When rep-cons tweet "anything" against libs-dems-obama its labeled...hatespeech..when a lib dem does it to rep-cons its freespeech?

One would hope this question is intended as hyperbole and does not reflect the belief that such an extreme situation is really the case. If someone tweets (or uses any other mode of communication) to disagree with policy positions of the other party for ideological or practical reasons, that is obviously not hate speech, and is free speech. The murky part is in deciphering what the intent behind the disagreement is.

If that intent is to have the president fail (e.g. Conservatives saying that they plan to make health care reform Obama's Waterloo), and if that desire for his failure is based on wanting to be rid of an African American from the White House, then that is indeed hate speech of a sort, though masquerading as political free speech. Since most of the GOP base is in the Christian white majority, there is not likely to be such nefarious hidden agendas in disagreements with their policies. Thus, it is much less probable that liberal criticisms of conservative positions would be hate speech.

This situation leads to the seeming that attacks against liberal positions are criticized as hate-motivated, while this is not the case when the shoe is on the other foot. Having said all that, still there can certainly be (and are) very pointed criticisms of Obama's policies and/or performance that are motivated solely by ideological or practical disagreement, and that could in no way shape or form be considered hate-speech.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.