There are people who write like this on both sides of the political aisle, and I have a hard time taking any of them seriously. The sin Limbaugh attributes to liberals is in fact his own.
Limbaugh argues that recent events, mainly the riots in Britain and the poor economic response to the debt ceiling battle, disprove the liberal view. He criticizes liberals for failing to recognize this apparently self-evident fact. He accuses them (or rather, us) of failing to adjust our worldview when confronted with new facts.
In fact, however, it is Limbaugh himself who is unmoved by facts. He refers to them, but is entirely unswayed by them. Does anyone believe that if recent events had been different in a plausible way *he* would adjust his view? Is he saying, "My conservative way of thinking predicted British riots (even though I didn't tell anyone before they started). If they had not in fact occurred I would be forced to readjust my views." Clearly, Limbaugh's political philosophy is fully formed, and his only goal is to fit events into it, rather than to be informed by events.
The downgrade in particular seems to follow more from a weakness of our political system than of either political party. Democrats spend more and don't raise taxes enough. Republicans spend more and cut taxes precipitously. Hence, we have much public debt, the underlying reason for our credit downgrade. Republican stubbornness led to brinkmanship which increased uncertainty, the proximate cause of S&P's downgrade. Credit ratings at the major agencies are now AA+ or AAA. Limbaugh offers no evidence for his claim that America's credit ratings would have been worse if we had failed to raise the debt ceiling.
Returning to the issue of whether liberals can change their mind, I think that both sides can be quite dogmatic. Nevertheless, liberals are at least philosophically dedicated to empirical thinking:
"The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held, but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment." Bertrand Russell
Also, just to be petty, if Limbaugh wants to be taken seriously as the spokesman for "Every marginally intelligent person" (not to mention God) he should probably stop spelling "partier" with a "y".
