Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Liberal tricks

2008-07-14T04:20:07Z

PlausibleF: How about that. Bit of irony on the part of the guy who told me. Now people will be wary.

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

# insert a [[liberal]] assumption into a question, as illustrated by the classic "when did you stop beating your wife?!"
# distract and disrupt reasoned discussion, as in stating irrelevant claims, inconsequential tales of personal experience, or false outrage
# claim expertise beyond one's area of expertise, as in a "Dr." or professor implying that he is an expert in an area beyond his specialty
# make arguments that have superficial appeal to the dimwitted, but are actually nonsensical and probably not believed by the liberal himself<ref>For example, one might conclude that [[Michael Moore]] makes silly statements designed to appeal to the less intelligent.</ref>
# pretend that liberals do not have a political point of view, but are just being reasonable<ref>For example, people who insist on promoting [[abortion]] with mandatory taxpayer funding claim they are merely "pro-choice".</ref>
# exaggerate praise for fellow liberals;<ref>For example, liberal praise by law professors for [[Barack Obama]] borders on the absurd.</ref> pretend that atheism equals intelligence
# in court decisions, hold in favor of the [[conservative]] side by using [[liberal]] reasons that will be cited for liberal outcomes in ''future'' cases<ref>''See, e.g.'', ''[[Everson v. Board of Education|Everson v. Board of Ed.]]''</ref>
# [[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 such as pre-marital sex, worshipping many gods/no gods, homosexuality, or abortion)
# everyone else supposedly believes in something so it must be right
# your [[parent]]s aren't cool; [[Hollywood values]] are cool; [[professor values]] are brilliant; blindly follow your government
# 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
# call someone a [[racist]] if he criticizes a ''liberal'' having a different skin color
# demonize [[conservative]]s and pretend they don't care about regular people
# 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'').
# the poor are blameless because they have nothing; the rich are to blame because they have everything.
# accusing conservatives of libel, but forgetting that truth is the perfect defense against libel.
# to discount other point of views, [[liberals]] use comparisons of other known "wrong actions" to justify their supposed correct stance. <ref>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/04/07/hanson-earth-at-crisis-point/ , AFP Hansen, Earth At A Crisis Point, April 7, 2008</ref>
# inserting false information, usually lewd into a respected work or group of works.

(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''' #15 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.

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

{{liberalism}}

Kyoto Protocol

2008-07-14T04:17:28Z

PlausibleF: Just noticed. No references

The '''Kyoto Protocol''' (named after the [[Japan|Japanese]] city in which it was drafted) is a 1997 liberal treaty backed by the [[United Nations]] concerning [[greenhouse gas]] emissions. It commits 39 participating industrial nations to a combined 5% reduction (from 1990 levels) in climate-damaging emission by the year 2012.

The stated goal of the treaty is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the signed countries, which supporters say is crucially needed to prevent a global environmental tragedy. Opponents of the treaty argue that ratifying the treaty would greatly harm many US industries while ignoring other high polluting, developing nations such as [[China]] and [[India]].<ref>[[USA Today]], [http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-02-15-kyoto-csm_x.htm ''Kyoto Era Begins''].</ref> For these reasons, the [[United States]], while it negotiated the treaty during the [[Bill Clinton|Clinton administration]], has only signed the protocol, but has adamantly refused to ratify it. The Senate voted 95-0 not even to bring ratification up for a vote.

The Kyoto Protocol became effective on February 16, 2005, requiring the [[European Union]] to reduce its average emissions between the years 2008 and 2012 by 8% relative to 1990 levels.

