Politics: For My Liberal Friends

This post is for my Liberal/Democrat friends (some not all): For the life of me, I cannot understand why in a plethora of political & social discussions, when arguments are presented, you can never argue in terms of the original argument. In other words, if I say, "President Obama is fiscally irresponsible" The Liberals/Democrats will respond by saying, "but Talitha, Bush was fiscally irresponsibe too, How come you don't say anything bad about him!" First of all, How do you know I haven't said anything "bad about him" (Let me add that I don't care for the word choice "bad" - it's vague & inappropriate, I'd say, "Why don't you refute or disprove his positions/policies, but that's just me) If you're going to participate in such discussions or rebut someone's assertions, why don't you at least take as much time researching the person's position as you do typing these long, emotional diatribes? Many of you criticize myself & other Conservatives for "bashing"Obama in terms of a perceived failure to equally criticize previous White presidents when if you did your homework, you will find that many Conservatives/GOP supporters have done just that! Trust me, we have no problem whatsoever telling one of our own when they are in error. Second of all, it is very erroneous & illogical to bring up irrelevant counterpoints (for example the one about Bush) without first telling me why Obama is indeed fiscally responsible, in & of itself. If you did this (which you cannot btw) your arguments would be far more effective & you'd gain a lot more respect from me just by the mere fact that you are showing respect for intelligent discourse period. If I say "the clouds in the sky on the east coast are thin & don't produce enough rain" & if you live on the east coast & respond by saying, "the clouds on the west coast are just as thin & don't produce enough rain either, Why don't you talk about those? Why don't you like the clouds on the east coast? You must be from the west coast!" If you researched where I live (or asked me) you'd find that I do live on the east coast which would debunk part of your argument. If I were you I'd say (after thorough research if need be), "The clouds on the east coast in fact not thin, their thickness is hidden because the clouds on the east coast are less visible due the the difference in the refraction of sunlight against them & actually do produce sufficient rain Talitha. In fact, Scientists have proven that the dry climate of the east coast over time has caused the people, animals & plant life to adapt well to it & therefore, that area of the country does not require as much rain. As to the thin clouds, scientists have proven that the thinner clouds are, the more moisture they retain, however, it rains less because it takes the clouds a very long time to complete a hydrologic cycle, much longer than the west coast & this is the reason for this phenomena of nature which you have observed. Doesn't that sound much better? More sound? More logical? Wouldn't the latter discussion go a lot more smoothly than the former? These are just my thoughts on my page on what I have observed in the discussions that I have participated in online & in person for quite some time now. It's just some food for thought! Please don't inbox me any angry or childish responses, if you wish to refute what I have shared, do it intelligently & please, please, please (some more than others) think about what you are going to type before you do! Also, please don't send me messages arguing the science of my example, I know it's not scientifically sound, pay attention to the flow of the logic not the science. When you participate in discussions in this illogical manner which I have described, you're only shooting yourself in the foot &  making it easier for Conservatives to disprove your arguments! Call me crazy, but I'd like to have some real competition in my political sparring from someone other than a Conservative every now & then.