IHL
01-03-2005, 11:52 PM
This email is from Robert the liberal. All of my words are in blue to help follow the flow of the exchange.
From: Robert
Sent: Tue 8/10/2004 9:33 AM
To: IHL
Subject: Hating Liberals
Well i must say it was only a matter of time when i type in the domain, "I HATE LIBERALS", a website would finally be created. I gotta give it to you right-wingers, you're very persistent.
Since i found you, i must ask;
1) What is a liberal as it is define in the dictionary?
2) Do you really hate people of like me, or does it bother you that individuals like Joseph Wilson, Ted Kennedy, Paul O'neill and Michael Moore simply question the integrity and truthfulness of a administration you blindly support?
3) Why do you sit up on your website and write how "liberals are losing their minds" and yet Vice President Cheney telling Leahy to f*** off and focusing Kerry's credibility in the military while not mentioning anything about Bush going AWOL from the Texas National Guard between 1971 and 1972?
And finally since you despise liberals so much, what would you like to see happen to us. Actually let me rephrase the question if you were lost and needed help and you approached me for directions, would you first ask for my political affiliation? If you own a restaurant I wanted to eat at your establishment would you not serve me because through a conversation, you found i am left leaning. Would you ask for my political affiliation before you seat me?
Segregation, Racism Homophobia and Sexism is a result hate, and if are you willing to support minimizing certain individuals livelihood because you hate their opinions?
If so what makes you any different from a Saddam Hussein or other dictators who use their power to suppress all forms of opinions?As far as I'm concern your use of Old Glory is no different from a KKK burning a cross or Nazi using swastika( i probably misspelled it) Just something to think about?
Robert
IHL <IHL@IHateLiberals.com> wrote:
Robert,
Let me answer a few of your questions.
1.) The meaning of the term liberal as defined in the dictionary is irrelevant. Many words may have different meanings when taken literally. We know what liberals are in the context of how they are referred to on this site.
2.) As I said on my site, it's not liberals I hate so much as liberalism. I do not blindly support this president. There are several issues I disagree with him on - campaign finance reform, prescription drugs, stem cell research, to name a few.
3.)It was a private discussion while the senate was not in session.
Many of your points are not logical. You mention segregation for example. I have never condoned segregation. I'm not attempting to supress someone's opinion. I disagree with their opinion and I am pointing out why and expressing my own. If you see this as segregation, then that is your problem.
And then you ask "what makes you any different from a Saddam Hussein ", yet those same liberals would never do anything to stop them. In fact, they complain when Hussein is removed from power. I am not suppressing opinion. I am stating my own - there is a huge difference.
I'm glad you stopped by the site. I don't know that you'll ever come back but if you do, I welcome any additional comments you have. And remember, my site is an attempt to counter the onslaught of liberal philosophy from the media.
IHL
From: Robert
1.) The meaning of the term liberal as defined in the dictionary is irrelevant. Many words may have different meanings when taken literally. We know what liberals are in the context of how they are referred to on this site.
Sorry but your spin is not going to cut it with me: Since your site is dedicated to hating liberals and what they stand for, I would advise you to know the true definition of the word before engaging in mindless rhetoric. Answer my question; WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF LIBERAL AS DEFINE IN DICTIONARY AND NOT YOU BELIEVE IT TO BE. Get back to me when you do.
Joseph Wilson and Michael Moore are not questioning integrity. They are documented and proven liars. If you question the integrity of someone, based on lies, then yes, I have a problem with that.
First of all Joseph Wilson was proving the Bush's reason for invading Iraq were baseless lies IE weapons of mass destruction, nuclear program and its connection to Al Queda and 9-11. All that was brought out in the 9-11 commission. If can prove other wise i would like to see....but i highly doubt it. Second I won't discuss Michael Moore. Obviously you haven't seen F/9-11.All your right-wing friends said the movies is a lie even though they probably have not seen it either,so you went along and drank the kool aid.Was it a lie that Mr Bush sat frozen in a class room for 7 minutes when it was announced the country is under attacked?
VP Cheney's words to Leahy while not appropriate are hardly indicative of someone losing their mind
Oh really? I must remind you Mr Cheney still believe there is a connection a between Iraq and Al Queda despite the fact Commission discredit that theory.Obviously the man has a few screws loose and it's too bad your blind partisan allegiance won't let you see that.
