Then Zot them all, and let God sort them out. ;-)
End of the day, this is Jim's house and his rules. Jim personally racked the shotgun at me once for speculating that Palin might pick Romney as VP to leverage his cash intake, to counteract the billion dollar Obama campaign. In retrospect, I phrased that post badly and walked it back. While I felt it was a little harsh of a response to a hypothetical point, I've also been a lurker since early 97, so I know the drill. Jim doesn't want his house used as a billboard for things he doesn't agree with, and if you don't like it, the door is to the left. (as it were)
I'm an intelligence analyst by training, but I realize that what I consider as "wargaming out bad scenarios based off of a given situation", other people can interpret as "trying to advocate bad things." It's also fair to point out that lots of people are in fact trying to pull the seminar caller routine and the red flags that go up are usually warranted.
Anyway, to the issue at hand, I think Romney is without question the wrong man for the Presidency, but we can't pretend he doesn't exist. He's out there, with lots of cash, and he might not go away. I certainly understand that the management doesn't want to do anything that might lend aid or comfort to the RINOcracy, and in some cases, you need to shut down certain things pretty hard. My inner Machiavelli concurs that when you're running a website designed to drive power to the right, sometimes appearances and unity matter more than context or debate.
Thanks for the heads up on the zot fest, I wandered in late to an apparently bloody mess of a thread. As an epic understatement, this isn't an issue I care to fall on the sword for.
Yeah, it's Jim's house and Jim's rules....but all the same, wouldn't it strike you as a little odd if you were visiting somebody at their house, and they suddenly racked a shotgut at you for saying something that they disagreed with politically?
Wolf packs and ass kissing has been a big part of this forum...folks find a new cause and get some mod help and run around purging and gleefully high five like a football game.
There have been a number of issues over the years from the Lucianne dustup, to Bush 2000, to Schiavo, Amnesty..once supported here largely, Katrina and so forth...now it’s..at least for the wolf pack..”You Don’t Support Sarah Devoutly Enuff”...
and the Romney accusation is their denunciation..sometimes true..sometimes not...I was under the impression Drapes supported Bachmann
i had hoped when some of the worst sorts had left with Mad Ivan over their support of Rudy that it would be a while till we got into all this again...nope...many are back supporting Sarah
Pray tell how do you go from Rudy to Sarah ideologically and if so then how solid are one’s own creds?
I often disagree with Hannity who is too soft but we do eat our own here