need a Kleenex? there is nothing as sad as a constant passive/aggressive innuendo monger who plays the victim when people respond in a more direct fashion than your posts about what others think, and that everyone but you thinks in lock-step with each other. that kind of thinking is what causes your ilk to lose elections.
Your response to practically every issue with a pavlovian progression of republican talking points as a response is so predictable that it is tedious. If you want to see real censorship happen, go to any of the con boards ranging from no-lib zone to the simply stupid board and watch when a liberal posts something factual.
If you want to do it a different way, why not start your own board so people can stay away in droves? Or just post on any of the con boards that "obama is a moslem traitor, trying to destroy america" and you will be instantly accepted and you won't have to feel like a constant victim when you wander into an area that doesn't accept the chanting nonsense of Faux news . And you think this board is groupthink... well, the small handfull of liberal boards on IHUB compared to the number of truly twisted boards where they don't even understand that part of patriotism isn't hating on the president personally just because your side didn't win the last election.
You know, fear isn't the common thread on this board, but is the currency on the con boards. Fear of immigrants, of "obama taking their binkies away", of an impending revolution, Jade Helm, FEMA camps, you name it, they live in constant fear of one thing or another. and like you, very rarely offer any constructive solutions, as it interferes with the group bitching sessions. Hell, even the con presidential candidates offer few ideas of any sort, other than building a higher physical wall with mexico: when pressed for details, none are ever offered. If you find a con board that you feel is more objective than here, let us know. You have demonstrated your disdain for Hillary over and over and over, but are kind of lean on what the bullshit artist candidates on your side would be better at, never any realistic solutions, only anti-rhetoric towards the group trying to do the greatest good for the greatest number of people. The cons talk all sorts of platitudes, but name one thing they have actually done that doesn't feather the 1%'s nest in one manner or another, normally at the expense of the very people that have been conned into supporting those ideas, based on, almost universally, one fear or another.
Many of us (we do not speak for each other) are not big hillary fans, but should it become a choice between her and anything the cons have to offer, who the hell could pull the lever for any of the cons? If you support someone better, why not tell us who it is any why, instead of the constant politics of destruction of whoever you are hating on at the moment (usually hillary or obama). do i hate on cons? well, it is hard to take them on about ideas because they seem to have none, and avoiding exposing their actual motives is their main game, it seems.
Debunking constant attack stuff from the right accomplishes little, as the basic value systems are so different; doubling down on incredibly stupid assertions seems to be the stock in trade among republican candidate leaders. Notice how Benghazi fell out of your side's mantra when there are terrorist attacks at hand that are better for whipping up fears?
As to your being butt-hurt about people questioning using "faith" as an excuse for anything, politicians on the right seem to use it as a crutch. When they fuck up by getting caught on one thing or another, it gives them cover when they are "forgiven", and when they are proven wrong because of their support to their benefactor's agendas which are counter to the people they supposedly represent, it gives them cover among part of their constituency for denying the realities of science (and not just climate science) and actual personal responsibility. Personal responsibility is just their code for hating on poor people, when it is typically used as a smokescreen to detach their own rhetoric from their actions. Voting down anything having to do with benefiting veterans is a prime example of the chasm between the rhetoric and actions for the pseudopatriots dwelling in the house of reagan.
All things are not black and white, of course; there is a bell curve of representing their constituents in a way that is in their best interests and not the .1%, but trying to convince anyone that the politicians on the right are not more highly represented on the tail owned by the .1% is going to be a losing battle among those that can think objectively.
So the wingnut boards might be a better place for your stuff. You smugly think you are "educating" us, but we have heard the hollow arguments put forth by you many times, by many people; an occasional kernel of truth under a mountain of bullshit is not a nutritionally sound way to nourish the brain.
