups have very different political biases.

A rebuttal is to these criticisms is that it is unclear what moderates add or subtract to a group. For example, it is argued that the counterweight by provided 33 conservatives to the 66 liberals in the presence of 1 moderate, than that is just as effective as the counterweight provided by 1 conservative to 2 liberals in the presence of 97 moderates. The influence of moderates are in this argumentation purposefully ignored, for the sake of simplicity.

In this context it has also been pointed out that the term ''liberal quotient'' can be misleading, and will often be understood to mean liberal fraction. The liberal quotient of 1:2 of the American public, for example, might be mistaken to mean that 66% of all Americans are conservative, although it is only about 35% according to the Harris poll.

A more fundamental criticism is directed to the use of the liberal quotient when applied to media outlets or encyclopedias. Rather than estimating the political orientation of editors, critics propose to consider the political orientation of the actual content. Recent scientific studies on media bias look at the media content, and not at the orientation of the editors, and use in addition other measures than the quotient of articles with a liberal bias versus articles with a conservative bias [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=947640#PaperDownload][http://ideas.repec.org/p/umc/wpaper/0501.html]. Note, that both studies nevertheless conclude that most media outlets have a liberal bias.

Another problem with applying this metric to media outlets and encyclopedia is that, in contrast to groups, unbiased articles, the analog to moderates, do not swing their orientation in the presence of biased articles. An encyclopedia with 99.7% unbiased articles, 0.2% liberally biased articles, and 0.1% conservatively biased articles, has the same liberal bias as a product with 66.6% liberally biased articles, 33.3% conservative articles , 0.1% unbiased articles. However, the first would be considered a reliable source of information, while the second would be highly unreliable. And this despite having the same liberal quotient. Even if the influence of moderates in a group of people might be unclear, the influence of unbiased articles on on the reliability of an encyclopedia is obvious.

Other criticism of the liberal quotient is directed at the way it is used in comparison of the bias of Wikipedia with statistically sound results from a Harris Poll. The identified problems are:
* The comparison relies on raw data from a self-selected sample [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedians_by_political_ideology].
* It compares 2 answers of a poll with 3 possible answers, to 2 of 32 user categories.
* It compares the outcome of a poll in which respondent can only choose one option, with one a self-identification project, in which users can choose as many options as they like.

[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Liberals]]

Liberal redefinition

2008-02-29T02:23:38Z

Economist68:

[[Image:Monkey-typing.jpg|thumb|center|500px|<center>Please ignore this blog entry.</center>]]

'''Liberal redefinition''' is the distortion of traditional meanings of words to advance the liberal ideology and often to erode [[faith]]. Examples include:

* [[equality]]
* [[evolution]]
* [[faith]]
* [[feminism]]
* [[gay]]
* [[hate crime]]
*[[Rainbow|rainbow]]
* [[secular]]
* [[they]]

(add more)

[[Category:Liberals]]

Liberal bias in academia

2008-02-29T02:23:33Z

Economist68:

[[Image:Monkey-typing.jpg|thumb|center|500px|<center>Please ignore this blog entry.</center>]]

'''Liberal grading''' is when [[teacher]]s, primarily in [[public school]] and college, mark favorably [[liberal]] work and downgrade work that is [[politically incorrect]] or [[conservative]].

'''Liberal grading''' is most apparent on controversial issues like [[abortion]], [[homosexuality]], [[evolution]], and [[gun control]], and [[environmentalism]]. In some cases a teacher will refuse to write a recommendation or a student will be denied full credit or graduation unless the student embraces a liberal belief.

The liberals' sense of self-entitlement and [[affirmative action]] has also created massive grade inflation in public schools.

== Example ==

An example of '''liberal grading''' is when a professor punishes a student with a lower grade for having done something [[politically incorrect]] outside of class:<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,242688,00.html</ref>

:Dowd and another non-inducted Lacrosse player were enrolled in [Professor] Curtis’ "Politics and Literature" class. Grading was based on three papers plus class participation, each of which accounted for 25 percent of the total. At first, both players were passing the course, with Dowd receiving a C+ and a C- on his first two papers. (As a student overall, Dowd had a grade point average of approximately 3.4 on a 4.0 scale, with the C- being his lowest grade.)

