Liberal MSM Hypocrites to the Max!

[ExomatrixTV]

Liberal MSM Hypocrites to the Max!

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Iw4ObPaPvpo

[DeDukshyn]

Hmmm ... news to me, never noticed any politicians to be hypocrites before <-- major sarcasm

[ExomatrixTV]

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
Hmmm ... news to me, never noticed any politicians to be hypocrites before <-- major sarcasm

~we live in an age where biased mainstream media (msm) is going to the extreme being HYPOCRITES & helping the other hypocrites!

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Just goes to show how much has changed in 20 years, in terms of how much farther left the left has really gone.

Trump takes this same position and now they call it racism and fascism. Interesting.

[DeDukshyn]

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)
Just goes to show how much has changed in 20 years, in terms of how much farther left the left has really gone.

Trump takes this same position and now they call it racism and fascism. Interesting.

I think it's the right "attacking left at all costs to win" and the left "attacking right at all costs to win" ideology that is rampantly consistent in western politics that is the force at play here ... to use one perspective of this and rendering it down to strictly "lefts are hypocrites" (or "rights are ...")" is disingenuous.

[conk]

....and shaping how most people think and feel.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)
Just goes to show how much has changed in 20 years, in terms of how much farther left the left has really gone.

Trump takes this same position and now they call it racism and fascism. Interesting.

I think it's the right "attacking left at all costs to win"

Really? That's what you think Bill Clinton backing up Trump's argument 20 years ago means?

So how exactly did the right organize this attack? Go back in time and somehow convince Bill Clinton to make that immigration speech despite his own position at the time? Or could it be... just maybe... that that was Bill Clinton's actual position on illegal immigration back then, and... just like I said... the left has radically shifted over the past 20 years?

Maybe? Oh, no, that's too simple of an explanation? Things have to be more complicated so that it can still be the right's fault somehow I see.

Trump is not part of the "left-right" political paradigm of the past several years. He has opponents within the Republican establishment just as he does Marxists on the left.

[DeDukshyn]

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)
Just goes to show how much has changed in 20 years, in terms of how much farther left the left has really gone.

Trump takes this same position and now they call it racism and fascism. Interesting.

I think it's the right "attacking left at all costs to win"

Really? That's what you think Bill Clinton backing up Trump's argument 20 years ago means?

So how exactly did the right organize this attack? Go back in time and somehow convince Bill Clinton to make that immigration speech despite his own position at the time? Or could it be... just maybe... that that was Bill Clinton's actual position on illegal immigration back then, and... just like I said... the left has radically shifted over the past 20 years?

Maybe? Oh, no, that's too simple of an explanation? Things have to be more complicated so that it can still be the right's fault somehow I see.

Trump is not part of the "left-right" political paradigm of the past several years. He has opponents within the Republican establishment just as he does Marxists on the left.

What you clipped is not what I was stating at all ...

Another example might be like how in Canada our Liberal government is under massive attack from conservatives recently for stating that Canada needs to get off it's dirty fossil fuel for it's main source of income ... The previous conservative government had said the exact same thing when they were in power but now the current conservatives find they can use it as an attack platform and so it is done -- welcome to politics.

Note that you took what I stated completely out of context ... what I stated was (verbatim):

" ... it's the right "attacking left at all costs to win" and the left "attacking right at all costs to win" ideology that is rampantly consistent in western politics that is the force at play here ... "

-- and just above, I gave an example to back up what I actually said initially. It goes both ways because politicians have no backbones regardless of who has been brainwashed into a strict "left vs right" alignment.

You appear to perceive me as defending "liberals" - I am now pointing out that the left / right smoke and mirrors gag is for people who want to (or can be brainwashed into) contribute to the "elite's" divide and conquer strategies - why should they work hard at divide and conquer when we can be programmed to do it for them - the left / right scale is exactly that tool. Read this post --> https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1114020 (actually -- do read the entire thread ...)

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
What you clipped is not what I was stating at all ...

Then here is the totality of your post:

I think it's the right "attacking left at all costs to win" and the left "attacking right at all costs to win" ideology that is rampantly consistent in western politics that is the force at play here ... to use one perspective of this and rendering it down to strictly "lefts are hypocrites" (or "rights are ...")" is disingenuous.

Bill Clinton is in the video clip above, taken back in the 1990s, making all the same kinds of arguments that Trump makes when he says we need to secure our border.