==Links==

*[http://www.cnsnews.com/SpecialReports/archive/200412/SPE20041217a.html Greens Concede Kyoto Will Not Impact 'Global Warming']

[http://unfccc.int/essential_background/kyoto_protocol/items/1678.php The official text for the Kyoto Protocol]

==References==
<references/>

==See also==
*[[Global warming controversy]]
*[[Socialism]]
*[[Environmentalism]]
[[category:liberalism]]
[[category:politics]]

Kyoto Protocol

2008-07-14T04:13:52Z

PlausibleF:

The '''Kyoto Protocol''' (named after the [[Japan|Japanese]] city in which it was drafted) is a 1997 liberal treaty backed by the [[United Nations]] concerning [[greenhouse gas]] emissions. It commits 39 participating industrial nations to a combined 5% reduction (from 1990 levels) in climate-damaging emission by the year 2012.

The stated goal of the treaty is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the signed countries, which supporters say is crucially needed to prevent a global environmental tragedy. Opponents of the treaty argue that ratifying the treaty would greatly harm many US industries while ignoring other high polluting, developing nations such as [[China]] and [[India]].<ref>[[USA Today]], [http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-02-15-kyoto-csm_x.htm ''Kyoto Era Begins''].</ref> For these reasons, the [[United States]], while it negotiated the treaty during the [[Bill Clinton|Clinton administration]], has only signed the protocol, but has adamantly refused to ratify it. The Senate voted 95-0 not even to bring ratification up for a vote.

The Kyoto Protocol became effective on February 16, 2005, requiring the [[European Union]] to reduce its average emissions between the years 2008 and 2012 by 8% relative to 1990 levels.

==Links==

*[http://www.cnsnews.com/SpecialReports/archive/200412/SPE20041217a.html Greens Concede Kyoto Will Not Impact 'Global Warming']

[http://unfccc.int/essential_background/kyoto_protocol/items/1678.php The official text for the Kyoto Protocol]

==See also==
*[[Global warming controversy]]
*[[Socialism]]
*[[Environmentalism]]
[[category:liberalism]]
[[category:politics]]

Liberal tricks

2008-07-14T04:06:49Z

PlausibleF:

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

# insert a [[liberal]] assumption into a question, as illustrated by the classic "when did you stop beating your wife?!"
# distract and disrupt reasoned discussion, as in stating irrelevant claims, inconsequential tales of personal experience, or false outrage
# claim expertise beyond one's area of expertise, as in a "Dr." or professor implying that he is an expert in an area beyond his specialty
# make arguments that have superficial appeal to the dimwitted, but are actually nonsensical and probably not believed by the liberal himself<ref>For example, one might conclude that [[Michael Moore]] makes silly statements designed to appeal to the less intelligent.</ref>
# pretend that liberals do not have a political point of view, but are just being reasonable<ref>For example, people who insist on promoting [[abortion]] with mandatory taxpayer funding claim they are merely "pro-choice".</ref>
# exaggerate praise for fellow liberals;<ref>For example, liberal praise by law professors for [[Barack Obama]] borders on the absurd.</ref> pretend that atheism equals intelligence
# in court decisions, hold in favor of the [[conservative]] side by using [[liberal]] reasons that will be cited for liberal outcomes in ''future'' cases<ref>''See, e.g.'', ''[[Everson v. Board of Education|Everson v. Board of Ed.]]''</ref>
# [[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 such as pre-marital sex, worshipping many gods/no gods, homosexuality, or abortion)
# everyone else supposedly believes in something so it must be right
# your [[parent]]s aren't cool; [[Hollywood values]] are cool; [[professor values]] are brilliant; blindly follow your government
# 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
# call someone a [[racist]] if he criticizes a ''liberal'' having a different skin color
# demonize [[conservative]]s and pretend they don't care about regular people
# 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'').
# the poor are blameless because they have nothing; the rich are to blame because they have everything.
# accusing conservatives of libel, but forgetting that truth is the perfect defense against libel.
# to discount other point of views, [[liberals]] use comparisons of other known "wrong actions" to justify their supposed correct stance. <ref>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/04/07/hanson-earth-at-crisis-point/ , AFP Hansen, Earth At A Crisis Point, April 7, 2008</ref>
# in a move informally refered to as a '''donkey punch''', the liberal will attempt to insert false information, usually lewd into a respected work or group of works.

(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''' #15 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.

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

{{liberalism}}