Kerry's military service and credibility in the military are questioned by those that served with him.
That is a lie.These individual were never part of his command and are simply reacting not to his service during the war, but his opposition to it when he returned in 1969 and two years later testifying before Senate Foreign Relation Committee.
The issue of Bush going AWOL has never been substantiated despite numerous attempts to do so by the left. Bush has provided more documents than the left can sort through and they still can not prove he was AWOL. It is simply a non-story kept alive by the liberal media.
Another lie....i would advise you check out www.awolbush.com (http://www.awolbush.com/) and you will see substantial accounts of you beloved commander-n-chief 's military record and comparison to John Kerry. Plus coverage of Bush national guard adventures (or lack thereof) is severely pale in comparison to Clinton dodging the draft which i'm pretty sure you were screaming up and down defecating in your shorts for the past 8 years, but i guess it shows how two-faced and hypocritical you right-wingers can be.
You seem to want to attach my hate for liberalism into a personal matter. As I've also stated on my site, it's not liberals I hate so much as liberalism. I deal with people every day that are liberals. I'm sure many restaurants I frequent are owned by liberals. Again, this seems to be irrelevant. What would I like to see happen to you? I'd like to see you change your views. It's not a personal thing until someone makes it so. Will I ever go see a Bruce Springsteen concert again? No. Will I buy product if it would be endorsed by Michael Moore? Of course not. They have made things personal by mixing their business with their politics so it is then fair game.
Well it's apparent you subscribe yourself to a personal vendetta against liberals even though you don't have a clue what liberalism represents. It's become painfully clear that your views simply based on emotional hatred for people who think differently from you. That is why I use the ideology comparing you to vicious segregationist. It seems you have a fear toward other who might have a different opinion than yours then created this website. If you choose not to cater to the likes of Bruce Springsteen and Michael Moore for not sniffing the butthole of the Bush Administration, you have that right. Just as long i have the right to be critical toward the president and his cronies for misleading the American people and sending young men and women to die based on false pretense for war. It's not personal as long as my right to speak out isn't jeopardized. I'm not changing my views just like i don't expect you to change your views but it would be nice to see you have the capability to read and come up with your own opinions instead having them dictated by Fox News, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.
The liberals like to use Hussein and Hitler as an icon of evil when being used to denigrate conservatives,
Oh please and how many times you right winger pulled Hussein, Hitler and Bin Laden out your anus to question somebody's patriotism. Remember the smear campaign which cost Max Cleland the election in Georgia?
I doubt your liberal mind will absorb any of what I said. Most of your points are typical talking points based on rhetoric or emotion and little if any fact or logic. This however is typical among liberals so I'm not surprised.
LOL how can you have an insight on my liberal mind when you cannot define what a liberal is?
If you'd like to challenge anything on the site, I'd be happy to have that discussion with you as well.
Well i have no problem with that just as long you can finally accept an ounce of truth for once in your life.Thank you for responding and I hope my message will be published in feedback.
Robert
From: IHL
Sorry but your spin is not going to cut it with me…
1. You are the one spinning things. Call yourself whatever you want. You can look up words in a dictionary as easily as I can. I won't play word games with you. Call yourself liberal, democrat, leftist, I don't care. The point is, it is your philosophy and political positions I disagree with regardless of what you want to call yourself.
Joe Wilson and Moore are liars. This has been proven. They are not disputable. Wilson lied about Iraq not attempting to obtain yellowcake uranium from Niger. Wilson said it couldn't have happened - it did. He also lied about his wife in saying she was not the one that recommended he be send to Niger in the first place. The 9-11 commission did not by any stretch of the imagination show that Bush lied. Quite the opposite. It showed he may have had some flawed information from the CIA - the same CIA the Kerry voted to gut funding of ironically enough - and that Bush acted on that and other information. He did not lied. According to Moore's logic as shown in an interview with Bill O'Reilly - if Bush didn't tell the truth - he lied. I'm sure even you are smart enough to see the bias there. If Bush acted on information he believed to be true, it's not a lie. And if Bush lied, then so did Kerry and Edwards and Hillary and Kennedy, and Pelosi.
