The Totalitarian Leftist Tactics against the Right

quote:

---

There were few non-Christian religions around at the time (and I have my doubts that the Founding Fathers were much concerned about protecting them).

---

As I have pointed out earlier this is not really true: Thomas Jefferson on the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom

What I am seeing is a continued refusal to accept the rule of law, demanding that Trumo be appointed dictator. If the President is entitled to break any law he likes - and painting investigations and the invocation of impeachment as automatically wrong does that - then freedom is finished.Describing impeachment as a "leftist coup" is literally insane. Pence would take over and no body could honestly call Pence a "leftist"

If Trump goes down it will because of his contempt for the law and the Constitution.And all your lies and hate won't save him. I am glad that modern America is NOT like Germany in the 1930s. Bad as he is Trump is not Hitler.

You've certainly fallen for the propaganda! Your description of Trump is completely unrecognisable. How can anyone forget Trumps massive ego, continual lying and habit of vilifying people on Twitter? Or the Trump University scam?And it's hardly "obvious" that there is nothing to the Russian collusion. Trump's existing links to Russian businesses, Manafort, Flynn, Sessions misleading Congress, Trump trying to get the investigation of Flynn halted, Trump sacking Comey and claiming it was for something Comey did in July last year.

That's because I'm not. You are.Let's not forget that the main reasons the media are "attacking" Trump are that he really is doing a lot of bad things that deserve reporting - and that he wants them to act as his personal propaganda machine.Remember how Trump called the media dishonest because they wouldn't say that Mexico would pay for the wall? And even now is there any sign that Mexico will pay for the wall?

They certainly didn't give Obama a pass on everything.But then the propaganda machine has clearly got to you. You can't even see the truth when it is under your nose. You can't even admit that Mexico has no intention of paying for Trump's wall, and that nobody has offered any viable way of making them pay for it.

Sure, in a free country winning an election would give you total control of the press and you could make them print any falsehoods you like, no matter how ridiculous.Put it down to th evil totalitarian Founding Fathers granting freedom of the the press- and even putting it into the evil totalitarian Constitution. Along with the evil totalitarian idea of a "balance of powers" which stops Trump doing whatever he wants.

No, just fact. And you're the one complaining that Trump isn't dictator. And blaming the press.To take one example. It isn't the fault of anyone but Trump that healthcare was more complicated than he thought (anyone who had been following the debate would know that the ACA was a balancing act - well except for those listening to silly propaganda about "socialised healthcare" I suppose). It isn't the fault of anyone but Trump and the Republicans that their tinkering with the ACA will take many out of insurance, and make it more expensive for many more - contrary to Trumps promises. It isn't the fault of anyone outside the Republican Party that some Republicans thought that the the changes weren't extreme enough and halted the first attempt.Trump got elected on propaganda. Too bad you insist on believing it even after it turns out to be false.

I'm not lying. You are the one complaining that the press prints the truth - or at least something close to the truth - instead of what you want.And how can Trump sort the healthcare situation out when the Republicans are divided and what he wants is probably impossible anyway ? It doesn't take any "obstructionism" from the left for that.And don't forget we saw plenty of obstructionism from the right in the last few years.

Oh yes. We come back to your use of "lying" to mean "telling truths you don't like"

quote:

---

I could not care less what the official definition of hate speech is since the Left has lost its right to determine such things by attacking the ordinary citizens who voted for Trump and not protesting when they are attacked

---

I note that this comes from somebody who tried to defend Ann Coulter.

Nothing you could say would better prove my point.

And there you do it again. If you feel happy with throwing out such hate, how can you complain when people on your side are criticised ?

The contempt underlying it - contempt for the truth as well as individuals - is a pretty good indication of hate. Let's face it proof is a pretty good justification for criticism. But apparently not good enough when you are the target.

You expect you and your side to be exempt from criticism - even truthful criticism - while retaining the right to criticise your opponents without regard for the truth. And you find it "unbelievable" that your opponents won't accept that ?