But student Dowd was then accused of being at the politically incorrect party that resulted in the unjust, notorious indictment of three other players. Here is what happened next:

:[Professor] Curtis joined what has become infamously known as "the Group of 88"-- 88 faculty members who signed a full-page advertisement in Duke’s student newspaper. The ad was entitled "What Does a Social Disaster Sound Like?" and stated, "Regardless of the results of the police investigation, what is apparent everyday now is the anger and fear of many students who know themselves to be objects of racism and sexism."

:The 88 linked their political outrage and condemnation to a specific criminal accusation; thus, the ad virtually convicted the Duke 3 of rape. It congratulated students on their anger "regardless of the results of the police investigation" and, so, sanctioned the posters then being tacked up on campus with photos of Lacrosse players over the word "rapist."

:University officials did not rein in the 88; faculty members have neither apologized for nor withdrawn their statements.

:Dowd and the other Lacrosser player became the only students in Curtis’ class to receive an overall "F." The grade meant Dowd could not graduate in May and would lose a job scheduled for July.

Dowd attempted to appeal the grade but was rebuffed with a terse reply that there are no appeals. Later, amid public pressure, Duke did change the grade to a "D", and Dowd had to sue in court to seek further justice.

== References ==

<references/>
[[Category: Liberals]]

Liberal denial

2008-02-29T02:23:28Z

Economist68:

[[Image:Monkey-typing.jpg|thumb|center|500px|<center>Please ignore this blog entry.</center>]]

'''Liberal denial''' is the tendency of [[liberals]] to conceal, deny or censor the truth for ideological reasons:

# that ideas do matter, and can cause great harm, including [[liberal]] falsehoods
# that girls and women in sports have debilitating ACL knee injuries at 3-4 times the rate of men<ref>''Compare'' [http://www.universityhealthmatters.com/article.php?artid=50] (with an explanation of why there is a big difference) ''with'' [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/18/health/18knee.html?ex=1204088400&en=3a5abfaa6104ac63&ei=5070&emc=eta1 New York Times] (downplaying the difference and pretending that no one knows why)</ref>
# that [[young mass murderers]] fit the profile of [[public school]]-trained [[atheism]]
# that the numerous premature deaths of [[Hollywood]] stars are the result of [[Hollywood values]]<ref>Liberal [[Wikipedia]] lists numerous [[actor]]s who died of drug overdoses, but will not acknowledge the role played by Hollywood values, for which Wikipedia does not even have an entry. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_drug-related_deaths]</ref>
# that [[homeschoolers]] often do better than those who attend [[public school]]
# that [[culture]] affects [[politics]], and people's views and lifestyles
# that successful [[democracy]], both historically and logically, is the result of [[Protestantism|Protestant]] [[Christianity]]<ref>[http://www.apologetics.com/default.jsp?bodycontent=/articles/cultural_apologetics/snyder-democracy1.html Calvinism and the Success of Liberal Democracy, by John Snyder]</ref>
# that [[Lawrence Summers]] was fired as President of [[Harvard]] for making a [[political correctness|politically incorrect]] suggestion about women and [[math]] aptitude
# that [[Ronald Reagan]]'s public exhortation, "[[Mikhail Gorbachev|Mr. Gorbachev]], tear down this wall," helped cause the nearly 30-year-old [[Berlin Wall]] later be torn down
# that [[gun control]] may increase [[crime]]
# that group [[prayer]] is censored from public school
# that reducing [[taxes]] stimulates the [[economy]]
# that choosing [[abortion]] over childbirth increases the risk of [[breast cancer]]
# that the [[mainstream media]] is [[bias]]ed
# that privately-run [[transport]] is more efficient than government-run transport
# that [[Universal Health Care|public health care]] is inferior medical care
# that [[union]]s interfere with [[employment]] opportunities
# that [[Islam]]ic extremism is a threat to the [[Western civilization]]<ref>Leftist [[Sam Harris]] admitted and complained about this liberal denial [http://www.cmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061009/REPOSITORY/610090301/1028/OPINION02 here].</ref>
# that banning [[same-sex marriage]] is analogous to banning [[polygamy]]
# that aggressive interrogation is often the only way to obtain answers from [[terrorists]]
# how the [[liberal]] ideology is pushed on unsuspecting others, particularly youngsters

Often [[liberal]]s refuse to admit that they are [[liberal]]s, in the hope of appearing more reasonable. [[Hillary Clinton]] refused to admit in a presidential debate in 2007 that she is a liberal. Similarly, [[Michael Dukakis]] refused for a while to admit that he was a liberal during the 1988 presidential campaign. Only out of desperation did Dukakis admit that he was a liberal, and even then he admitted only that was a liberal like President [[Harry Truman]], who served 40 years earlier.

