Surely the professor can do better than that. This example tends to demonstrate the liberals' lack of nuance more than the conservatives', as do many other examples I'll give you. Can't these paragons of complexity understand that Bush's words were at most ill advised based on disputed, not phony intelligence? Don't they understand that a lie involves the intent to deceive, not just arguably erroneous information? Further, can't they grasp that this was not even one of the major reasons we used to attack Iraq?

Let me give you a few other examples of the liberals' seeming inability to make intellectual distinctions. They seem too narrow-minded to understand that:

  • perjury, obstruction of justice and contempt of court are different from merely "lying about sex";

  • likening Ronald Reagan and Rush Limbaugh to Hitler is the grossest form of hate speech they otherwise pretend to decry;

  • the desire to reverse liberal judicial activism is not conservative judicial activism;

  • one can favor action against Iraq without being a "neo-conservative";

  • opposition to affirmative action is born of egalitarianism not racism;

  • advocacy of government-forced wealth redistribution is not synonymous with compassion, and opposition to it is not incompatible with compassion;

  • their championship of tolerance as the highest virtue is inconsistent with their intolerance toward conservatives, particularly Christian conservatives;

  • opposition to federal control over education is neither anti-children nor anti-education, but precisely the opposite;

  • the tax code can affect economic behavior such that marginal tax rate cuts do not result in dollar-for-dollar losses in revenue;

  • the terrorist threat of suitcase nuclear bombs does not obviate strategic missile defense (SDI) – we continue to face multiple threats;

  • developing SDI is not an offensive gesture, but defensive, and should not be deceptively dubbed "Star Wars";

  • America can attack Iraq without attacking all other despotic regimes in the world and not be guilty of inconsistency in its approach to foreign policy;

  • school choice will liberate and uplift minorities;

  • irresponsible gun control measures will cost, not save lives;

  • promoting "separation of church and state" often stifles rather than promotes religious freedom;

  • this bogus study by biased liberal professors so close-minded and arrogant that they don't even realize their findings were predetermined by their ideological prejudices speaks loudly to their tunnel-vision simplicity.

    Were it not for the destructive influence of their jaundiced ideas we should feel nothing but sympathy for these misguided professors. But they and their ilk are helping to poison the minds of America's next generations of leaders. Or is that too simplistic for us to understand?