[perfect_rovian_storm]

Are you under the impression that we often discuss Mitt Romney on Fred Thompson threads without provocation from his supporters?

Check the posting history of the user JCEccles for a little example of WHY we might take to a few nasty comments about ole Mitt on our own threads.

The Duncan Hunter people at least care about some issues. They can be reasoned with. I’m sure the vast majority of Mitt supporters can too, however the ones that grace us with their presence on Fred Thompson threads are quite the opposite.

So, basically when you see us bashing Mitt Romney on a Fred Thompson thread, 99.99% of the time, you’ll see that the subject of Mitt Romney would not have been brought up were it not for one of his minions attacking Fred Thompson.

[DieselHoplite]

That’s fine. Fair enough. I can agree that every candidate has supporters that can get carried away at times. Many attacks are clearly unfair. But only the unfair attacks directed at one specific candidate are met with immediate banishment from the site.

[redgirlinabluestate]

I agree that we should refrain from "attacking" candidates or their supporters. However, pointing out the actual record of someone is not attacking them. Many Mitt people post on Fred threads when there are lies or inaccuracies posted about Mitt's actual record.

I think the problem is that Fredheads want to give Fred a pass on prior statements and always point to his actual record as being good enough, but Mitt gets no such breaks. A little fairness is all anyone wants (both candidates have damaging youtube videos out there).

I think it is the hypocrisy that gets some people angry and then they are unable to post as civilly as they should.

However, for the most part, the Romney posters are very civil and usually make very factual postings backed up with evidence. I am not sure why people have to call us Willard-ites and make other nasty comments.

The truth is many candidates made prior statements that do no match up with their actual record while in office. I think more weight should be given to the actual record.

While some may find Mitt's prior statements more objectionable than Fred's past statements -- I give him a break because he was running for office in Massachusetts and not Tennessee.

The truth is that both Fred and Mitt are better than Rudy on this issue.

The truth is that Duncan Hunter, however, has the strongest pro-life record of all the candidates supported by FReepers.

I wish we could all just stipulate to this and move on to other issues.