== References ==

<references/>

[[category:politics]]
[[category:liberals]]

Liberal hate speech

2008-02-29T02:23:25Z

Economist68:

[[Image:Monkey-typing.jpg|thumb|center|500px|<center>Please ignore this blog entry.</center>]]

==Liberal hate speech against persons with disabilities==
*[[Rush Limbaugh]]
*News24 of South Africa has on its website an obituary for [[Ronald Reagan]] entitled, ''Gay about Reagan's death''. <ref>[http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1538744,00.html ''Gay about Reagan's death''], News24, 07/06/2004.</ref> and quotes Jon Beaupre, a gay journalist and Los Angeles radio talk show host as saying, "I have a feeling that an awful lot of [[gay]] people are going to be cheering, that 'Ding-dong! The wicked witch is dead'."

*Actor [[George Clooney]] is unapologetic about tasteless ridicule of an [[Alzheimer's]] sufferer:
:KURTZ: O'Reilly also criticized you for making a joke about [[Charlton Heston]], the former NRA chief, having Alzheimer's.

:CLOONEY: Yes.

:KURTZ: Was that in poor taste in retrospect?

:CLOONEY: Yes, oh, yes. It was in poor taste. It was a funny joke. It was in a room of 100 people. Yeah, (UNINTELLIGIBLE). I have a lot of good friends who -- in fact, I have a very good friend who is dying of Alzheimer's. And it was just a funny joke. <ref>[http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0310/26/rs.00.html Interview With George Clooney], Transcript CNN Reliable Sources, October 26, 2003.</ref>

==Liberal hate speech against women==
*In August 2007, [[Democratic]] [[2008_Presidential_Election#Declared_Democratic_Party_Candidates|Presidential hopeful]] [[John Edwards]] viciously attacked social commentator [[Ann Coulter]], calling the petite embodiment of women's aspirations for equality in the marketplace of ideas a "she-devil" <ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/08/edwards-calls-c.html Edwards Calls Coulter 'She-Devil'], ''ABC News'', August 17, 2007.</ref>

==Liberal hate speech against African-Americans==
*[[U.S. Supreme Court]] Justice [[Clarence Thomas]] has been the relentless target of the most vile liberal hatred since his appointment; Spike Lee called him "A handkerchief-head, chicken-and-biscuit-eating Uncle Tom."

*[[Colin Powell]] is a respected and popular Statesman who rejected offers to be drafted for President in 1996. In an interview, [[liberal activist]] Harry Belefonte stated, "there are those slaves who lived on the plantation, and there were those slaves who lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master to exactly the way the master intended to have you serve him. That gave you privilege. Colin Powell is permitted to come into the house of the master, as long as he will serve the master according to the master's dictates." <ref>[http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/30/157217&mode=thread&tid=25 Interview with Harry Belefonte], ''Democracy Now'', January 30th, 2006.</ref>

==Liberal hate speech against Hispanics==
*[[Alberto Gonzales]]. The first Hispanic U.S. Attorney General, was consistently mocked on liberal websites as 'Alberto "Speedy" Gonzales' <ref>[http://boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?threadID=800028910&start=0 ''Speedy Gonzales to Resign''], Aug 27, 2007. Retrieved from History.com message boards August 30, 2007.</ref> during his tenure. Speedy Gonzales is a reference to a disparaging stereotypical cartoon character of Hispanics that Hollywood attempted to popularize in the 1950s and 60s. Upon his retirement, ''[[NBC News]]'' anchor [[Matt Lauer]] called Gonzales "a piñata" for the Democrats. [http://newsbusters.org/static/2007/08/2007-08-28-NBC-TDYpinata.rm]

