3 ms·
I'd caveat this by saying that corrupt democrats do exist; not every democrat is pure and truthful. Far from it, a good swathe of them are likely just politicia
by hitekker 9y ago
I'd caveat this by saying that corrupt democrats do exist; not every democrat is pure and truthful. Far from it, a good swathe of them are likely just politicians with their own self interest. The left is very much not sunshine and rainbows.
However, you are correct in noting that the parent commenter desperately wants to paint both sides as biased, guilty, and debased, in order to excuse the wrongdoings of the cause he fervently supports.
"If I can convince myself that everyone did what we did, then there's nothing wrong if we continue to do it!"
Ah, projection; the mark of the politically insecure.
- theoh 9y agoYou presumably don't mean "99% of democrats are not pure and truthful." Did you mean that apart from 1% bad apples, they are? Because what you wrote condemns 99% of them. Difference between "not everyone is pure" and "everyone is not pure".
- hitekker 9y agoGood point, but I did actually mean to put down 99% of democrat leaders. To be "pure and truthful" to me is a high standard, which most of our representatives do not currently meet. I have updated my comment to clarify.
- skinnymuch 9y agoSaying 99% of almost any group is not pure and truthful is probably much closer to the truth than a small fraction like 1%. And I'm assuming we aren't literally meaning completely pure and truthful either. Still has me think the original statement is closer to the truth. Democrats in America are no saints. Just compared to Republicans, in my opinion, they comparatively are much better.