[nickcarraway]

I oppose Romney, but I think not allowing that viewpoint to exist at FR only weakens FR. If conservative candidates are better than Romney, they can win in the market. Losing nondisruptive Romney supporters makes it seem like they have to be eliminated, because the other side can’t hold their own. Just $.02.

[PapaNew]

I agree. No, I don’t like disruptive types, but it seems to me that FR is a forum. Hard to have a forum when you kick out those with opposite viewpoints. If we’re right, we’ll beat ‘em in the debate in the forum of ideas.

[SideoutFred]

Amen...it absolutely weakens FR.

[greyfoxx39]

Losing nondisruptive Romney supporters

I guess you weren't paying attention in '07 and '08 when the "disruptive" Romney supporters were allowed free reign..until...too many of them challenged JR.

Not to mention that Romney supporters on FR would be allying with the Karl Rove bunch trying to force Mitt down our collective throats.

You state: "I oppose Romney, but I think not allowing that viewpoint to exist at FR only weakens FR."

So in other words, you feel it's fine to question Jim's judgment? He has guided this site for a long time, and it hasn't "weakened" yet.

[Krankor]

I oppose Romney, but I think not allowing that viewpoint to exist at FR only weakens FR. If conservative candidates are better than Romney, they can win in the market. Losing nondisruptive Romney supporters makes it seem like they have to be eliminated, because the other side can’t hold their own. Just $.02.

. I agree. A conservative argument might even swing some to the right side

[NotSoModerate]

Losing nondisruptive Romney supporters makes it seem like they have to be eliminated, because the other side can’t hold their own. Just $.02.

I would normally agree with you, but I think the ban is more about sending a message rather than eliminating the message Romney supporters push.

And the message being sent is, in part, this: as conservatives we are taking a stand once and for all against supporting RINO's foisted upon us by the establishment in the Republican Party. They are no longer welcome in this conservative circle because they relentlessly legislate away our liberty after obtaining our votes through bald faced lies.

I think of it this way: If I ever caught my wife cheating she'd be banned from my life, as in divorce. Free Republic has officially divorced itself from the RINO wing of the Republican Party.

[arderkrag]

I oppose Romney, but I think not allowing that viewpoint to exist at FR only weakens FR. If conservative candidates are better than Romney, they can win in the market.

Free Republic isn't the market. It's the concept engineer division at the factory.

[Scanian]

“I oppose Romney, but I think not allowing that viewpoint to exist at FR only weakens FR.”

Carrying that line of thought to its logical conclusion, why not allow Obots, socialists, and commies?

[Elsie]

I oppose Romney, but I think not allowing that viewpoint to exist at FR only weakens FR.

Churches have a 'cryroom' off the sanctuary for a reason...

[MinorityRepublican]

I oppose Romney, but I think not allowing that viewpoint to exist at FR only weakens FR. If conservative candidates are better than Romney, they can win in the market. Losing nondisruptive Romney supporters makes it seem like they have to be eliminated, because the other side can’t hold their own. Just $.02.

I agree. The purge has already weakened this site.