The left veered off the high road against Trump immediately after the election and they are still stuck in the mud

Michael Goodwin:

A headline on a story about escalating liberal outrage toward President Trump and his team wondered whether the resistance movement had veered off the “high road.”

Veered off? When was it ever on the high road?

Certainly not when congressional Democrats boycotted Trump’s inauguration. And certainly not when, soon after the election, Dems tried to pressure Electoral College electors in states that Trump won into backing Hillary Clinton.

Even more important, was the Obama administration taking the high road when the FBI gave Clinton preferential treatment despite her sloppy handling of classified emails? Or when it weaponized the FBI and CIA to paint Trump’s campaign as a Russian agent?

Those actions and others were not mere expressions of policy disagreements.

Nor did they emerge from the ether. They are the fruit of a poisonous tree.

The poison behind the resistance movement is the lie that Trump was an illegitimate candidate, and is now an illegitimate president. When prominent figures such as Clinton, Rep. Maxine Waters and former CIA boss John Brennan say or insinuate that Trump is a thief who stole the election, or when celebrities muse about assassinating the president or kidnapping his youngest son, it’s inevitable that some on the left will view their own actions as morally justified.

Which brings us to the decision by the owner of a Lexington, Va., restaurant to refuse to serve Trump press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and her family.
...

The language these partisan moralizers use reminds me of two groups of people.

The first group is the Southern racists who refused to serve blacks in their restaurants. They, too, couched their refusal as ­virtuous and just.

The second group Wilkinson and others resemble are college snowflakes who can’t bear to hear conservative speakers — or let anyone else hear them.

These budding autocrats believe everyone must conform to their views — or be silenced. Or go home hungry.
...

Trump can occasionally be harsh but it is usually in a counter punch response to being attacked.  The Democrats are being rude and abusive to people they don't even know and who have never attacked them personally.   Contrast these people who are upset over policy differences with Tea Party members who were also upset with policy differences.  Those citizens were abused verbally and by Obama's IRS, but they never interfered with adversaries dinner plans.