Calendar
August 2015
M T W T F S S
« Apr    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

Why Do Liberals Lie So Much?

Conservatives and especially Christian conservatives find it hard to comprehend how and why liberals lie so easily.  Many liberals seem to lie without the slightest guilt or compunction.

For left-wing politics, lying goes back to the Russian Bolsheviks or earlier.  The masses were lied to because the ruling elite (or the ruling elite to be) felt that the ends (Marxism) justified any means, and the masses were too stupid and ignorant to know what was good for them.  But the ruling elite knew exactly what was good for them.  Leftists have a rather low opinion of the masses, the average citizen.

Liberalism is like a religion, and it has zealots as fanatical as any other religion.  But unlike most religions, liberalism has no moral code.  The closest thing to a moral code in liberalism is “don’t get caught”.  Ethics are situational, and totally up for interpretation.  The truth is subjective, and the truth is merely what you want it to be.  To the fanatic the leftist cause is so noble, so sacred that any lying or cheating for the leftist cause is justified.

When a liberal lies to the American public, he is in effect saying,

You are too stupid to know what is good for you. I know what is good for you.  I will say anything I need to say to convince you my way is the right way.”

If liberals were honest about their vision for this country few people would ever vote for them.  Liberals must lie to us in order to impose the tyranny of liberalism upon us.

16 Responses to “Why Do Liberals Lie So Much?”

  • La Zanya Baker:

    Testify, Brother.

  • Marilyn Hoagland:

    Hello. fantastic job. I did not anticipate this. This is a fantastic story. Thanks!

  • Cialis:

    I’d must verify with you here. Which is not something I usually do! I get pleasure from studying a put up that may make individuals think. Additionally, thanks for allowing me to remark!

  • valium:

    This really answered my downside, thank you!

  • sleep aids:

    There are some fascinating closing dates on this article but I don’t know if I see all of them center to heart. There may be some validity but I will take hold opinion until I look into it further. Good article , thanks and we would like more! Added to FeedBurner as well

  • Cialis:

    There are actually lots of details like that to take into consideration. That could be a nice level to bring up. I offer the thoughts above as common inspiration but clearly there are questions just like the one you convey up where an important factor will be working in trustworthy good faith. I don?t know if best practices have emerged round things like that, but I’m positive that your job is clearly recognized as a good game. Each boys and girls feel the influence of only a moment’s pleasure, for the rest of their lives.

  • viagra:

    Aw, this was a really nice post. In concept I want to put in writing like this additionally – taking time and actual effort to make a very good article… but what can I say… I procrastinate alot and in no way seem to get one thing done.

  • avoid abusive ex boyfriend:

    My boyfriend and I genuinely were delighted learning about on this publication, I was just itching to acknowledge if you trade featured posts? I am always attempting to find site owners to make deals with but it’s only an idea I would ask.

  • nail fungus:

    I’d need to verify with you here. Which isn’t something I often do! I take pleasure in studying a put up that can make folks think. Additionally, thanks for allowing me to comment!

  • al:

    jUST LIKE MUSLIMS, THEY ARE OF THEIR FATHER THE DEVIL,THE FATHER OF LIES

  • Urbain, les soins dentaires:

    Someone essentially help to make seriously posts I’d state. That is the very first time I frequented your web page and so far? I amazed with the analysis you made to create this actual publish amazing. Wonderful task!

  • MARK TRAINA:

    NAAWP: BoycottMediaSponsors.com
    The Conservative Response to a Biased Media.
    Exercise your economic might with a few clicks of a mouse!
    (Use the controls on your browser to navigate this site.)
    ________________________________________Television
    Newspapers
    Internet
    Magazines
    Radio
    Volunteer to help BoycottMediaSponsors
    Media Sponsor List
    Sponsors that stopped advertising with the Biased Media
    Home
    Rules
    Search BMS
    ________________________________________ BoycottMediaSponsors.com makes every effort to make sure the information on this website is timely and accurate. If, however, you find information that is wrong or inaccurate please forward the correct information to webmaster@BoycottMediaSponsors.com. Thank you.
    Send mail to webmaster@BoycottMediaSponsors.com with questions or comments about this web site.
    Last modified: 05/14/10
    The design of this web site is intended to be simple and straight forward. The intention is to focus solely on forcing the biased media to adopt fair and unbiased journalistic standards or leave the journalism profession.

