I don't think this comment contributes all that much. "Liberal hand-wringing" is I think largely (though, not entirely) an expression of sentiment, not an expr

I don't think this comment contributes all that much. "Liberal hand-wringing" is I think largely (though, not entirely) an expression of sentiment, not an expression of fact. (similar phrases about other places in the political "spectrum" would be similar in this regard. My comment is about the type of comment, not about the specifics of liberal vs somethingotherthanliberal). The "liberal" part is contentful enough I guess, but it doesn't really add much to the conversation, because any comment which is disagreeing with a comment that is meant to defend, e.g., muslim immigrants or w/e could be expected to, most of the time, consider the post they are responding to, to be too liberal (again, similarly, this could be reflected partywise. I'm not making a point about specific parties). The hand-wringing, I think, suggests, I guess, worrying too much about something, or, trying too hard to be seen as being concerned about something? one part of this is the "too much", and, the phrase is just, generally a disparaging phrase. But, accusing the comment one is responding to, of being just for posturing, doesn't really seem like something that contributes all that much? I mean, sure, it could be true, but isn't more important than the motivations of what is said, the accuracy or validity of what is said? Also, the ambiguity of the meaning of calling something "hand-wringing" I think also reduced the content of it. If someone says "No, that technically isn't liberal-handwringing", what would they be saying? If it doesn't mean much to dispute a statement, then it doesn't mean much to make the statement. So, generally, I think your comment that this comment is a reply to, is almost without content.