>> [etc. etc.] "...the RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA hoax" [etc. etc.]
I appreciate Mr Farr taking the time to prove my point. Very thoughtful.
I have a suggestion for Billado.
To be clear my opinions have nothing to do with any "mischaracterization" of her in the "news media". All information I have about her views comes from her own columns and commentaries.
There's not room to address all the claims she has made, so let me mention just two.
First an often-repeated assertion by Billado is that (as above) the only real source for criticism of the Trump administration is that his critics are "hate-filled" and "deranged". In short, some people just don't like him. Otherwise everything is just fine.
Second, a recent favorite topic of Billado's columns is the so-called "widespread media war on religion". Even if this charge were true (which, of course, it's not) it's reasonable to ask: How seriously should we take a lecture on religious values from someone who defends the well-documented actions of Donald Trump, whether personal and family values; compassion and charity; or simply the ability to tell the truth.
It come down to this: We understand why Fox News, Kellyanne Conway, Sean Hannity and their ilk need to keep repeating this sort of nonsense. The facts are not on their side and distraction, misinformation and outright falsehood are the only tools they have.
What is harder to understand is why Billado seems to believe that anyone who has paid any attention over the last three years should be expected to take any of this seriously.
So, as a suggestion to Billado, if she wishes to be taken seriously, then the next time she feels compelled to simply parrot this sort of nonsense that she should stop, read it over, and think about what she is saying. If for no other reason to not to look silly.
Shame on Mr Broughton. And shame on the Library Board, not least because of their attempt (for example in the posts below) to hide their action behind the claim that the reason for the name change was primarily that "too few people today were reading [DCF's] books".
> "[Middlebury College officials said] were concerned that they could not guarantee peoples safety as protestors organized. "
Sadly, this may be a reasonable concern, given the demonstrated inability of Middlebury College to control those thugs who have shown themselves willing to use violence to silence speakers whose views they have taken it upon themselves to decide that no one else should even be allowed to hear.
> "Thank you for proving my theory that the first amendment needs to be amended."
An obvious concern is that --were such proposed changes currently in place-- this would mean that we would currently be living in a political and legal environment in which the Trump/Whitaker Department of Justice would be capable of defining "hate speech" and specifying which speech would be permissible and which speech illegal.
Perhaps someone could explain to me why I shouldn't be worried about that?
If I may, I'd like to offer a word of advice to the state Republican party:
As noted above Mr Zupan was appointed as candidate by the state party (i.e. after losing the primary election and the subsequent withdrawal of Brooke Paige from the race).
We all understand the necessity and the problems of putting forth a candidate, any candidate, in situations like this (we might think of Jack McMullen).
But I trust you will also understand why, in particular, this sort of nonsense of attacking an opponent as "un-American" or "anti-American" simply because they disagree with you on a political issue (as touched on in the article and as made clearer in the Vermont Edition interview referred to above) is one of the main reasons why many voters find it all but impossible to take seriously, let alone vote for, candidates like Mr Zupan.
Re: “Vermont's GOP Closes Ranks Behind Pro-Trump Chair Deb Billado”
I think mctommy makes an excellent point.
It is not only useful, but it is important to distinguish between Republicans and Trump Partyists. These are not the same things. There are Republicans, decent fine folks, who understand the harm that the Trump Party has done to the United States and its democracy. And for the reasons mctommy points out that, whatever they choose to call themselves, nothing the TrumpParty, represents has virtually anything to do with the VTRP.
That said, I think it is fair to suggest that these true Republicans, i.e. those who understand the threat that the Trump Party represents to the future of our country, could do a much better job of making it clear that neither Trump, or his party, speak in their name.