Even Godwin allowed for that exception to his rule. The problem I see is when you drill down to the source on these comparisons, there's no there there. Like an

Even Godwin allowed for that exception to his rule. The problem I see is when you drill down to the source on these comparisons, there's no there there. Like anything else in the media, the facts are highly distorted to fit partisan ends. Transcripts of his statements contrast starkly with widespread misconceptions about what was said. When I've challenged partisans on these discrepancies they'll claim, "Yes, but we know what he _really_ meant" From that point, you can't argue using evidence. Widespread delusions are more powerful... 'Truth' or at least the will to perceive and the perception of it has become highly partisan. In regards to censorious intolerance, both sides are not the same. We are supposed to value democracy, (tyranny of the masses?) yet we can't trust individuals to consume or digest information without hand-holding from partisan fact checkers. If we are concerned about democracy, this should be problematic. These are themes of technocracy, not democracy. It isn't important to me to establish equivalence. That's not what I am working towards here. I'm attempting illustrate what I see as mass hysteria, widely held delusions. The Hitler comparisons, a common form of hyperbole are part of that.