Both types have their pros and cons. I like the convenience of dry yeast--I can wake up tomorrow morning, decide to brew, and know I have the dry yeast on hand to do that. It's possible to keep liquid on hand as well but the viability declines much more quickly.
I do mostly lagers, and I like the ease with which I can make sure I pitch enough cells with dry yeast. Two packs rehydrated for most normal gravity lagers is going to get me the cells I need at the sub-50 degree temperatures I often use. I can get there with liquid as well, but it's a huge starter, or steps, or multiple liquid packs. Liquid is something like $12 for a smack pack at my LHBS. Throw in the DME costs and the time to make the starter and it's not a cheap or particularly convenient option. For new lager brewers especially, fermentation problems tend to involve underpitching. So I strongly recommend dry yeast in those situations.
Liquid provides a marvelous array of options for your yeast. As others have noted, yeast strain selection can make a huge difference to your beer. Having said that, I've won gold medals this year with beers made using W-34/70 (doppelbock), S-189 (light and standard American lagers) and S-23 (bohemian pilsner), so I know they are all quality dry yeasts that, among them, give me huge flexibility to brew whatever lager I like. But I still really want to try a variety of liquid strains on my workhorse recipes to nail down that perfect flavour profile.
So like I said, they both have their pros and cons and most brewers develop a strong preference for one or the other. A buddy and I just did a side-by-side with S-05 vs. 1056 and both prefer the beer brewed during the latter. Our club is having our club brew tasting this Tuesday so we'll get to see what the BJCP folks have to say about one vs. the other.
If the time, cost, and convenience were all equal then I would always use liquid. But they aren't so I often use dry, especially for lagers.