The question before Jane and Dan is, “Where is the line between free speech toward a candidate and out right malice?
by Plain Jane
I believe that the truth must be told. If a political candidate is a bigot or racist this must be exposed. If a political candidate goes against the values of the real America that also must be brought to the attention of the American public.
Fairness and objective reporting are critical for an informed debate. All opinions must be allowed but when those opinions stand opposite the opinions of human rights, those opinions must be exposed for what they are.
Let’s take an example. Donald Trump has no business in politics yet he garners support from a right wing element of haters. This inflammatory speech, his desecration of Muslims must be exposed for the bigotry it spews.
by Dan the Man
Jane, your reasoning is the very source of the divide in America. Because you believe that your opinion and your values are better than others. There is no free speech in America any longer. There is only information that the liberal press reports — a one sided view.
Trump is a viable candidate because he is NOT a politician. He can stand aside from the game played on both sides of the aisle. He is expressing a form of logic foreign to the left — common sense. Your side calls it bigotry. When ISIS, a Muslim group, tells the world they will terrorize America after the Paris incident and the President then wants to bring in between 10,000 and 250,000 refugees, common sense says “DANGER DANGER.” Heck, Jane, their religious book really does say ti kill the infidel, the non believer. In many ways your view toward the conservative is the same logic — kill the other viewer.
You speak of the truth being told. The Huffington Post has launched a media campaign to discredit conservative candidates. I suppose that is their prerogative. First they should not purport to me a news organization when they give their slant on any story. And as for the truth, maybe if they exposed the lies of their candidate, Hillary, and the absolute sham of the DNC in the preordained selection of the candidate without the attempt to show discussion to a large audience their message might have a meaning.
How can I make this clear? The horrible things the liberal media says about opinions they disagree with, the attack on candidate’s family members, the total control of the media to get their one sided message across, cannot be seen by them. The party of bigotry shows as the party of non acceptance.
Despite the Democrat history of voting against civil rights and demeaning religious beliefs of a Christian faith, they are willing to accept the faith of a religion that wants to kill the Americans and the American way of life, they have garnered the vote of the very people they opposed, But we don’t see that in the press.
by Plain Jane
You are making a case for Hitler. You are saying that we should accept the points of view of immorality, the very fabric of American goodness must be ignored. It is you and your bigoted point of view that is holding back the growth of this great nation.
Your arguments against Hillary are politically based as you and your conservative thought cannot stand the thought of a woman leader on the after a great black leader. Admit it. You are simple a bigot who cannot stand to see real change.
Response to your other arguments are pointless because you return to the same dialogue,