Why do liberals refuse to use facts to support their bizarre statements?

Question

Why are liberals allowed to say that the US only went into Iraq for oil, but aren't pushed for facts to back this up? Is it not extremely anti-American to accuse your country of such a horrible crime without anything to back it up? Why are liberals allowed to say that Bush knew about 9/11 ahead of time, yet nobody pushes these liberals for facts to support their statements? Isn't it extremely anti-American for liberals to claim that the president is a treasonous murderer without any facts at all? Why do we treat liberal like children and laugh off all their baseless, illogical, anti-American rants instead of challenging them? In 95% of the countries on this planet they would have been shot or at least jailed by now, yet in America we respect liberals so much that we won't even intellectually challenge their anti-Americanism for fear of hurting their feelings.

Answer 1

They should be challenged for what they say. I haven't even heard of a liberal and i have no reason now to ever really respect them

Answer 2

Well, to be honest, there WERE those memos talking about how to sell off Iraqi oil fields BEFORE the war started...makes me think they were eye-balling that oil way too far in advance for it to be mean NOTHING.
I don't think Bush knew exactly what would happen on 9/11...I think he didn't do enough to prevent it, but then again so did previous administrations.
It is NOT NOT NOT true that liberals would've been shot in 95% of countries, only an ignorant American who has never left this country would say something that blantantly WRONG.
I agree that people should support thier arguments, but you should be more careful about what you say.

Answer 3

Let me try this out on you. Yes, unfortunately there are a lot of emotional liberals out there that make rediculus claims like we went to Iraq for oil. Their hearts are in the right place but not their brains. The real reasons for why we went to Iraq are unknown outside of Bush & Cheney. We know now it wasn't for Al-qeda, because there are more of them there now than before the war. We know it wasn't for WMD because there weren't any. My opinion about why we are in Iraq is that W wanted to secure a political legacy in the middle east, started by daddy in '91 and brought to fruition by sonnyboy. My question to you is how can you be supportive of an obviously corrupt and incompetent POS like Mr. Bush. The blind faith that conservative have in idiots that wrap themselves up in the flag w/o reason or facts is probably the greatest problem our country faces. Most historians agree that W will go down as the worst presiddent in history. W's incompetence makes Warren G. Harding (the current worst president) look like a Nobel prize winner. 3500 US soliders killed for nothing in a war that was unnessecary. How about this for some facts to back up what I say. The US military is now weaker, more over-stretched, less prepared, and more unable to respond to new threats than any time since 1940. How is it that conservatives who claim to be sooooo pro-military turn a blind eye to the fact that 3500 died and many thousands more are maimed, blinded, or lost limbs, and then treats them like pure **** once they come home? Conservative patriots, conservatives obviously have some other agenda besides what is best for the US, so to call conservatives patriots is more than a little contradictory. I'm a flag burning patriot and I truly want what's best for our country. BRING OUR BOYS HOME!!! or at least re-deploy them to Afghanistan where the people who actually attacked us are. No more bug hunts for rich boys who get deferments to play jet jocky while there are wars to be fought.

Answer 4

Are we in iraq for oil? can you prove we are not? No you can't. Cheney had a "secret" meeting before attacking iraq and a map was drawn of oil fields in iraq. Judicial watch has the document for you to see. All the other reasons for attacking iraq have been false. So why did we go into iraq?

Answer 5

We know that we could provide you with facts upon facts backed up with reliable sources but you would find some way to ignore them and/or not bother reading them.

So... Why waste our time? The best we can do is maybe raise questions and perhaps inspire enough curiosity from ya'll to research "these crazy theories" for yourself. That way, maybe you can change some of our minds if you find out something different or contradicting.

Answer 6

"i've got encountered homosexuality firsthand for truly it sluggish" i assume you're vacationing too many gay bars, then. Gays are an exceedingly small subset of the inhabitants, and a good smaller subset are the flowery stereotype portrayed interior the media. i've got lived in a rustic the place gay marriage is legal all my existence, and that i've got basically met one or 2 people who made it obvious they are gay. The vast majority are basically inner maximum folk like everyone else who basically decide directly to stay their lives.

Answer 7

I've seen many bizarre statements from you conservatives without facts to back it up. Look at some of the answers from some of your fellow cons here, for instance- nothing but childish name calling.

Answer 8

Ah, our favourite troll has surfaced again. Since when did you all of a sudden start advocating the use of facts to back up assertions?

Too bad you have trouble taking your own advice: "Why do liberals hate america?" "Will militant liberalism cease to end?" "Liberals are evil...liberals are traitors...yadda yadda yadda..."

Answer 9

Even though you disagree with those statements (and honestly, I don't believe them all either), thank the Constitution for the 1st amendment. Our country is made stronger through differing opinions, even when those opinions aren't pro government.

Answer 10

They're called opinions. There is no requirement to support opinions with fact in order to be allowed to state them.