A Quote by Christopher Michael Cillizza

I think Twitter is becoming remarkably intolerant and heavily liberal. As in, anything that is perceived as being "pro Trump" is scolded and mocked. — © Christopher Michael Cillizza
I think Twitter is becoming remarkably intolerant and heavily liberal. As in, anything that is perceived as being "pro Trump" is scolded and mocked.
I am so old that I can remember when liberals were liberal - instead of being intolerant of anything and anybody that is not politically correct.
I pivoted from a pro-Trump guy to more of a journalistic guy, and I'm going to keep making that pivot. So whenever people think of me as, like, a pro-Trump guy, I don't want people to think of me as a pro-Trump guy anymore.
Charlie Hebdo mocked everyone. They mocked the left. They mocked the right. They mocked, above all, the extreme right, the extreme right of Le Pen's. If anything could identify their politics, they were kinds of anarchists.
I don't want anyone to think of me as a pro-Trump guy. I'm going to specifically reject any kind of branding about pro-Trump or whatever.
It's very important to say that what I mean when I say 'liberal' is liberal in the 19th-century British sense. Pro-market, pro-individual, freedom, pro-openness. Not the American sense.
I think that's why Donald Trump continues to enjoy evangelical support. They're not endorsing necessarily his lifestyle. What they're saying is this is a binary choice between one candidate, Donald Trump - who is pro-life, pro-religious liberty, pro-conservative justices of the Supreme Court - and another candidate, Hillary Clinton, who has an opposite view on all of those issues.
I'm also very pleased at the fact we're well on our way in Indiana to becoming the most pro-adoption state in America. I think if you're going to be pro-life, you should - you should be pro-adoption.
You never run into a fundamentalist Christian as intolerant of - take anything, you know, homosexuality as a liberal who has just found a lit cigarette in a nonsmoking section.
I don't think a decent person has to choose between being pro-Israel and pro-Palestine. I think you have to be pro-Peace.
If people are pro-Israel, they are pro-Israel one-hundred-and-twenty percent. If they are anti-Israel or pro-Palestinian, they tend to be pro-Palestinian one-hundred-and-twenty percent. I don't think a decent person has to choose between being pro-Israel and pro-Palestine. I think you have to be pro-Peace.
When you are being anti-lie or pro-truth, you come across as being anti-Trump or pro-Democrat, and it's a very tough thing for those of us who are just working journalists and still believe in the notion of objectivity.
I think that being liberal, in the true sense, is being nondoctrinaire, nondogmatic, noncomitted to a cause but examining each case on its merits. Being left of center is another thing; it's a political position. I think most newspapermen by definition have to be liberal; if they're not liberal, by my definition of it, then they can hardly be good newspapermen.
If you're anti-war it doesn't mean you are 'Pro' one side or the other in a conflict. However, it does make you 'Pro' many thingsPro-Peace, Pro-Human, Pro-Evolution, it makes you Pro-Communication, Pro-Diplomacy, Pro-Love, Pro-Understanding, Pro-Forgiveness.
At any Trump rally, the Trump supporters were peaceful. They were enthusiastic. They loved America. They were excited. They were pro Trump. They were not bullies. They were not angry. They were not doing anything unless they were provoked.
Only in America can you be Pro-Death Penalty, Pro-War, Pro-Unmanned Drone Bombs, Pro-Nuclear Weapons, Pro-Guns, Pro-Torture, Pro-Land Mines, AND still call yourself 'Pro-Life.'
We should start being intolerant to those who are intolerant to us. This is not modern logic, this is not extreme, this is common sense.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!