"Hillary Bashing"

[NanceGreggs]

269. Do you understand ...

... that supporting someone's potential candidacy (like Hillary's) is not a blanket approval of everything she's ever said, or every decision she's ever made?

(That's a rhetorical question, BTW - because obviously you don't understand that.)

The idea that if someone doesn't post in threads about fracking, the TPP, etc., doesn't mean that their "silence is approval". And that is so ridiculous a notion, I can't believe that even you would seriously promote it.

Probably the biggest reason some posters do not weigh-in on certain topics is because they feel they don't know enough about the details of that topic to make a useful contribution to the discussion. Unfortunately, some people consistently weigh-in on topics they obviously know nothing about, only to make complete fools of themselves, much to the detriment of the discussion as a whole.

Might I suggest that you ask the Admins to "pin" your admonition to the top of discussion threads that YOU think are important, because I'm sure everyone here is more than willing to defer to your better judgment on what should be opined on - lest they be taken as "approving" of things they might not approve of by failing to post in a "Rhett o Rick Mandated" thread?

I hope those here who are interested in your opinions (however many there may be) will be monitoring your own participation in various threads from here on. This way we'll all know that if you fail to post in every thread on the topics of torture, sexism, racism, animal cruelty, bullying, voter surpression, misogyny, consumer fraud, police brutality, gerrymandering of districts, anti-union activity, any and all anti-democratic court decisions, anti-abortion activities, anti-acces to contraception efforts, and every anti-Democratic statement made by any and all Republicans, we can assume that by your silence in those threads, your approval of same can be taken as a given and duly noted.