Hardly.
The aggressive, accusatory comportment of many an anti-Catholic make it eminently appropriate.
It can't be hatred of what we teach, because if it were they'd take pains to understand what we teach and why we teach it. Instead they skim over our official documents and linger over the unofficial ones to find juicy tidbits amenable to misconstruction.
If their intention were to liberate us from some alleged hateful error, then they'd try to present what that error is in such terms that we would recognize them. When we denied it, instead of mockery and abuse we'd get true and sincere questioning in an effort to find a way to persuade us of the accuracy of their charges.
For example, if they truly loathed not us but what they see as syncretism, they wouldn't just yell "pagan" and put up pictures of pagan goddesses and say that's what we worship. Instead they'd make an effort to see that we recognized some element of truth in the charges they levy. They'd deal, thoughtfully and effectively, with Justin's and Lewis's suggestions that a lot of paganism is a failed attempt to express a truth unavailable to those without the Holy Spirit and revelation.
But of course that is not at all what happens.
There is one way in which I could see something other than hatred motivating this, and that would be using us as foils as they make their points to lurkers. I have already expressed that I think that falls short of honesty and charity and is contemptuous and manipulative.
And there is one other way, and that is if their is a character trait or personality disorder which interferes with the freedom necessary either to hate or to have charity.
And as it happens, we know very well that there is some collaboration going on to say things not because they are thought to be true but because they are thought to be irritating. So no, I will not 'get off the "hate" kick.' I believe it to be accurate and lamentable, but not at all to be "enabled" by pretending it's not there.
Hate is beneath us all, yet on it rolls apace.