I mean NOT ONE LIBERAL has ever used weather reports in the short term as a "gotcha" for Conservatives.

There are plenty of moonbats from both camps. Quite a bold move to make such an absolute statement. If you don't believe me, try reading through TBC Sound off/letters to the editor and see how many fuzzies (left and right) think snark and sarcasm pass for cogent points.

Yeah, I thought it was a bit far reaching also. So I stopped to think about it and I swear I've never seen it.

That's why I asked the question at the end. It wasn't a dare. I seriously would like to hear of such an instance. I know i could come up with plenty of the "very cold in Chicago, no global warning here" types aplenty.

I posted data about the right coming up with hate-speech earlier and maintaining it longer and using it more frequently in an earlier post. One of my first, in fact.

This post was along those lines. 

I don't think, if one were able to develop data on this, that it would be equal on both sides. Hence the invite. I wanna see examples of LIberals using short term weather as an argument point about global warming.

Seriously.

...and thanks for the opportunity for me to explain myself better.

It was only a few days ago a blogger contended the inclement snow in New York "proved" global warming was a hoax. Afterall, if the world is getting warmer, how can there be snow? (Or something like that.)

Thanks catpaw. I believe I can come up with dozens of such references. And if I didn't restrict myself to these blogs, I would get many, many more.

I am not exagerating when I say I have never seen a Liberal do the same thing, and yet, LIke zapped, I figure it must have happened somewhere, sometime.

So: anybody every witnessed this?

I maintain there IS a difference between what get lobbed from left to right and from right to left. 

I don't think, if one were able to develop data on this, that it would be equal on both sides.

The beauty of making claims about things that cannot be quantified....I agree that it wouldn't be equal on both sides (of course, you wouldn't agree with my conclusion ;P )

Your data about hate speech, I'd like to look at it. I'd like to see what qualifies as hate speech. Take a camera into Berkeley or Ocean Beach 2 years ago and I bet you I could have made a documentary of liberal hate speech and try to make a claim that the Left is more "hateful" than the right. 

/but I digress about not being able to qualify such things  ;)

On another note, read the part of today TBC where one reader made a claim that Father Braun was forcing a "medieval" ideology on us. I got a chuckle.

/sorry about the threadjack at the end, I'm just multitasking here and drinking

Such things are not difficult to quantify at all. And of course the sampling has to be reasonable random.

Going to Berkeley and counting LIberal comments is clearly not random.

Here is my attempt:

http://people.bakersfield.c...

Well, dirty, you got to consider that republicans had their backs to the wall and were (still are) on the defensive. Name calling is a resort when there isn't an argument. I don't know that I would call every ugly slur a speech motivated by hate. Political conviction (and religious) is a personal matter and consequently an emotional one. How many times have you attempted to have a "logical" discussion to see it become an intense emotional free-for-all. Could it be that the statistics are a reflection of the losing team's frustration?

Yeah, catpaw, I do.

in fact, I don't think that is far from the thesis expressed in the referenced earlier blog.