[allmendream]

Banning someone removes them from the discussion. It was obvious that BobJ was never going to be united in the purpose of advancing the candidacy of Sarah Palin, but he may well have (at one time or another) been a useful ally in advancing conservative causes or contributing to conservative discussion.

That was the “coalition” that the poster said was to be desired, his continued participation in this discussion.

That you bring up “unequally yoked to the unbeliever” and the notions of “righteous” and “unrighteous” as to why BobJ should have been banned amazes me.

Do you really consider BobJ an “unbeliever” or “unrighteous”? Is this based entirely upon his opposition to the candidacy of Sarah Palin?

[editor-surveyor]

Bob considers himself an unbeliever, by his own testimony.

Maybe you have not been here long enough to have encountered his posts that led many of us here, including Jim to declare that he was in no way a conservative. This goes back to around 2002-2003. Before that he posted little, but was involved in the funding drives; I believe that he processed the credit card contributions.

His goals have never coincided with the site’s goals.