Isn't that the truth

Wouldn't do any good JA. It would only engender another off track comment of no value. but i'll consider your request as mine.

The following will be quite beyond terms2limited but I'll add them nonetheless.

Racism according to the left - whatever we say it means at that moment.

Racism is forming opinions or taking actions for or against any particular individual or groups of individuals based on previously conceived notions of the speakers racial superiority and the inferiority of the target or target audience without facts in evidence.

Dictionary....Full Definition of racism. 1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. 2 : racial prejudice or discrimination.
racism - definition of racism in English from the Oxford ...

The Macquarie Dictionary defines racism as: "the belief that human races have distinctive characteristics which determine their respective cultures, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule or dominate others."

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/di...
racism definition, meaning, what is racism: the belief that people's qualities are influenced by their race and that the members of…. Learn more.
Racism - definition of racism by The Free Dictionary
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/racism
The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others. 2. Discrimination or prejudice based on ...

Racism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism
Jump to Etymology, definition and usage - The term racism is a noun describing the state of being ... It was first defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as ..."

Applied as a method of revenge or retaliation is often called reverse racism and no group of the human race is immune from that form as they are not immune from overt racism

Prejudice which is not confined to racial use is judging before facts in evidence. Post judice is judging after facts are in evidence

Belonging to a particular group does not automatically make one an active member of that group e.g. the womens movement principally the NOW organization abandoned their principles and their sisters in favor of supporting Clinton I and Clinton II. Clinton II is now calling in that marker once again.

The terms do not automatically exclude nor include any particular individual especially those who have no discernible principles. Donald Trump is an example of that condition along with his supporters paid or volunteer.

Thus we are left with what he had said and what he has done in the past and the same for the others.

The objectivist will take anything said by a politician with a huge dose of salt precisely because of the lack of demonstrated principles.

A demonstration of lack of principles is the constant changing, dodging, evading, and redefining of any particular topic with no facts produced in evidence

Thus Plato becomes Playdough. and Kant becomes cant and then can't.

another quote....from the chief propagandist of the left...

It was an objective observation. The left has long supported racism. You are a leftist the odds are in my favor. Your comments certainly help.

don't have to what? Unfinished sentences always leave me wondering what was left unsaid.

Doesn't use a teleprompter or Hillary style speeches and you 'think' he might be more serious as a President

Great Qualifications. The nuts and bolts of the Trump Platform. Thank you.

Lumped together? By who? Oh yes the illiterate whatevers. Congratulations the crown jewel of leftist liberal reasoning.

It's not a given. It's a distortion.

It does take a certain intellectual ability. We call it thinking and reasoning. You call it regurgitating party slogans.

So? You are a racist. What else is new Most left wingers are racists.

Pure leftist right from the book George Soros. Not a bit of it original thought.

The false premise is the first two words. However you are doing a poor job of presenting images.

and finish with this one

http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/o...

If Harvard sided with Cruz and no challenge to a court ruling has been filed I fail to see how personal opinion carries any weight at all except feather weight and inconclusive shoddy research.

It was the Harvard Opinion that convinced me. It cited an actual court case not personal opinion