Difference between revisions of "Template:Examples of Liberal Bias"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(never -> rarely per suggestion on talk page)
(unjustified -> unsubstantiated, as suggested on talk page)
(47 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
==Examples of Liberal Style==
 
==Examples of Liberal Style==
  
The style of a [[liberal]] often includes these characteristics:
+
The style of a [[liberal]] often includes these basic characteristics, which include techniques to mislead or simply advance self-serving goals:
  
#insistence on having the last word in a discussion or debate, or [[last wordism]]
+
#a never-ending craving for attention (e.g., [[Hollywood]] types and politicians [[Bill Clinton]] and [[Chuck Schumer]])
 +
#a high word-to-substance ratio, as in using many words to say little of substance (e.g., [[Obama]] and the [[90/10 rule]] here)
 +
#interrupt others more frequently than conservatives do, reflecting how liberals rely on [[censorship]] to persuade (as [[Obama]] and [[Biden]] did in the debates)
 +
#obsession with the media, and even with the few [[conservatives]] in the media
 +
#feign offense as a way to silence criticism, or censor prayer and [[conservative]] viewpoints (e.g., [[ACLU]])
 +
#pretend to know more than one does; [[Isaac Newton]] admitted that he knew almost nothing, yet a liberal pretends to know much (e.g., [[Al Gore]])
 +
#use a [[double standard]]: racial remarks by liberals (e.g., [[Joe Biden]] or [[Hillary Clinton]]) are just fine, but extreme abuse greets any conservative for that
 +
#insist that theories a liberal likes (e.g., [[evolution]], man-made [[global warming]]) are somehow ''objective'' and indisputable, while what a liberal dislikes (e.g., [[conservatism]]) is ''subjective''
 +
#unjustified praise of [[atheists]] and other [[liberals]] as "geniuses", despite little achievement
 +
 
 +
Liberal style also includes these additional characteristics:
 +
 
 +
#support of greater bureaucratic control rather than more competition to address problems
 +
#demands answers to questions, but after receiving answers then the liberal himself tries to avoid answering similar questions<ref>See, e.g., the stunt pulled by [[Clarence Darrow]] in the [[Scopes Trial]].</ref>
 +
#refuses to admit the truth in debate, even if a conservative compromises in a conciliatory manner
 +
#like to use the phrase "reflects poorly on the site" when talking about the liberal articles on Conservapedia <ref>do a search on [[Special:Search|"reflects poorly"]]</ref>
 +
#uses the term "controversial" to describe what he opposes (e.g., [[classroom prayer]]), but not to describe what he supports (e.g., [[theory of evolution]])
 +
#a lack of originality and a predominance of copying and imitating
 +
#virtually never criticize hateful comments or behavior by a fellow [[liberal]]
 +
#like to use the phrase "Silence Speaks Volumes" [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/28/us/28vigil.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/U/Urbina,%20Ian] [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-lois-capps/when-silence-speaks-volum_b_98601.html] [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/sen-mitch-mcconnell-his_b_38699.html]
 +
#call something disliked a "conspiracy theory," but don't use that term against wacky [[liberal]] theories like [[global warming]]
 +
#respond with "sigh" when presented with repeated examples of harm caused by [[liberal]] culture, yet persist in denying the harm despite overwhelming evidence
 +
#thinking in terms of what someone likes or doesn't like, or has or doesn't have, or belongs or doesn't belong
 +
#declaring that one is insulted as a response to an argument<ref>"One of [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]'s most prominent black supporters [Bob Johnson] said Sunday ''he'' was insulted by the characterization by rival [[Barack Obama]]'s presidential campaign of ''her'' remarks about the civil rights movement."  [http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/johnson_obama_bet/2008/01/13/64032.html]</ref>
 +
#unsubstantiated claims of expertise, authority or knowledge
 +
#insistence on talking more and having the last word in a discussion or debate, or [[last wordism]]
 
#attempting to portray [[conservatives]] as callous or uncaring; bait them into making insensitive remarks; falsely describing them as angry
 
