Certainly I mind. You make some sort of a nasty back hand comment about ":answering a questing with a questing" to a guy Jewish enough to be gassed for it, and you expect me not to mind? And to let it pass? Certainly I mind. And I did answer your question. And you are avoiding answering mine. That was about as uncalled for a swipe as any I have seen.
If you don't want to dialogue here, exactly what is the point of you semblance of conversation? Dialogue, as in back and forth conversation requiring some sort of openness. Is your agenda something other than that?
A Harris poll released on March 24 found that a majority of Republican respondents believe that President Obama "is a socialist," "wants to take away Americans' right to own guns," "is a Muslim," "wants to turn over the sovereignty of the United States to a one world government," and "has done many things that are unconstitutional." The findings follow a year of such smears and attacks on Obama by conservatives."
While the conclusions about the Harris Poll are by Media Matters, a Left Wing organization, the Poll itself is politically neutral.
The feeling and statements do reflect those of some Tea Party Members and Activists.. There is a Library of U Tube videos to choose from showing TEA Party Rallies with all sorts of signs and there are filmed interviews to go with them, some including TEA Party Members actively apologizing for statements that other TEA Party members have made. And Rightfully so.
Please have a look at this section from the Wiki definition of hate speech:
In law, hate speech is any speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is forbidden because it may incite violence or prejudicial action against or by a protected individual or group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected individual or group. The law may identify a protected individual or a protected group by race, gender, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, or other characteristic
I'd suggest to you that speech designed to portray the President to vulnerable segments of the population as being part of many of the activities the Harris poll identifies would fall into that category. Portraying the President — an elected official of the Federal Government — in these ways may well incite violence against him. It may or may not come under the "Fighting Words" exception to the first Amendment. I'm not a lawyer, and I have no ambition to become one, That exception appears to be constructed more narrowly these days. It appears to me, though, that there's plenty of Hate speech about Speaking of the President as a Muslim to an audience of far right wing Christian extremists, for example, would be an example of what seems to me to be Hate Speech. And for Far Right Wing Christian extremists to be talking about the President back and for this way between themselves seems to be inciting to violence.
It wouldn't bother me except as a lie.
But to the wrong audience, it can be very provocative.
This, by the way, is the same reason, that calling Barney Frank "an aging Queen" is hate speech. I am not bothered by Frank's sexual orientation, nor by his age, and it seems reasonably clear that The Representative is reasonably at ease with them as well. That doesn't mean that to the right audience, this isn't incitement to violent action, nor that it isn't part of the ritual that some hate fetishists use to work themselves up to a violent attack.
Some of the oddest things can be turned to fetishistic uses in the world of violent pornography. In sexual fetishes, a pair of shoes can become hight sexualized. In violence, words can frequently serve the same function, and can arouse a crowd to lynchings, even if the word in other contexts is not particularly terrible.
Jews can use the word "Hebe" in a friendly way, but I wouldn't recommend a non-Jew try it, for example. Other groups have similar words.