==Liberal hate speech against Jews==
*Rev. [[Jesse Jackson]] said on Jaunary 25, 1984, "all Hymie wants to talk about, is Israel; every time you go to Hymietown, that's all they want to talk about." <ref>[http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=187440 Jesse and the Jews], Michael W. Hirschorn, ''The Harvard Crimson'', March 05, 1984.</ref>
*Anti-war activist [[Cindy Sheehan]] said "Casey was killed for lies and for a [[PNAC]] Neo-Con <ref>[http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=h-antisemitism&month=0304&week=&msg=4zdiWX1EuCVzeRLDdQySKA&user=&pw= 'Neo-conservative' is a codeword for Jewish], Dr. Barry Rubin, director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Institute, Interdisciplinary Center of Herzliya, H-Net discussion April 6, 2003.</ref> agenda to benefit Israel", <ref>National Review, [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2FjYjA3NDU2NThiZjI4YzFkYTdkZmViY2M5M2U4MTE= ''Dear Useful Idiot''], Catherine Seipp, May 26, 2006. </ref> accusing members of a vast right-wing Jewish conspiracy of being responsible for her sons death to benefit Israel.
*[[Richard Dawkins]] claimed that Jews "more or less monopolize American foreign policy." His comments have been criticized by the Anti-Defamation League as "classic Anti-Semetism."<ref>[http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/134346 Dawkins: Jews Control US Policy], Israel National News, October 8, 2007.</ref>

==Liberal hate speech against South Asians==
*[[Michael Moore]] affecting a mock Indian accent live on air and ridiculing CNN Chief Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta's name. <ref>[http://www.racewire.org/archives/2007/07/moore_attacks_cnn_network_spew.html Moore attacks CNN network, spews anti-South Asian sentiments], ''RaceWire.org'', July 10, 2007.</ref>

==Liberal hate speech against people of faith==

*[[Radical]] [[extremist]] [[Katherine Yurica]] stated the [[Republican Party]] gained power through "[[Hitler]]ian tactics", [[evangelical]] leaders from [[Billy Graham]] to [[Jerry Falwell]] "had to have read Hitler’s [[Mein Kampf]]" and [[Christian]]s have "[[fascist]]ic tendencies."<ref>[http://www.ird-renew.org/site/apps/s/content.asp?c=fvKVLfMVIsG&b=494491&ct=928973 ''President Bush Called “Evil,” Evangelicals Equated With Nazis at NCC-Supported Conference''], John Lomperis, The Institute on Religion and Democracy. </ref><ref>[http://the-fourth-world.blogspot.com/2006/11/apocalypse-no-christian-fascism-and.html Apocalypse No! Christian Fascism and the Nazi Legacy], Apocalypse No! An Indigenist Perspective, by Juan Santos, November 01, 2006.</ref><ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Pravknight#POV_editing Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Pravknight/POV editing], Retrieved from Wikipedia October 22, 2007.</ref>

*[[Richard Dawkins]] in his 2006 book ''The God Delusion,'' states fundamentalist religion "saps the intellect,"<ref>[http://www.sciencefriday.com/pages/2006/Oct/hour2_100606.html Sciencefriday.com page on Dawkins]</ref> and refers to belief in [[God]] as a "mind-virus."<ref>[http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/47052/ The Dawkins Delusion] by Alistair McGrath</ref>

==Liberal homophobia==
*[[HBO]] ''[[Real Time]]'' host [[Bill Maher]] 's on air [[homophobic]] comments about Republicans were [[censor]]ed by CNN. <ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/11/08/censored-by-cnn-bill-mah_n_33701.html Censored by CNN : Bill Maher Suggest RNC Chair Mehlman is Gay], ''The Huffington Post'', November 8, 2006.</ref>
*[[Democrat]] [[Fred Phelps]] is known for notorious inflammatory anti-homosexual rhetoric.<ref>[http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21229 The "God Hates Fags" [[Left]],] By Mark D. Tooley, FrontPageMagazine.com, February 09, 2006.</ref>

==Liberal race baiting==
*An anonymous editor at the ''New York Times'' attacked Rep. [[Tom DeLay]] with the most vile [[hate speech]] in Delay's [[Wikipedia]] biographical entry. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tom_DeLay&diff=prev&oldid=85320018][http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/name2ip.php?orgname=New+York+Times&location=]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://hq.protestwarrior.com/?page=/featured/PHS/PHS.php Bryan Henderson's attempts to balance socialist political science teacher], a civil libertarian come face to face with leftist hate.
*[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29414 Liberal hate speech], Judith Reisman, ''[[WorldNetDaily.com]]'', October 25, 2002.
*[http://www.godhatesfredphelps.com/ God Hates Fred Phelps], Retrieved from http://www.godhatesfredphelps.com/ October 25, 2007.

