LIBERALISM SUCKS

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.