"I think Iraq and Saddam Hussein present the most serious and most imminent threat." -John Edwards, February 24, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Ted Kennedy
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -John Kerry
So when you call Edwards and Kennedy and Kerry liars too, you may have some credibility.
Your rhetoric regarding the Michael Moore talking point about Bush being frozen for 7 minutes is laughable. Especially considering Kerry's own words about his actions that day. Kerry said "Shortly thereafter sat down at the table and then we just realized nobody could think" this was during a period of 40 mins. It's easy for him to now say how brave he would have been.
That is a lie. These individual were never part of his command and are simply reacting not to his service during the war,
Not a lie at all. In fact, many of these veterans were Commanders of Kerry's. This would be simple to correct. Since Kerry has bases his whole campaign on the 4 months her served in Vietnam. And since he is such a war hero, why then doesn't he allow his war records to be released? Release the records, show the truth and if Kerry is telling the truth, he wins by a landslide. If he releases the records and they show he is lying, he is ruined. Hmmm. Makes you wonder why he wouldn't release them doesn't it? Well, it would for most people. I'm sure someone as far left as you will rationalize this somehow.
It's become painfully clear that your views simply based on emotional hatred for people who think differently from you.
The last thing my site is, is emotional. I am not ranting and raving and using profanities. I am quoting liberals own words, I am citing in many cases, liberal sources and giving my own comments and impressions. Emotion plays little part in it. I don't have a problem with those that disagree. In fact, it seems to be the fact that you disagree with me that prompted your email. I welcome that. If I didn't want to hear people that disagree, I wouldn't have the feedback section or the forum.
Well i have no problem with that just as long you can finally accept an ounce of truth for once in your life.Thank you for responding and I hope my message will be published in feedback.
It would seem that truth is based on how you see it. I am in search of truth. I believe the SwiftVets are telling the truth as well. Their charges would be easily disputed. Instead, the mainstream media is attempting to smear the people personally instead of the facts - unlike Fahrenheit 9/11 which they tried to make into a liberal icon. I doubt you'll see the SwiftVets paraded out at the RNC or sitting next to the President like Michael Moore at the DNC.
And I assure you this will be posted in the feedback section.
From: Robert
Sent: Tue 8/10/2004 9:33 AM
To: IHL
Subject: Hating Liberals
Well i must say it was only a matter of time when i type in the domain, "I HATE LIBERALS", a website would finally be created. I gotta give it to you right-wingers, you're very persistent.
Since i found you, i must ask;
1) What is a liberal as it is define in the dictionary?
2) Do you really hate people of like me, or does it bother you that individuals like Joseph Wilson, Ted Kennedy, Paul O'neill and Michael Moore simply question the integrity and truthfulness of a administration you blindly support?
3) Why do you sit up on your website and write how "liberals are losing their minds" and yet Vice President Cheney telling Leahy to f*** off and focusing Kerry's credibility in the military while not mentioning anything about Bush going AWOL from the Texas National Guard between 1971 and 1972?
And finally since you despise liberals so much, what would you like to see happen to us. Actually let me rephrase the question if you were lost and needed help and you approached me for directions, would you first ask for my political affiliation? If you own a restaurant I wanted to eat at your establishment would you not serve me because through a conversation, you found i am left leaning. Would you ask for my political affiliation before you seat me?
Segregation, Racism Homophobia and Sexism is a result hate, and if are you willing to support minimizing certain individuals livelihood because you hate their opinions?
If so what makes you any different from a Saddam Hussein or other dictators who use their power to suppress all forms of opinions?As far as I'm concern your use of Old Glory is no different from a KKK burning a cross or Nazi using swastika( i probably misspelled it) Just something to think about?
Robert
IHL <IHL@IHateLiberals.com> wrote:
Robert,
Let me answer a few of your questions.
1.) The meaning of the term liberal as defined in the dictionary is irrelevant. Many words may have different meanings when taken literally. We know what liberals are in the context of how they are referred to on this site.
2.) As I said on my site, it's not liberals I hate so much as liberalism. I do not blindly support this president. There are several issues I disagree with him on - campaign finance reform, prescription drugs, stem cell research, to name a few.
3.)It was a private discussion while the senate was not in session.
