Okay, so that's a lie.
But I do try not to lose my temper in debates as it just undermines the argument. And I also try, despite how passionate I feel, not to come across as too abrasive or insulting.
Unfortunately, given the number of times I've seen people been told lately, or been told myself, that concerns and dismay about the impact of the Welfare Reform Bill (passed thanks to Lib Dem MPs) is actually nothing more than "hyperbole" or "exaggeration" or "falling for Labour propaganda", I'm actually feeling rather fed up with it.
So that's why, earlier this evening, I said this in a comment thread in a Lib Dem facebook group. I've removed the names from it as I think it would be unfair to spread them around without the permission of the people in question.
[Name deleted], I've been researching and campaigning on this for well over half a year. Without wishing to be insulting, I probably know a damn sight more about this than you do. I doubt I'm the most knowledgeable about this within the party but I'm probably within the top fifty or less when it comes to the issue of the WRB's impact on disabled people. I'm not falling for Labour propaganda, I'm reaching a conclusion based on evidence and hundreds of hours of research.
I'd suggest you listen to people like [name deleted], who is on the exec of the Lib Dem Disability Association. The people in he LDDA know what they're talking about - especially as they're directly affected by this. They're not being led astray by opposition rhetoric - they know damn well what's facing them. If this was the LGBT+ Lib Dems talking about an issue affecting them then I highly doubt there'd be so much sneering and claims that they don't know what they're talking about.
Get your head out of the clouds. Our party is not perfect, and our MPs are perfectly capable of doing the wrong thing so stop acting like the sun shines out their arses.The reason I'm blogging what I said is because I think that, aside from the obvious irritation in my tone, the points I made are fairly valid.
But, to sum up, quite frankly, unless you have any actual FACTS to back up your assertions, I suggest you stop making sweeping claims about something which you seem to know very little about.
And, because I was already asked what I meant about the comment about LGBT+ Lib Dems, here's my reply to that question:
[Name deleted], what I mean is that, when LGBT+ Lib Dems experience, for example, a legislative measure that discriminates against them and makes life harder or unfairer, such as the blood ban, if they raise their voices about it then their word usually seems to be taken at face value and they don't encounter anywhere near the same level of vitriol as disabled people are experiencing.
In short, I suspect that there is, at least in part, an undercurrent of disability discrimination when you look at the way they are being treated when they complain about this. When LGBT Lib Dems complained about section 28 I highly doubt that they got people within the party telling them that they were "falling for propaganda", or being hysterical, or using hyperbole.
Basically, while I'm not saying for one moment that racial, sexual or gender equality have been reached, people campaigning for them seem now able to do so with far less vitriol than the disabled encounter.
You wouldn't for example, get a columnist for the Sun saying nowadays that homosexuality is a "choice" and that people decide to be gay just in order to get sympathy and because it's "trendy". It's simply unthinkable because, if they did, then they'd be immediately sacked following the public furore.
Yet only last week we got Rod Liddle saying [in the Sun] that several severe, debilitating conditions, such as ME, were "made up" and "trendy". That's what I mean.