#attempting to portray [[conservatives]] as callous or uncaring; bait them into making insensitive remarks; falsely describing them as angry
#calling others "extremist"
+
#calling others "extremist" or "racist"
 +
#an obsession with and exaggeration of artificial scarcity, such as wealth, rather than focusing on creating more
 +
#ignoring or failing to recognize abstract concepts and denying obvious correlations between liberal beliefs and destructive behavior
 
#deny the obvious and embrace the implausible; see examples of [[liberal denial]]
 
#deny the obvious and embrace the implausible; see examples of [[liberal denial]]
 
#attempting to appear smarter than others, when often the opposite is true
 
#attempting to appear smarter than others, when often the opposite is true
 
#attempting to appear more reasonable than others, when often the opposite is true
 
#attempting to appear more reasonable than others, when often the opposite is true
 
#overreliance on [[hearsay]], such as the false claim that most support [[evolution]]
 
#overreliance on [[hearsay]], such as the false claim that most support [[evolution]]
#unjustified praise of [[atheists]] and other [[liberals]] as "geniuses", despite little achievement
 
 
#denial of accountability
 
#denial of accountability
 
#believing that bureaucratic honors or appointments are meaningful achievements, as fights over political office
 
#believing that bureaucratic honors or appointments are meaningful achievements, as fights over political office
Line 17: Line 43:
 
#calling conservative free speech "hate" speech <ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia_talk:Deletion_Policy&rcid=279869 Before the article was deleted, it said "New page: American Taliban You site is nothing but a Democratic hate site".</ref>
 
#calling conservative free speech "hate" speech <ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia_talk:Deletion_Policy&rcid=279869 Before the article was deleted, it said "New page: American Taliban You site is nothing but a Democratic hate site".</ref>
 
#calling conservative humor "unprofessional and meaningless, and degrades the quality of your encyclopedia." <ref>--Tmcfulton 17:36, 13 November 2007 (EST) [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page#Democratic_National_Convention]</ref>
 
#calling conservative humor "unprofessional and meaningless, and degrades the quality of your encyclopedia." <ref>--Tmcfulton 17:36, 13 November 2007 (EST) [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page#Democratic_National_Convention]</ref>
#pretending to know more than he does; [[Isaac Newton]] admitted that he knew almost nothing, yet a [[liberal]] rarely admits that and often pretends to know more than he does
 
 
#resistance to quantifying things, such as [[liberal bias]] or [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness|openmindedness]]
 
#resistance to quantifying things, such as [[liberal bias]] or [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness|openmindedness]]
#preference for obscenity and profanity <ref> [http://newsbusters.org/node/11171 When It Comes to Profanity, the Left Can't Help Itself] by [[Matthew Sheffield]] at [[NewsBusters]] </ref>
+
#preference for obscenity and profanity<ref> [http://newsbusters.org/node/11171 When It Comes to Profanity, the Left Can't Help Itself] by [[Matthew Sheffield]] at [[NewsBusters]] </ref>
#over-reliance on [[mockery]] <ref>Your use of the first amendment sounds like [[Liberal_logic|liberal logic]]. Careful, you're on thin ice trying to utilize that amendment. The only amendment that counts is the second. For the rest of the Constitution, just refer to the Ten Commandments for everything you need to know. --[[User:Jdellaro|Jdellaro]] 14:18, 20 February 2008 (EST) [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=prev&oldid=391932]</ref> <ref>"adolescent berating of Liberals" [[User:Graham|Graham]] 07:47, 23 September 2007 (EDT)  
+
#over-reliance on [[mockery]] <ref>Your use of the first amendment sounds like [[Liberal_logic|liberal logic]]. Careful, you're on thin ice trying to utilize that amendment. The only amendment that counts is the second. For the rest of the Constitution, just refer to the Ten Commandments for everything you need to know. --[[User:Jdellaro|Jdellaro]] 14:18, 20 February 2008 (EST) [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=prev&oldid=391932]</ref> <ref>"adolescent berating of Liberals" [[Talk:Main_Page/archive23#Burma|User:Graham 07:47, 23 September 2007 (EDT)]]</ref> <ref>"I would appreciate a little less paranoia'' [[User:Graham|Graham]] 09:07, 23 September 2007 (EDT)
[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&curid=45295&diff=298334&oldid=298314#Burma]</ref> <ref>"I would appreciate a little less paranoia'' [[User:Graham|Graham]] 09:07, 23 September 2007 (EDT)
+
 