Many of your points are not logical. You mention segregation for example. I have never condoned segregation. I'm not attempting to supress someone's opinion. I disagree with their opinion and I am pointing out why and expressing my own. If you see this as segregation, then that is your problem.
And then you ask "what makes you any different from a Saddam Hussein ", yet those same liberals would never do anything to stop them. In fact, they complain when Hussein is removed from power. I am not suppressing opinion. I am stating my own - there is a huge difference.
I'm glad you stopped by the site. I don't know that you'll ever come back but if you do, I welcome any additional comments you have. And remember, my site is an attempt to counter the onslaught of liberal philosophy from the media.
IHL
From: Robert
1.) The meaning of the term liberal as defined in the dictionary is irrelevant. Many words may have different meanings when taken literally. We know what liberals are in the context of how they are referred to on this site.
Sorry but your spin is not going to cut it with me: Since your site is dedicated to hating liberals and what they stand for, I would advise you to know the true definition of the word before engaging in mindless rhetoric. Answer my question; WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF LIBERAL AS DEFINE IN DICTIONARY AND NOT YOU BELIEVE IT TO BE. Get back to me when you do.
Joseph Wilson and Michael Moore are not questioning integrity. They are documented and proven liars. If you question the integrity of someone, based on lies, then yes, I have a problem with that.
First of all Joseph Wilson was proving the Bush's reason for invading Iraq were baseless lies IE weapons of mass destruction, nuclear program and its connection to Al Queda and 9-11. All that was brought out in the 9-11 commission. If can prove other wise i would like to see....but i highly doubt it. Second I won't discuss Michael Moore. Obviously you haven't seen F/9-11.All your right-wing friends said the movies is a lie even though they probably have not seen it either,so you went along and drank the kool aid.Was it a lie that Mr Bush sat frozen in a class room for 7 minutes when it was announced the country is under attacked?
VP Cheney's words to Leahy while not appropriate are hardly indicative of someone losing their mind
Oh really? I must remind you Mr Cheney still believe there is a connection a between Iraq and Al Queda despite the fact Commission discredit that theory.Obviously the man has a few screws loose and it's too bad your blind partisan allegiance won't let you see that.
Kerry's military service and credibility in the military are questioned by those that served with him.
That is a lie.These individual were never part of his command and are simply reacting not to his service during the war, but his opposition to it when he returned in 1969 and two years later testifying before Senate Foreign Relation Committee.
The issue of Bush going AWOL has never been substantiated despite numerous attempts to do so by the left. Bush has provided more documents than the left can sort through and they still can not prove he was AWOL. It is simply a non-story kept alive by the liberal media.
Another lie....i would advise you check out www.awolbush.com (http://www.awolbush.com/) and you will see substantial accounts of you beloved commander-n-chief 's military record and comparison to John Kerry. Plus coverage of Bush national guard adventures (or lack thereof) is severely pale in comparison to Clinton dodging the draft which i'm pretty sure you were screaming up and down defecating in your shorts for the past 8 years, but i guess it shows how two-faced and hypocritical you right-wingers can be.
You seem to want to attach my hate for liberalism into a personal matter. As I've also stated on my site, it's not liberals I hate so much as liberalism. I deal with people every day that are liberals. I'm sure many restaurants I frequent are owned by liberals. Again, this seems to be irrelevant. What would I like to see happen to you? I'd like to see you change your views. It's not a personal thing until someone makes it so. Will I ever go see a Bruce Springsteen concert again? No. Will I buy product if it would be endorsed by Michael Moore? Of course not. They have made things personal by mixing their business with their politics so it is then fair game.
Well it's apparent you subscribe yourself to a personal vendetta against liberals even though you don't have a clue what liberalism represents. It's become painfully clear that your views simply based on emotional hatred for people who think differently from you. That is why I use the ideology comparing you to vicious segregationist. It seems you have a fear toward other who might have a different opinion than yours then created this website. If you choose not to cater to the likes of Bruce Springsteen and Michael Moore for not sniffing the butthole of the Bush Administration, you have that right. Just as long i have the right to be critical toward the president and his cronies for misleading the American people and sending young men and women to die based on false pretense for war. It's not personal as long as my right to speak out isn't jeopardized. I'm not changing my views just like i don't expect you to change your views but it would be nice to see you have the capability to read and come up with your own opinions instead having them dictated by Fox News, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.