[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Deceit]]
[[Category:Liberals]]

Liberal

2008-02-29T02:23:21Z

Economist68:

[[Image:Monkey-typing.jpg|thumb|center|500px|<center>Please ignore this blog entry.</center>]]

A '''liberal''' is a believer in many of the following political positions:

* Tax and spend government
* Taxpayer-funded [[abortion]]
* [[Income redistribution]], usually through progressive taxation
* Government-rationed and taxpayer-funded medical care
* Taxpayer-funded "free" [[public education]]
* The denial of inherent [[gender differences]] and wanting men and women to have the same jobs in the [[military]]
* [[Same-sex marriage]]
* [[Affirmative action]]
* [[Political correctness]]<ref>[http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/27429.html Politically Correct Terrorism] ''The Conservative Voice'', August 21, 2007</ref>
* [[Censorship]] of [[prayer]] in classrooms and school sponsored events
* Labor [[union]]s
* Elimination of [[abstinence]]-only program funding <ref> [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286671,00.html Democrats Aim To Kill Abstinence-Only Program Funding], [[Fox News]], Monday, June 25, 2007</ref>
* A "[[living Constitution]]" that is reinterpreted, thwarting the amendment process specified in the Constitution as written.
* Support for [[gun control]]
* Government programs to [[rehabilitate criminals]]
* Abolition of death penalty
* [[Environmentalism]]<ref>[[Greenpeace]], for example.</ref>
* [[Disarmament treaties]]
* [[Globalism]]
* Opposition to a strong American foreign policy <ref>Stefaan Walgrave and Joris Verhulst, [http://nicomedia.math.upatras.gr/conf/CAWM2003/Papers/Verhulst.pdf The February 15 Worldwide Protests against a War in Iraq: An Empirical Test of Transnational Opportunities. Outline of a Research Programme](PDF).</ref>
* Support of obscenity and pornography as a [[First Amendment]] right<ref>The [[Warren Court]], led by [[liberal]] Justices [[William O. Douglas]], [[Hugo Black]], [[Abe Fortas]], [[William Brennan]] and Chief Justice [[Earl Warren]] issued 36 decisions granting [[First Amendment]] rights to obscenity and pornography. These decisions remain fully supported by liberals today.</ref>
* Opposition to full private property rights<ref>For example, the liberal wing of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] issued the 5-4 [[Kelo v. City of New London]] decision authorizing the taking of private property by government in order to give the property to another private entity rather than convert it to a public use.</ref>
* Limiting [[conservative]] talk radio by reinstating the [[Fairness Doctrine]]
* Promoting [[liberal deceit]] if it advances their goals, or at least tolerating it
<br>

== Liberalism in North America today ==
[[Democrats]] and many media outlets in the [[U.S.]] often have a [[liberal bias]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics1.asp|title=Media Bias basics|publisher=Media Research Center}}</ref>

===Liberal Rankings of Congress Members===

The National Journal compiles the votes of each congress member each year and uses the information to create rankings<ref>http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/index.htm</ref> of how liberal each member of the United States [[Congress]] is. In addition to showing the voting records of each member and given an overall all ranking of liberalness, the National Journal also ranks congress members by liberalness in the areas of social, economic, and foreign policy.

==Liberalism in Europe today==

In Europe, on the other hand, parties that call themselves ''liberal'' are moderate in outlook, ranging from centre-left to centre-right, promote typically economic and business freedom. The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe<ref>http://www.alde.eu</ref> is an party of the European Parliament that represents most ''liberal'' parties from European countries. Similar policies are promoted by many ''liberal'' parties throughout the world,<ref>http://www.liberal-international.org/</ref> such as the Liberal Party of Australia.<ref>[http://www.liberal.org.au/]</ref>

Trade unions and socialist parties often criticize politicians that promote lower taxes on business, or more flexible hiring and firing laws, by calling them "liberals" or [[neoliberal|neoliberals]]. Thus, just like in the US, "liberal" is often used as a term of abuse. But when someone is called "liberal" in Europe, it is an entirely different to the meaning in the US.
In fact, the US meaning of liberal is more similar to the politics of European [[socialist]] or [[social democracy|social democratic]] parties.<ref>[http://www.pes.org]</ref>