[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&curid=45295&diff=298366&oldid=298314#.22General_Betray_Us.22]</ref> <ref>"IN fact, this should be regarded as 'idiot's style'" Graham 08:26, 23 September 2007 (EDT)
 
[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&curid=45295&diff=298366&oldid=298314#.22General_Betray_Us.22]</ref> <ref>"IN fact, this should be regarded as 'idiot's style'" Graham 08:26, 23 September 2007 (EDT)
 
[http://www.conservapedia.com/Template_talk:Examples_of_liberal_bias#Its_just_funny]</ref> <ref>"The toilets overflowed at school today...if only the [[liberal|liberals]] had allowed religion in school, this never would have happened." BillOhannity on October 1, 2007</ref>
 
[http://www.conservapedia.com/Template_talk:Examples_of_liberal_bias#Its_just_funny]</ref> <ref>"The toilets overflowed at school today...if only the [[liberal|liberals]] had allowed religion in school, this never would have happened." BillOhannity on October 1, 2007</ref>
 
#over-reliance on accusations of hypocrisy <ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24193 God and the Presidential Election], [[Bill O'Reilly]], [[Human Events]], December 29, 2007</ref>
 
#over-reliance on accusations of hypocrisy <ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24193 God and the Presidential Election], [[Bill O'Reilly]], [[Human Events]], December 29, 2007</ref>
 
#hostility to [[faith]]
 
#hostility to [[faith]]
#insistence on censoring certain speech, such as a description of [[The Flood]] or even teaching children about a massive flood, despite its acceptance by a majority of Americans{{fact}}
+
#insistence on censoring certain speech, such as a description of [[The Flood]] or even teaching children about a massive flood, despite its acceptance by a majority of Americans
 
#believing that the education of children is for [[liberals]] to control
 
#believing that the education of children is for [[liberals]] to control
 
#believing that [[conservatives]] will fail, and refusing to accept when they succeed, as when [[George W. Bush]] won in 2000
 
#believing that [[conservatives]] will fail, and refusing to accept when they succeed, as when [[George W. Bush]] won in 2000
Line 33: Line 57:
 
#draw an analogy between opponents and racists, no matter how illogical
 
#draw an analogy between opponents and racists, no matter how illogical
 
#claim that science supports their position, and ignore any evidence that shows their position to be false
 
#claim that science supports their position, and ignore any evidence that shows their position to be false
#often declare that an adversary should be "ashamed of himself," while rarely saying that about a fellow [[liberal]] (such as [[Ted Kennedy]] or [[Bill Clinton]])<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page#I.27m_Done Porthos on 27 September 2007 </ref> <ref>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&curid=47632&diff=327149&oldid=326555&rcid=353756] RidiculouslyLiberal, November 3, 2007</ref>
+
#often declare that an adversary should be "ashamed of himself," while rarely saying that about a supportive co-[[liberal]] (such as [[Ted Kennedy]])<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page#I.27m_Done Porthos on 27 September 2007 </ref> <ref>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&curid=47632&diff=327149&oldid=326555&rcid=353756] RidiculouslyLiberal, November 3, 2007</ref>
#willing to give away everything held dear by the majority to avoid serious conflict (such as the [[appeasement]] of Prime Minister [[Neville Chamberlain]], or those [[liberal]]s who wish to pull our troops out of Iraq, and embolden the [[terrorist]]s).
+
#willing to give away everything held dear by the majority to avoid serious conflict (such [[liberal]]s who wish to pull our troops out of Iraq, and embolden the [[terrorist]]s).
 
#using [[hyperbole]] instead of fact-based logic in an attempt to tug at people's emotions rather than appealing to their sense of reason.<ref>[http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/11/30/MNGVNA3PE11.DTL Anti-evolution teachings gain foothold in U.S. schools]</ref>
 
#using [[hyperbole]] instead of fact-based logic in an attempt to tug at people's emotions rather than appealing to their sense of reason.<ref>[http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/11/30/MNGVNA3PE11.DTL Anti-evolution teachings gain foothold in U.S. schools]</ref>
 
#often long-winded and verbose, and in debates [[liberals]] often consume more than their fair share of the alloted time, leaving less time for the other side.
 