The liberals like to use Hussein and Hitler as an icon of evil when being used to denigrate conservatives,
Oh please and how many times you right winger pulled Hussein, Hitler and Bin Laden out your anus to question somebody's patriotism. Remember the smear campaign which cost Max Cleland the election in Georgia?
I doubt your liberal mind will absorb any of what I said. Most of your points are typical talking points based on rhetoric or emotion and little if any fact or logic. This however is typical among liberals so I'm not surprised.
LOL how can you have an insight on my liberal mind when you cannot define what a liberal is?
If you'd like to challenge anything on the site, I'd be happy to have that discussion with you as well.
Well i have no problem with that just as long you can finally accept an ounce of truth for once in your life.Thank you for responding and I hope my message will be published in feedback.
Robert
From: IHL
Sorry but your spin is not going to cut it with me…
1. You are the one spinning things. Call yourself whatever you want. You can look up words in a dictionary as easily as I can. I won't play word games with you. Call yourself liberal, democrat, leftist, I don't care. The point is, it is your philosophy and political positions I disagree with regardless of what you want to call yourself.
Joe Wilson and Moore are liars. This has been proven. They are not disputable. Wilson lied about Iraq not attempting to obtain yellowcake uranium from Niger. Wilson said it couldn't have happened - it did. He also lied about his wife in saying she was not the one that recommended he be send to Niger in the first place. The 9-11 commission did not by any stretch of the imagination show that Bush lied. Quite the opposite. It showed he may have had some flawed information from the CIA - the same CIA the Kerry voted to gut funding of ironically enough - and that Bush acted on that and other information. He did not lied. According to Moore's logic as shown in an interview with Bill O'Reilly - if Bush didn't tell the truth - he lied. I'm sure even you are smart enough to see the bias there. If Bush acted on information he believed to be true, it's not a lie. And if Bush lied, then so did Kerry and Edwards and Hillary and Kennedy, and Pelosi.
"I think Iraq and Saddam Hussein present the most serious and most imminent threat." -John Edwards, February 24, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Ted Kennedy
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -John Kerry
So when you call Edwards and Kennedy and Kerry liars too, you may have some credibility.
Your rhetoric regarding the Michael Moore talking point about Bush being frozen for 7 minutes is laughable. Especially considering Kerry's own words about his actions that day. Kerry said "Shortly thereafter sat down at the table and then we just realized nobody could think" this was during a period of 40 mins. It's easy for him to now say how brave he would have been.
That is a lie. These individual were never part of his command and are simply reacting not to his service during the war,
Not a lie at all. In fact, many of these veterans were Commanders of Kerry's. This would be simple to correct. Since Kerry has bases his whole campaign on the 4 months her served in Vietnam. And since he is such a war hero, why then doesn't he allow his war records to be released? Release the records, show the truth and if Kerry is telling the truth, he wins by a landslide. If he releases the records and they show he is lying, he is ruined. Hmmm. Makes you wonder why he wouldn't release them doesn't it? Well, it would for most people. I'm sure someone as far left as you will rationalize this somehow.
It's become painfully clear that your views simply based on emotional hatred for people who think differently from you.
The last thing my site is, is emotional. I am not ranting and raving and using profanities. I am quoting liberals own words, I am citing in many cases, liberal sources and giving my own comments and impressions. Emotion plays little part in it. I don't have a problem with those that disagree. In fact, it seems to be the fact that you disagree with me that prompted your email. I welcome that. If I didn't want to hear people that disagree, I wouldn't have the feedback section or the forum.
Well i have no problem with that just as long you can finally accept an ounce of truth for once in your life.Thank you for responding and I hope my message will be published in feedback.
It would seem that truth is based on how you see it. I am in search of truth. I believe the SwiftVets are telling the truth as well. Their charges would be easily disputed. Instead, the mainstream media is attempting to smear the people personally instead of the facts - unlike Fahrenheit 9/11 which they tried to make into a liberal icon. I doubt you'll see the SwiftVets paraded out at the RNC or sitting next to the President like Michael Moore at the DNC.
And I assure you this will be posted in the feedback section.