[DTxAg]

You need to dig deeper. The clincher is that this obot (like all obot and Clinton trolls) is a typical South basher on the CW threads. That alone is acceptable to the management, though if you look at the posting history of obot trolls on Freerepublic, that is one trait they almost invariably have in common.

Wow, so if a person disagrees with your reading of a SCOTUS case and what, thinks the South seceded to keep slavery instead of some deeper "states rights", then they're an Obot troll?

Cite specifically what I’ve posted that warrants such a preachy, sanctimonious reply. Specifically, word for word.

My reply was neither preachy nor sanctimonious. You took to questioning a 5-year Freeper with a length posting history based on another's accusation, when you could have simply looked at Sherman Logan's posting history on this thread and elsewhere. So far, the only evidence given to support the accusation of being an Obot troll is that there is a disagreement about Happersett and "South bashing." And your response to that was nonsensical, asking whether SL believes Obama has a specific psychiatric condition, as if that proves anything. How's reality treating you recently? I told you before it was the cure.

[Godebert]

Me thinks thou protest too much.

[Fantasywriter]

Your reply was the height of sanctimony. I asked you to quote my offensive words and you were UNABLE to do so. Quote exactly what I said that got you so worked up-—i.e.: provide my exact words w a link—or stop being such a jackass.

As for S. Logan, answer this. What conservative in the history of the world has ever answered a question w a default, knee-jerk resort to Moral Equivalence? I know of no case where any conservative ever has; Moral Equivalence is anathema to conservatives.

Liberals, though, live and breathe Moral Equivalence. They resort to it as naturally as a fish swims in water.