Your Cathy Newman "so what you're saying" shtick is amusing. You're "allowed" or "not allowed?" Really? Not by me.
What I did write was:
"I am quite happy for there to be opposing viewpoints as is the nature of us all. Free Republic is free, after all. I am happy that "The Enforcer" has given his testimony for us to review. I am happy that all the YouTube content creators make their various claims as they do. It amusing to look behind the wizard's Oz-like curtain and see the production of all the messaging, all the nudging and all the MONEY.Ssh. Don't tell Buwaya. He thinks I "allow" and am able to not "allow." As was written, "an odd place." As was also written by another, "evil."
You are complaining that the kid in Alabama is unprofessional and is making money. So, it seems, you were making a case against him on those grounds. You dont want other people to patronize his channel for those reasons - else why wpuld you post?
I object to your objections. They are not based on universal principles, as I pointed out. There are much worse institutional sources out there, and they all make money.
Your objections are therefore illegitimate. You could try make a detailed, legitimate case regarding the content of his broadcast if you care to.