    The following LINK will provide our BOYCOTTERS with the SPONSORS of the LIBERAL MEDIA and the PRODUCTS that they are PROMOTING on ZIONIST MEDIA NETWORKS!

    http://boycottgemsnbc.weebly.com/

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz-rrdbHo0s&feature=player_embedded

    http://boycottmediasponsors.com/index.html

    http://www.theantiliberalzone.com/category/liberal-lapdog-media-sucks-it/

    MARK TRAINA
    NAAWP, PRESIDENT, CEO and NATIONAL SPOKESPERSON
    CANDIDATE for LOUISIANA GOVERNOR in 2015
    http://www.marktraina.webs.com
    fatuouscra@aol.com
    mark a. traina/certified school psychologist/economist/civil rights activist/504-231-3056

    • Izzy Weird:

      The above has a number of interesting looking links. LiberalismSucks.com does not endorse these organizations. While I might agree with some of them, one item rings my turkey detector, and that is the use of the term “Zionist Media”.

  • MARK TRAINA:

    Union lobbyist who worked one day as a teacher suing Illinois for $30,000 annual pension!

    After working one day as a substitute teacher in Illinois, David Piccioli could be entitled to an annual pension of more than $30,000.

    And he’s suing the state to make sure he gets paid.

    DVERTISEMENT
    ADVERTISEMENT
    Piccioli is a retired union political activist who’s already pulling down a pair of state pensions from Illinois’ beleaguered public retirement system. But he’s taking the Teachers Retirement System to court to squeeze more money out of the state.

    The Chicago Tribune reported Thursday that Piccioli is already collecting $31,000 annually from the Teacher Retirement System, but he could get an additional $36,000 annually if he wins his case. He’s also collecting a $30,000-pension from a different state retirement system for his time as a legislative aide in Springfield, according to the Tribune.

    Piccioli is a retired lobbyist for the Illinois Federation of Teachers and never worked in a classroom, but he took advantage of a loophole in Illinois pension law to score his teaching pension.

    In 2007, he worked one day as a substitute teacher at a Springfield school. Under Illinois pension law, that one day in the classroom allowed him to qualify for a pension that would pay him for all of his years of work as a member of the union.

    Find out more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/19/union-lobbyist-who-worked-one-day-as-teacher-suing-illinois-over-30000-pension/

    Join U.S. at: NAAWP FACEBOOK

    NATIONAL ASSOCIATION for the ADVANCEMENT of WHITE PEOPLE – 2015

  • M Moss:

    This article says nothing and gives nothing by way of evidence. In effect, it’s a rant. Here’s how to do it properly. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/why-do-conservatives-soak_b_4934274.html

    • Izzy Weird:

      I’m sorry that you found my article wanting for evidence. And thanks for providing a link to an article that has many excellent examples of liberal lies. The gist of the linked article is that conservatives soak up lies. But on closer examination the alleged lies are really the truth, or examples of where conservatives disagree with the liberal orthodoxy.

      A phony study was made of Fox News watchers, claiming they were uninformed and misinformed. But upon examination the criteria used was whether or not they believed in liberal orthodoxy. If they did not, they were therefore not well informed.

      Lets take the Iraq WMD question. Here are just three of many examples of Democrats saying Saddam had WMD. Note that this was before Bush was elected.

      “If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

      “{W}e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

      “Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

      The truth is Saddam did have WMD, and a few were found after we removed Saddam. A lot of their chemical material was flown and trucked into Syria just before we arrived. There are satellite photos and testimony that this happened. The Russians helped to remove this stuff because they supplied some of it and it would have been embarrassing to them had it been found in Iraq. Saddam himself said he had WMD, and the world’s top intelligence agencies also knew he had them. Bush certainly did not lie about this.

      Or take the case of man-made climate change. The so-called scientific consensus is a desperate lie, the polled sample is not representative of enough of the related scientific disciplines. And science is not done by consensus anyway, it is done by proving out theories.

      Climate change believers know there is no compelling scientific evidence for dangerous man-made climate change. All there is are computer models, and these are models that have never accurately predicted the climate. The models are not just unproven, they have been consistently wrong.

      Do you want models that predict something long term like this? I can give you predictions of any outcome you desire. Simply by making small tweaks to a couple of assumptions (parameters) I can completely change the predicted outcome. Predictions based upon computer models are only of value if the predictive method has proved to be accurate.

      Anthropogenic climate change is not a matter of science at all, it is a belief system, a pseudo-religion, like liberalism itself. Yet your article uses it an example of how conservatives soak up lies. It may well be a better example of how liberals soak up lies.

Leave a Reply