monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

You were the ridiculous idiot in this scenario. Funny to watch you squirm around.

Sez you, someone from a country that went through McCarthyism. This country, with its socialist traditions, did not embrace fascism. Many of the blacklisted victims of the fascist witchtrials got jobs over here.

One mega difference is that none of Corbyn's supporters agreed with the illegal neo imperialist war in Iraq. None of them would have voted for your war criminal Bush, especially after the pictures of dead Iraqi children were sent home.

That didn't deter Sanders supporting Lash though did it?

Your statement is not remotely identical to Walter's. He understands European politics. You don't.

I'm not squirming, you have retreated into an Oralesque fantasy because reality is giving you a headache.

Many Americans fought against McCarthyism—and because the McC ilk won and still prevail, some of us are STILL fighting it.

Sanders is the antidote. The establishment still uses McCarthyism—as evidenced by even the so-called liberal party using McCarthy-type censure against our first elected Muslim female representative—publicly censuring her for criticizing Israel and for appearing to criticize the US response to 911.

It’s comparable (take a breath; I know you can barely countenance that word) to the French response to Hitler. Some approved the capitulation, others fought it.

————————

Many Americans are searching facts about where we really are, how we got here, and how we can effectively oppose it. We welcome one another as our perspectives evolve. We can use every voice and every vote we can get. This is how a movement grows.

But, certainly, you have a right to reject newcomers to your political philosophy. Let me know how that works for you...

I brought the article he quoted, and agree with its content.

”

I don't think there was ever (perhaps Set can find one similar)a US president quite as unpresidential as Trump.

Fortunately for me, I broke out of the rut most politically-invested Americans find themselves in. I recognized the lies I was being fed from my government and their media mouthpieces, and I got off the tribal crazytrain.

I don’t reflexively support a party. I criticize the candidate who I plan to vote for when I think he’s wrong.

I love reality because acknowledging it and seeking it forwards my agenda: helping my planet, helping regular people, and calling out criminals who are preventing the help we need.

It’s very freeing to be on the side of the planet and regular people, and not having to squirm around, defending the indefensible.

Just war criminals.

No more than you support Thatcher, Blair, hundreds of years of English Empire murder and slavery. You slapped Gandhi around like a bitch. How hypocritical of you.

He didn't quote all of it. You can agree with an article without agreeing with every single word. Conversely, you can disagree with most of an article save for one or two points.

You don't seem to have come to the same conclusions as Walter though. You still see Corbyn and Sanders as two Mattel toys, identical in every way except one wears a bowler hat and the other wears a Stetson. You cut and pasted the BBC article to support your other article in a vain attempt to prove me wrong.

Walter highlighted the parts that said although there were similarities they are two very different people from very different traditions. Thus drawing the opposite conclusion from the one you were trying to make. And I suspect he did it because he's quite mischievous in that regard, you should see the fun he has with Pinky, (who seems to be enjoying a leave of absence btw, long may it continue.)

You claim that Sanders' support of UHC puts him on the same footing as Corbyn. You could just as easily say it puts him on the same footing as Margaret Thatcher. She supported UHC because she knew full well that it would be political suicide not to. That's because UHC is mainstream, it's only "socialist" in countries with a far right government.

The French didn't vote for Hitler. Hitler wasn't French Joe McCarthy didn't invade, he was home grown, and democratically elected.

Other than that it's a ******* brilliant analogy.

This is an intentional lie or evidence of poor, maybe excessively hopeful, reading comprehension. The article I brought cited similarities and differences—hence a comparison—which is what I’ve always said and you can’t seem to handle.


Do you really think anyone doesn’t know this? You just cannot bear me to mention Corbyn. It gives you the hives. Of course, this means Corbyn will appear soon in my signature. 😀. Get some Benadryl...

I never supported Thatcher, and I stopped supporting Blair once he started cosying up to Bush.

******* Gandhi and the British Empire! Really, that's where you have to go because you have **** all else. I could respond with a load of similarly irrelevant bollocks about your own slavery, treatment of the native American, Vietnam, Salvador etc. etc.

We're not debating what our countries may have done in the past because that's not anything either of us have any control over. You voted for a war criminal post invasion. That was something you had control over. In the general election I voted for a man who resigned his cabinet seat in protest at the illegal war, and was the most outspoken critic of the war out of all the other candidates. That's what I had control over.

You can talk about Corbyn all you want, although most of what you say is bollocks.

Is it sponsored bollocks? What the **** is Benadryl? Are you being paid by big pharma to push its shitty products this side of the pond?

(pats Izzy on head and suggests nap)

Now you're sounding like Donald Trump.

This is a common tactic of yours, you can't argue the points raised so you cast aspersions about the emotional state of the person you're arguing with.

It only underlines the fact you've got nothing to say.

I said everything; your silliness proved my point. I was trying to part ways amicably. Maybe you’re too sensitive to take it as intended.

No harm was intended, but I guess if the shoe was on the other foot, I’d consider it condescending.

My apologies.

(But, c’mon. This wasn’t joking???)