I say this is evidence of how radical the left has become in 20 years, that they now call this same policy "racist" and "fascist" when they were backing it too just 20 years ago, but you dismiss this to claim instead that it's "attacking...at all costs to win."

What are we trying to "win"? A secure border? And if that's the case then how is what I said still not true, that the left no longer supports their position from the 1990s because they have become radicalized against the very concept of even having a border in the first place?

I will point out for a second time that Trump did not run on the typical right-wing paradigm of recent years. I don't understand how you could have missed it but almost the entire Republican establishment was also against him during the primaries. Remember?

[DeDukshyn]

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
What you clipped is not what I was stating at all ...

Then here is the totality of your post:

I think it's the right "attacking left at all costs to win" and the left "attacking right at all costs to win" ideology that is rampantly consistent in western politics that is the force at play here ... to use one perspective of this and rendering it down to strictly "lefts are hypocrites" (or "rights are ...")" is disingenuous.

Bill Clinton is in the video clip above, taken back in the 1990s, making all the same kinds of arguments that Trump makes when he says we need to secure our border.

I say this is evidence of how radical the left has become in 20 years, that they now call this same policy "racist" and "fascist" when they were backing it too just 20 years ago, but you dismiss this to claim instead that it's "attacking...at all costs to win."

What are we trying to "win"? A secure border? And if that's the case then how is what I said still not true, that the left no longer supports their position from the 1990s because they have become radicalized against the very concept of even having a border in the first place?

I will point out for a second time that Trump did not run on the typical right-wing paradigm of recent years. I don't understand how you could have missed it but almost the entire Republican establishment was also against him during the primaries. Remember?

I didn't dismiss anything ... I pointed out the higher order of logic that causes hypocrisy in our politicians and those who align themselves with the left/right thing, and indicated that just choosing a side for sake of making a point is disingenuous. It was a statement in general saying that politicians in general - regardless of what one's alignment is, have no integrity or backbone -- this in turn allows such a hypocrisy which is a "justification for attack". I think you really misinterpreted my post.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
I didn't dismiss anything ... I pointed out the higher order of logic that causes hypocrisy in our politicians and those who align themselves with the left/right thing, and indicated that just choosing a side for sake of making a point is disingenuous. It was a statement in general saying that politicians in general - regardless of what one's alignment is, have no integrity or backbone -- this in turn allows such a hypocrisy which is a "justification for attack". I think you really misinterpreted my post.

I don't think your statement is relevant because, for the third time, Trump was against the establishment in both parties and doesn't stuff himself into the right/left paradigm. He was against the war in Iraq, he criticized the hell out of the Bushes on a range of issues, etc. The Republicans were trying to find a way to block him from the nomination all the way up to the convention itself, even after he had secured all the necessary votes and had set records doing so.

So if we limit this to Trump only, as an obvious exception and often opponent to the Republican establishment, how is he in any way being hypocritical when you see that Bill Clinton was supporting stricter immigration in the 1990s and now everyone on the left is calling it fascist?

[DeDukshyn]

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
I didn't dismiss anything ... I pointed out the higher order of logic that causes hypocrisy in our politicians and those who align themselves with the left/right thing, and indicated that just choosing a side for sake of making a point is disingenuous. It was a statement in general saying that politicians in general - regardless of what one's alignment is, have no integrity or backbone -- this in turn allows such a hypocrisy which is a "justification for attack". I think you really misinterpreted my post.

I don't think your statement is relevant because, for the third time, Trump was against the establishment in both parties and doesn't stuff himself into the right/left paradigm. He was against the war in Iraq, he criticized the hell out of the Bushes on a range of issues, etc. The Republicans were trying to find a way to block him from the nomination all the way up to the convention itself, even after he had secured all the necessary votes and had set records doing so.

So if we limit this to Trump only, as an obvious exception and often opponent to the Republican establishment, how is he in any way being hypocritical when you see that Bill Clinton was supporting stricter immigration in the 1990s and now everyone on the left is calling it fascist?

I think it was relevant, perhaps in more of an "umbrella" sort of way. I hope I have clarified what I was actually saying - as mentioned, I was not dismissing anything nor being critical of your comment, nor was I defending anyone.

I also never said or intended to say that Trump is being hypocritical, I merely was saying that this rampant hypocrisy we see across all arenas of politics is nothing new - it goes with the territory and each "side" seems to have made lying and hypocrisy the norm.