#often long-winded and verbose, and in debates [[liberals]] often consume more than their fair share of the alloted time, leaving less time for the other side.
Line 40: Line 64:
 
#attempting to control the definitions of words through [[political correctness]].  For example, referring to [[Israel]] as "occupied territories" or suggesting that Al-Qaeda terrorists in Iraq are not part of Al-Qaeda.
 
#attempting to control the definitions of words through [[political correctness]].  For example, referring to [[Israel]] as "occupied territories" or suggesting that Al-Qaeda terrorists in Iraq are not part of Al-Qaeda.
 
#Dismissing legitimate criticism as "a joke" <ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Essay:Liberal_Style&oldid=266960]</ref>
 
#Dismissing legitimate criticism as "a joke" <ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Essay:Liberal_Style&oldid=266960]</ref>
#Denying something widely known to be true but difficult to prove, such as observing that men are far more likely to work in gas stations than women.{{fact}}
+
#Denying something widely known to be true but difficult to prove, such as observing that men are far more likely to work in gas stations than women.
 
#Will often deny being a [[liberal]], or will claim to be a "true conservative", while spouting liberal and democratic talking points and criticizing basic conservative beliefs and principles.
 
#Will often deny being a [[liberal]], or will claim to be a "true conservative", while spouting liberal and democratic talking points and criticizing basic conservative beliefs and principles.
 
#using non sequiturs in argument, such as responding to the point above that [[liberals]] over-rely on accusations of hypocrisy by citing an example of conservatives' observing [[liberal hypocrisy]].  But their example does not help their argument.  Quite the contrary, use of that example tends to prove that [[liberals]] do over-rely on accusations of hypocrisy (relativism).  Think about that.
 
#using non sequiturs in argument, such as responding to the point above that [[liberals]] over-rely on accusations of hypocrisy by citing an example of conservatives' observing [[liberal hypocrisy]].  But their example does not help their argument.  Quite the contrary, use of that example tends to prove that [[liberals]] do over-rely on accusations of hypocrisy (relativism).  Think about that.
Line 47: Line 71:
 
#can't understand the difference between identity (e.g., color of one's skin), perspective (e.g., Judeo-[[Christian]]) and bias (e.g., [[Bias in Wikipedia]]).
 
#can't understand the difference between identity (e.g., color of one's skin), perspective (e.g., Judeo-[[Christian]]) and bias (e.g., [[Bias in Wikipedia]]).
 
#inability or unwillingness to differentiate between genuine conservative arguments and parodies of conservative arguments.
 
#inability or unwillingness to differentiate between genuine conservative arguments and parodies of conservative arguments.
#"Contrariness is creativity to the untalented" - Dennis Miller's general observation about liberal behavior.{{fact}}
+
#"Contrariness is creativity to the untalented" - Dennis Miller's general observation about liberal behavior.
#Assuming criminals are on the other side of the political fence, without evidence.
+
 
#calling the use of the term '''[[liberal]]''' when used in a derogatory context "stupid"<ref>"Stop candying Liberal around like that... It just looks stupid." Graham 19:55, 22 September 2007 (EDT) [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page/archive26#.22General_Betray_Us.22]</ref>
 
#calling the use of the term '''[[liberal]]''' when used in a derogatory context "stupid"<ref>"Stop candying Liberal around like that... It just looks stupid." Graham 19:55, 22 September 2007 (EDT) [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page/archive26#.22General_Betray_Us.22]</ref>
 
#denial that people can grow out of a [[liberal]] viewpoint, such as [[atheism]]
 
#denial that people can grow out of a [[liberal]] viewpoint, such as [[atheism]]
 +
 +
== See also ==
 +
 +
[[Hidden from the public by the liberal media]]
  
 
==References==
 
==References==
 
{{Reflist|2}}
 
{{Reflist|2}}
  
[[category:essay]]
+
[[Category:Essays]]
 
[[category:deceit]]
 
[[category:deceit]]

Revision as of 21:12, August 5, 2016

Examples of Liberal Style

The style of a liberal often includes these basic characteristics, which include techniques to mislead or simply advance self-serving goals:

  1. a never-ending craving for attention (e.g., Hollywood types and politicians Bill Clinton and Chuck Schumer)
  2. a high word-to-substance ratio, as in using many words to say little of substance (e.g., Obama and the 90/10 rule here)
  3. interrupt others more frequently than conservatives do, reflecting how liberals rely on censorship to persuade (as Obama and Biden did in the debates)
  4. obsession with the media, and even with the few conservatives in the media
  5. feign offense as a way to silence criticism, or censor prayer and conservative viewpoints (e.g., ACLU)
  6. pretend to know more than one does; Isaac Newton admitted that he knew almost nothing, yet a liberal pretends to know much (e.g., Al Gore)
  7. use a double standard: racial remarks by liberals (e.g., Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton) are just fine, but extreme abuse greets any conservative for that
  8. insist that theories a liberal likes (e.g., evolution, man-made global warming) are somehow objective and indisputable, while what a liberal dislikes (e.g., conservatism) is subjective
  9. unjustified praise of atheists and other liberals as "geniuses", despite little achievement

Liberal style also includes these additional characteristics:

  1. support of greater bureaucratic control rather than more competition to address problems
  2. demands answers to questions, but after receiving answers then the liberal himself tries to avoid answering similar questions[1]
  3. refuses to admit the truth in debate, even if a conservative compromises in a conciliatory manner
  4. like to use the phrase "reflects poorly on the site" when talking about the liberal articles on Conservapedia [2]
  5. uses the term "controversial" to describe what he opposes (e.g., classroom prayer), but not to describe what he supports (e.g., theory of evolution)
  6. a lack of originality and a predominance of copying and imitating
  7. virtually never criticize hateful comments or behavior by a fellow liberal
  8. like to use the phrase "Silence Speaks Volumes" [8] [9] [10]
  9. call something disliked a "conspiracy theory," but don't use that term against wacky liberal theories like global warming
  10. respond with "sigh" when presented with repeated examples of harm caused by liberal culture, yet persist in denying the harm despite overwhelming evidence
  11. thinking in terms of what someone likes or doesn't like, or has or doesn't have, or belongs or doesn't belong
  12. declaring that one is insulted as a response to an argument[3]
  13. unsubstantiated claims of expertise, authority or knowledge
  14. insistence on talking more and having the last word in a discussion or debate, or last wordism
  15. attempting to portray conservatives as callous or uncaring; bait them into making insensitive remarks; falsely describing them as angry
  16. calling others "extremist" or "racist"
  17. an obsession with and exaggeration of artificial scarcity, such as wealth, rather than focusing on creating more
  18. ignoring or failing to recognize abstract concepts and denying obvious correlations between liberal beliefs and destructive behavior
  19. deny the obvious and embrace the implausible; see examples of liberal denial
  20. attempting to appear smarter than others, when often the opposite is true
  21. attempting to appear more reasonable than others, when often the opposite is true
  22. overreliance on hearsay, such as the false claim that most support evolution
  23. denial of accountability
  24. believing that bureaucratic honors or appointments are meaningful achievements, as fights over political office
  25. insisting on a mindless equality, as in "if you have an entry for Beethoven, then you must allow entries for vulgar rap artists!"
  26. concealing one's liberal views rather than admitting them
  27. calling conservative free speech "hate" speech [4]
  28. calling conservative humor "unprofessional and meaningless, and degrades the quality of your encyclopedia." [5]
  29. resistance to quantifying things, such as liberal bias or openmindedness
  30. preference for obscenity and profanity[6]
  31. over-reliance on mockery [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]
  32. over-reliance on accusations of hypocrisy [12]
  33. hostility to faith
  34. insistence on censoring certain speech, such as a description of The Flood or even teaching children about a massive flood, despite its acceptance by a majority of Americans
  35. believing that the education of children is for liberals to control
  36. believing that conservatives will fail, and refusing to accept when they succeed, as when George W. Bush won in 2000
  37. reluctance to admit that anything is morally wrong
  38. bullying conservatives who disagree with liberal views
  39. draw an analogy between opponents and racists, no matter how illogical
  40. claim that science supports their position, and ignore any evidence that shows their position to be false
  41. often declare that an adversary should be "ashamed of himself," while rarely saying that about a supportive co-liberal (such as Ted Kennedy)[13] [14]
  42. willing to give away everything held dear by the majority to avoid serious conflict (such liberals who wish to pull our troops out of Iraq, and embolden the terrorists).
  43. using hyperbole instead of fact-based logic in an attempt to tug at people's emotions rather than appealing to their sense of reason.[15]
  44. often long-winded and verbose, and in debates liberals often consume more than their fair share of the alloted time, leaving less time for the other side.
  45. attempting to control the rules of evidence used in a debate. For example, claiming that Young Earth Creationism is false, and then refusing to allow supporting evidence by claiming that the scientists are religiously motivated.
  46. attempting to control the definitions of words through political correctness. For example, referring to Israel as "occupied territories" or suggesting that Al-Qaeda terrorists in Iraq are not part of Al-Qaeda.
  47. Dismissing legitimate criticism as "a joke" [16]
  48. Denying something widely known to be true but difficult to prove, such as observing that men are far more likely to work in gas stations than women.
  49. Will often deny being a liberal, or will claim to be a "true conservative", while spouting liberal and democratic talking points and criticizing basic conservative beliefs and principles.
  50. using non sequiturs in argument, such as responding to the point above that liberals over-rely on accusations of hypocrisy by citing an example of conservatives' observing liberal hypocrisy. But their example does not help their argument. Quite the contrary, use of that example tends to prove that liberals do over-rely on accusations of hypocrisy (relativism). Think about that.
  51. selectively citing the Bible when convenient, even though they hold much of it in disdain.
  52. silly demands for apologies.[17]
  53. can't understand the difference between identity (e.g., color of one's skin), perspective (e.g., Judeo-Christian) and bias (e.g., Bias in Wikipedia).
  54. inability or unwillingness to differentiate between genuine conservative arguments and parodies of conservative arguments.
  55. "Contrariness is creativity to the untalented" - Dennis Miller's general observation about liberal behavior.
  56. calling the use of the term liberal when used in a derogatory context "stupid"[18]
  57. denial that people can grow out of a liberal viewpoint, such as atheism