==Historical Liberalism ==
In history, the word "liberal" has meant different things at different times, and was associated with individual liberty in prior centuries. In the postwar period, liberals supported government intervention in the economy and welfare state policies, as well as peaceful coexistence with the communist block, which are not liberal policies in the sense of classical liberalism. After the end of the cold war, with the demise of socialism and communism, many liberals embraced some ideas from economic neo-liberalism, and coined it the "Third Way". In the area of national security and foreign policy liberals in the [[U.S.]] failed to define a consistent stance, even after the events of 9/11 and the beginning of the war in Iraq. Liberals generally support affirmative action, gay marriage, and abortion.<ref>"Political liberals tend, for whatever reason, to be ardent supporters of both gay rights and pro-choice programs." Greenberg and Bailey [http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Greenberg-Bailey/Homosexual%20Eugenics.pdf] </ref>

==Original meaning: Classical Liberalism==
Liberalism is a political philosophy with freedom as its core value. The term was originally applied to supporters of individual liberties and equal rights, but, in America, the term has come to represent a movement of social change that often conflicts with [[conservative]] values such as moral values and tradition.

See [[Classical Liberal|Classical Liberalism]]. Compare [[Libertarianism]].

==Alternative meanings of 'liberal'==

One definition of liberal is anything that is not conservative. For example, the American Heritage Dictionary includes this definition of "liberal":<ref>Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal</ref>
* Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas ...

==Liberal Organizations ==
*[[AARP|AARP - American Association of Retired People]]
*[[ACLU|ACLU - American Civil Liberties Union]]
*[[AFL-CIO|AFL-CIO - American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations]]
*[[Amnesty International|AI - Amnesty International]]
*[[Democratic National Committee]]
*[[Greenpeace]]
*[[NARAL|NARAL - National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League]]
*[[NAACP|NAACP - National Association for the Advancement of Colored People]]
*[[National Committee for an Effective Congress]]
*[[National Education Association]]
*[[National Organization of Women]]
*[[Planned Parenthood|Planned Parenthood Federation of America]]
*[[Rainbow/PUSH Coalition]]
*[[MoveOn.org]]
*[[A.N.S.W.E.R.]]

Source: [http://www.politixgroup.com/lo.htm The Politix Group]

==See Also==
* [[Liberal Bias]]
* [[Liberal Hypocrisy]]
* [[Essay:Liberal Style]]
* [[The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness]]
* [[Conservative Links]]
* [[Liberal denial]]
* [[Liberal hypocrisy]]
* [[Liberal deceit]]
* [[Liberal quotient]]
* [[Liberal hate speech]]
* [[Liberal logic]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Political ideologies]]
[[Category:Deceit]]
[[Category:Liberals]]

Deliberate ignorance

2008-02-29T02:23:13Z

Economist68:

[[Image:Monkey-typing.jpg|thumb|center|500px|<center>Please ignore this blog entry.</center>]]

'''Deliberate ignorance''' is the practice of refusing to consider or discuss logic or evidence disproving ideologically motivated positions. Examples include:

* [[Democrats]] refusing to acknowledge [[Barack Obama]]'s appeal to unpatriotic donors and supporters
* [[materialists]] refuse to address the impossibility of material explanation for [[migration]] and [[homing]]
* [[evolutionists]] refuse to address the lack of a plausible evolutionary path for the [[whale]]<ref>This is disputed by evolutionists at a blog worth reviewing further for plausibility [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/two_tales_of_whale_evolution.php here].</ref>
* [[liberals]] refuse to address how [[socialism]] destroys productivity
* [[abortionists]] refuse to address the undisclosed harm to the mothers who have [[abortions]]
* Advocates of the [[global warming theory]] refuse to consider any scientific evidence which shows that natural causes have always had a greater effect on terrestrial air temperature than human activity.
(add more)

Common expressions of [[deliberate ignorance]] include:

* I'm not aware of that! (without admitting a failure to look)
* I've never seen that in the [[New York Times]]!
* That's not what it said in my ([[public school]]) textbook!
* Let's talk about something else!
* I'm not interested in that!

== References ==

<references/>
[[Category:philosophy]]
[[Category:liberals]]