No, that is not what I am referring to at all.
I do like the article from Sundance and as I have posted elsewhere on the "inter-weebs" I also think Admiral Rogers is a Hero for the Republic's Preservation.
I am referring to what LS has been saying for two solid months. It has become impossible for him to participate in the forum because he has become too well known and thereby becomes a magnet for everyone who has their own vision of events and their causes. He can't agree or disagree in any comment without the baggage of snarky attacks from others about things he has predicted, or when he has tried to share his "educated guesses" with the forum.
There is a whole group or posters, perhaps you have joined them, that take all articles and opinions that vindicate some opinion of theirs and use it to bash anyone that has really stuck their neck out. I feel LS is one of the targets.
Don't get me wrong, LS is wrong on some prognostications, but he doesn't get nasty and fight about it. I told him the outcome within a tenth of a percentage point ninety minutes after the polls closed in Alabama in the recent special election. He had not yet come to that conclusion, but he did not argue, snipe, back-bite or get bitter. He knew from a week earlier that I felt Moore was too damaged and the wrong candidate, IN MY OPINION, but other than expressing disagreement, he did not lambast me. He and I enjoyed participation in the forum with different opinions -- we let it go to see what the final events and facts would reveal.
So again, not everything is about you. I was agreeing with LS that many posters have treated him like crap when he has done nothing other than be a solid contributor to this forum.
But he can't ban people over here, that I know of. He will have to defend his comments, and predictions in full debate, which he doesn't seem capable of doing. As we see here, he fires off a few weak personal attacks, much more personal than my posts, then goes back into hiding.
I'm not hunting for him in particular, but when he tells us that we are supposed to trust and respect Robert Mueller, I have a very serious disagreement with him. Then when he comes here and attempts to make posts that don't line up with that belief, then he deserves to be questioned on it.
That puts me on the firing line as well, because he has a history here and some dedicated followers, much more than the average poster. But no one is a sacred cow, especially when they want us to put faith in someone who is arresting the President's former staff, and now threatening his family. So I am going to continue to call him out when he makes illogical statements.
If he or his defenders want to debate Robert Mueller, then great, let's do that, and that is all that I am asking. But they don't, they/he want to turn it into a discussion that I am being unfair to him despite his claim that Mueller is a good guy without defending it with evidence.
I have no problem with you good FRiend. Your post was excellent, fair, and honest. I hope you see mine in the same good faith. And I will be careful not to respond to his childish insults re:”second grade” in that same manner, and don't feel that I ever have. As I have told him, I would like to see him return to the board, but if he continues to be in support of Robert Mueller, he should expect some tough questions about it. So far, he's been unable to answer them. Thanks!
Sad but true...While I can't see Mueller dismantling his entire crew if he was to go after Hillary, which he would have to do, I certainly don't hold any animosity for someone with a different opinion...
I hope LS is right...But so far, I don't see it...