See also

Hidden from the public by the liberal media

References

  1. See, e.g., the stunt pulled by Clarence Darrow in the Scopes Trial.
  2. do a search on "reflects poorly"
  3. "One of Hillary Rodham Clinton's most prominent black supporters [Bob Johnson] said Sunday he was insulted by the characterization by rival Barack Obama's presidential campaign of her remarks about the civil rights movement." [1]
  4. http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia_talk:Deletion_Policy&rcid=279869 Before the article was deleted, it said "New page: American Taliban You site is nothing but a Democratic hate site".
  5. --Tmcfulton 17:36, 13 November 2007 (EST) [2]
  6. When It Comes to Profanity, the Left Can't Help Itself by Matthew Sheffield at NewsBusters
  7. Your use of the first amendment sounds like liberal logic. Careful, you're on thin ice trying to utilize that amendment. The only amendment that counts is the second. For the rest of the Constitution, just refer to the Ten Commandments for everything you need to know. --Jdellaro 14:18, 20 February 2008 (EST) [3]
  8. "adolescent berating of Liberals" User:Graham 07:47, 23 September 2007 (EDT)
  9. "I would appreciate a little less paranoia Graham 09:07, 23 September 2007 (EDT) [4]
  10. "IN fact, this should be regarded as 'idiot's style'" Graham 08:26, 23 September 2007 (EDT) [5]
  11. "The toilets overflowed at school today...if only the liberals had allowed religion in school, this never would have happened." BillOhannity on October 1, 2007
  12. God and the Presidential Election, Bill O'Reilly, Human Events, December 29, 2007
  13. http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page#I.27m_Done Porthos on 27 September 2007
  14. [6] RidiculouslyLiberal, November 3, 2007
  15. Anti-evolution teachings gain foothold in U.S. schools
  16. http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Essay:Liberal_Style&oldid=266960]
  17. Senate Condemns "General Betray Us" Ad
  18. "Stop candying Liberal around like that... It just looks stupid." Graham 19:55, 22 September 2007 (EDT) [7]